Texas BSL

LEGISLATION /
Texas
BSL ALERT
There is no time to lose! Take action today!
AMERICAN CANINE FOUNDATION BSL ALERT FOR TEXAS HB1096/ SB 1111
FORWARD THIS TO ALL TEXAS DOG OWNERS AND NOTIFY ALL YOU KNOW !!!!
IN TEXAS THERE IS A STATE REPRESENTATIVE THATS MADE IT KNOWN THAT HE WANTS TO BAN AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIERS,ROTTWEILERS AND ALL BULL BREEDS. HE INTRODUCED A BILL WHICH WILL BE THE START AND IT’S PASSED THE FULL HOUSE. IF YOU DO NOT TAKE ACTION, THIS BILL WILL PASS!!
Responsible Pet Owners Alliance and Texas dog owners NEED HELP A.S.A.P.
STOP HB 1096 NOW !! Contact your State Senator today!
Texans are in deep trouble and a bill which will allow BSL in Texas has passed the FULL HOUSE and is on its way into the Senate. It must be stopped and EBA, RPOA and ACF are ALL asking for national and local opposition. ACF has been calling Rottweiler and APBT owners in Texas and they knew nothing of the Bill's contents. The Bill makes it very clear that cities with 1.9 million or more WILL BE EXEMPT from the existing state law that makes BSL illegal. An amendment to exempt cities of 50 thousand almost passed yesterday.
We ask you to fax, call and email the Texas Senate opposing BSL AND HB1096.
The Senate Website does not list emails, however you can go to http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/ and click on Senate members and each Senator has a link where you can electronic mail them. We ask that you take the time to write a letter and fax it or place phone calls.
PLEASE BE COURTEOUS! WE DO NOT NEED PEOPLE TO BE RUDE ON THE PHONE! The idea is to persuade, not to confront. Do not get angry on the phone or in e-mails.
We ask everyone no matter where you live to fax, call and email the Senate of Texas opposing HB1096 / SB 1111
This legislation will be heard in the Senate Criminal Justice Committee and its passed the Full House and nobody has opposed it. This means it has gained heavy support and will be very hard to stop at this time. Below are the Senators on the Committee and we ask you read the Bullet Point Memo from ACF that’s being lobbied to the entire Texas Senate. The way the bills drafted it will allow BSL in Texas and it must be stopped.
SB 1111
Bill Author: Senator Rodney Ellis
Ph: (512) 463-0113
Fax: (512) 463-0006
rodney.ellis@senate.state.tx.us
Senate Criminal Justice Committee members:
Chair: Senator John Whitmire
Ph: (512) 463-0115
Fax: (512) 475-3737
john.whitmire@senate.state.tx.us
Vice-Chair: Senator Kel Seliger
Ph: (512) 463-0131
Fax: (512) 475-3733
kel.seliger@senate.state.tx.us
Senator John Carona
Ph: (512) 463-0116
Fax: (512) 463-3135
john.carona@senate.state.tx.us
Senator Rodney Ellis
Ph: (512) 463-0113
Fax: (512) 463-0006
rodney.ellis@senate.state.tx.us
Senator Juan Hinojosa
Ph: (512) 463-0120
Fax: (512) 463-0229
juan.hinojosa@senate.state.tx.us
Senator Steve Ogden
Ph: (512) 463-0105
Fax: (512) 463-5713
steve.ogden@senate.state.tx.us
Senator Tommy Williams
Ph: (512) 463-0104
Fax: (512) 463-6373
tommy.Williams@senate.state.tx.us
ACF' MEMO TO THE TEXAS SENTATE
To the Honorable Senators of Texas
The American Canine Foundation (ACF), formerly Washington Animal Foundation is a non-profit organization that advocates responsible dog ownership. ACF assists with legislation, litigation and education. ACF drafts dangerous dogs laws for cities and states, conducts research studies on canine genetics, canine behavior and non fatal and fatal dog attacks.
We represent responsible dog owners throughout the United States and in Texas. We urge you to vote NO on HB 1096 / SB 1111 in its current draft because of the language in section 822.151
(a-b) listed below.
Sec. 822.151. APPLICABILITY; APPLICABILITY OF OTHER LAW.
(a) This subchapter applies only to a municipality with a population of 1.9 million or more.
(b) Subchapter D does not apply to a municipality subject to this subchapter.
What this allows is breed specific legislation for cities the size of Houston.

