Wednesday, September 7, 2011


SRUV recently initiated a series of posts on Dangerous Dog Laws (DDL) with this post. The comments to the post are worthy of note, and are posted below for those who may have missed them.

* * * * * 

Dorothea Malm said...
This is a great series to undertake! DDL have become more prevalent recently, and it seems to be working for all types of dogs excepting gripping/fighting breeds.

The fact that DDLs don't address egregious kinds of attacks like the one described here - launching out of a car to disembowel - clearly shows they can address normal dogs, but not gripping/fighting dogs.
Janelle Jerman said...
Thank you for undertaking this series. I am so saddened and disgusted by the city of Arvada's response to the attack on my Uno. The deputy chief of police told me that animal control could have removed the pit bull who killed Uno after the attack on Kim Greene's dog, but left it up to the discretion of the animal control officer in charge of her case. This is in spite of a THREE YEAR history of complaints and citations (including TWO dangerous and vicious dog citations and a court appearance) over this animal! If the laws that are already in place aren't even enforced with consistency or common sense then how can we keep our companion animals safe? How can a community remain safe from preventable attacks such as this? DDL NEED to have specificity to prevent tragedies like ours from happening again.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please do not cut and paste comments or include extensive linking. Comments are moderated but we will post all comments which do not include profanity or ad hominem attacks. Play nice. The SRUV comment section is not a forum for the advocacy of fighting breeds.