 

1. BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION DOES NOT PROTECT THE PUBLIC
Breed bans and breed specific laws do nothing to stop dog attacks, they do
nothing to stop illegal activity, they do nothing to protect the public from
irresponsible dog owners and only punish responsible dog owners, causing
court litigation, wasted tax money and impoundment of innocent dogs while
criminalizing U.S. Citizens. There is no data at this time to prove that a
breed ban or breed specific restrictions has been effective legislation.
There is no scientific proof that genetics cause a breed of dog to be
aggressive, vicious or dangerous. Irresponsible owners are to blame for the
behavior of dogs that are aggressive, vicious or dangerous. Breed specific
legislation is an injustice, genocide of dogs.
In this country according to a study done by the National Council on Pet
Population between 1994-1998 showed 2- 2.3 million dogs are taken in by
shelters across the country each year. 44% are found new homes or returned
to their owners. The number two leading cause of dogs ending up in shelters
is landlord issues ( insurance discrimination and breed specific legislation)
2. COURT LITIGATION PROVES BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Zuniga v. San Mateo Dept. of Health Services (1990) 218 Cal. App. 3d 1521,
267 Cal. Rptr. 2d 755. The court found there was not sufficient evidence to
prove Pit Bulls have an inherent nature of being dangerous.
Carter v. Metro North Assocs. (1998) 255 A.D. 2d 251; 680 N.Y.S.2d 299 A New
York appellate court determined that the alleged propensities of Pit Bull
Terriers to behave more viciously than other breeds had not been
authoritatively established.
On December 13, 2002 ACF filed civil action against the city of Pontiac
Michigan for 500,000 dollars in damages for passing breed specific
legislation, Pontiac negotiated and repealed their breed ban.
ACF litigated the city of Huntsville Alabama in 2002 in a case that was
heard by the Alabama Supreme Court. Huntsville v. Four Pit Bull Puppies
(Ala. 08-30-02), No.1010459, unreported. The court determined that American
Pit Bull Terriers were not dangerous.
In March 2003 ACF sued the city of Ottumwa Iowa for 750,000 for passing a
breed ban, the case is in litigation. ACF v Ottumwa EQEQ 103700
On July 16th 2003 ACF brought forth a constitutional challenge against
Ohio’s state law that declares the Pit Bull vicious. The case was heard in
the Toledo Muni Court and the court found the American Pit Bull Terrier was
not dangerous and granted Pit Bull owners due process , the case is in
appeal. Tellings v State of Ohio CRB02-15267
In August 2004 a case ACF assisted in was heard by the Ohio Supreme Court.
State v. Cowan 103 Ohio St. 3d 144 , 2004 – Ohio – 4777 The court found ORC
955:22 violative of the right to be heard as applied to ORC955:11 which
declared the Pit Bull vicious in Ohio. The decision struck down Ohio’s breed
specific legislation at the state level. Ohio was the only state to have
this type of legislation at the state level.
3. BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION DOES NOT REDUCE DOG BITE RELATED INJURIES
In analyzing nonfatal dog bite injuries we find an increase in serious
injuries each year.
A study was done by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and the
Center for Injury Prevention
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5226a1.htm. The study showed in
1994 333,700 patients were treated for dog bites in emergency departments
(EDs), in 2001 368,245 persons were treated in Eds. A study was done by the
American Canine Foundation which shows that where breed bans have been
enacted that dog bite incidents reports have increased. Banning ten breeds
of dogs from a city from current dog bite data will not reduce dog bites
given the ratio between mixed breeds compared to purebred dogs.
4. EXAMPLES OF WHY BREED BANS DO NOT PROTECT THE PUBLIC
Breed bans have been passed by cities in the United States with the animal
rights organizations supporting them claiming they will reduce dog bites and
fatalities, statistics show us breed bans do not reduce dog bite incidents,
fatalities or stop illegal activity involving dogs. Denver Colorado passed a
breed ban on American Pit Bull Terriers in 1988. A state law was passed in
2004 to stop breed specific legislation in Colorado. Data from Denver
revealed that there are more American Pit Bull Terriers in Denver now than
before the breed ban, there have been over 40 severe attacks and 2
fatalities by dogs since 1988 and they were not American Pit Bull Terriers.
All Denver’s breed ban accomplished was seizing innocent dogs that had no
aggressive behavior and at the same time criminalizing their owners. The
enforcement became so bad the courts ended up releasing dogs seized to
addresses outside Denver and dropping charges on the owners. Not one case of
a Pit Bull being released can be found where the dog injured someone.
Denver’s animal control director Doug Kelly admitted to ACF members on a
Denver talk show the breed ban was not working.
5. ACCURATE FATAL ATTACK STUDIES SHOW BREED IS NOT A DETERMINING FACTOR
The National Canine Research Foundation http://ncrf2004.tripod.com/ did a
study on fatal dog attacks from 1965-2004 and the study shows us that fatal
attacks have not been reduced by breed specific legislation. It was
discovered that the number of fatal attacks each year over a 30 year period
have remained close in numbers.
6. DOG OWNERS HAVE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS
Nicchia v. People of State of New York, 254 U.S. 228 (1920). The case is
referring to the licensing of dogs and the U.S Supreme Court makes it very
clear that the requirement of dog licenses does not take one mans property
and give it to another, nor does it deprive dog owners of liberty without
due process of law. The US Supreme Court supports a finding from a New York
Appeals Court case, Fox v. Mohhawk & H.R. Humane Society (1901) The US
Supreme Court gives broad power to regulate and control dogs including
drastic measures as long as it does not take away due process.The Nicchia
case clearly supports a finding that dog owners have a right to liberty and
due process.
7. NO BREED OF DOG IS GENETICALLY DANGEROUS
Reported by Attorney S. Zendorf Toledo Ohio
"On August 30, 2002 the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed a Circuit Court
Decision that four American Pit Bull Terriers born at the Huntsville Animal
Control Shelter did not lack any useful purpose" as required by the local
ordinance Huntsville v. Four Pit Bull Puppies (Ala. 08-30-02), No.1010459,
unreported. The court determined that the puppies were not trained to fight
and were not vicious. In addition, it held that three women who wanted to
adopt them had a right to intervene.
The City of Huntsville claimed the Pit Bull puppies were genetically
dangerous, used expert witness testimony, and appealed to the Alabama
Supreme Court after the lower court rejected its arguments and evidence.
The Alabama Supreme Court granted the Washington Animal Foundation’s
petition to participate in the proceedings as Amicus Curiae because the
Foundation is an expert on canine genetics. The Foundation provided expert
testimony to prove that Pit Bulls and other breeds are not inherently
genetically dangerous and must be trained to fight".
S.Zendorf (Attorney at Law)
8. FATAL DOG ATTACKS IN TEXAS
The state of Texas has had over 40 fatal dog attacks since 1965 ranging from
a Brittany Spaniel to Great Danes. Studies show us that severe mauling’s
have occurred from many different breeds in many cities throughout Texas and
many of these go without attention that the media give to certain breeds
such as the Rottweiler and American Pit Bull Terrier. Targeting a specific
breed of dog will do nothing to reduce dog bite related injuries from
occuring.
9. EFFECTIVE CANINE LEGISLATION
Strong laws that penalize the owners, regardless of the breed are what is
needed. These types of laws are valid, have merit and are not vague or
capricious. ACF supports laws that hold owners accountable for their dog’s
behavior. Laws need to declare a dog potentially dangerous when it menaces a
human, dogs need to be declared potentially dangerous when they bite a human
or domestic animal, owners need to be cited and placed under restrictions. A
second offense should automatically declare the dog dangerous and call for a
misdemeanor charge against the owner.
Dogs that have been declared dangerous because they caused severe injury
should be required to be kept confined, muzzled in public and have insurance
coverage of 250 thousand dollars or more, if a second incident happens with
a dog declared dangerous, if the dog causes injury the owner should be
charged with a felony, if the dog kills a human there should be a charge of
negligent homicide and the owner should be prohibited from owning dogs. If a
dog has been declared potentially dangerous and kills a human, the owner
should be charged with negligent homicide. Washington’s RCW 16.08 070 – 100
is the state law for regulation and control of dangerous dogs. Under the
statute if a dog causes severe injury regardless of whether the dog has a
prior history of biting the owner can be charged with a Felony.
VOTE NO TO HB1096 / SB 1111
We ask the Honorable Senators of Texas to consider that your state for many
years now has opposed breed specific legislation and you have a state law
that prohibits it. We ask that you
pass legislation that will protect the public and VOTE NO to HB1096 / SB
1111
Sincerely,
American Canine Foundation
http://acf2004.tripod.com/

 

Hi! This bill was defeated last year, WITHOUT ACF's help.

 

I believe it will be beat again. I know some country in the UK, bully breeds were banned but TX is a really huge state to pass such a small bill. Besides we haven't had many attacks by "pit bulls".I'm not the best author in the world so maybe I could send them a few "I'm sorry videos".

http://youtube.com/watch?v=c2Qlw3pzWv4

 

I'll make sure and send some e-mails. This sort of thing needs to be crushed.