Dog Credited With Saving Teen From Fire

Dog Credited With Saving Teen From Fire By Associated Press Published September 29, 2006, 6:10 PM CDT FORT MEYERS, Fla. — A pit bull who was recently adopted by a family after wondering onto a construction site may have save a teen girl from a house fire on Friday. Jerrica Seals, 17, was already safely out of the house by the time firefighters arrived, the News-Press of Fort Meyers reported. “She called me screaming,” said Leticia Vega, 36, the sister of Seals’ boyfriend Javier Garcia, 23, who owns the home. “She said the dog woke her up barking, jumped on the bed and bit her on the leg.” Seals was taken to the hospital for a checkup, but Garcia said she was going to be fine. Deputy fire Chief Steve Clyatt said blaze appears to have been caused by a bad extension cord on a window air conditioner. Vega said her oldest brother, Gabriel Garcia, found the dog while he was working. “He didn’t pay no mind to it,” Vega said. “He just kept working and the dog just stayed there so he brought it home. He doesn’t usually bark. He’s real friendly.”

Dog Credited With Saving Teen From Fire

Dog Credited With Saving Teen From Fire By Associated Press
Published September 29, 2006, 6:10 PM CDT
FORT MEYERS, Fla. — A pit bull who was recently adopted by a family after wondering onto a construction site may have save a teen girl from a house fire on Friday.

Jerrica Seals, 17, was already safely out of the house by the time firefighters arrived, the News-Press of Fort Meyers reported.

“She called me screaming,” said Leticia Vega, 36, the sister of Seals’ boyfriend Javier Garcia, 23, who owns the home. “She said the dog woke her up barking, jumped on the bed and bit her on the leg.”

Seals was taken to the hospital for a checkup, but Garcia said she was going to be fine.

Deputy fire Chief Steve Clyatt said blaze appears to have been caused by a bad extension cord on a window air conditioner.

Vega said her oldest brother, Gabriel Garcia, found the dog while he was working.

“He didn’t pay no mind to it,” Vega said. “He just kept working and the dog just stayed there so he brought it home. He doesn’t usually bark. He’s real friendly.”

Keep BSL out of Illinois

 Introduced by Rep. Michael Tryon on December 1st, 2005, HB4213 automatically deems American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, “pit bulls,” Pit Bull Terriers, Rottweilers and Staffordshire Terriers vicious and requires owners of these and other dangerous dogs to maintain liability insurance . As AKC reported last month, the bill further restricts the regulations for keeping these dogs, including requiring them to be muzzled and leashed whenever outside their owners’ residence, even in a fenced back-yard. Fines for violations will increase to a minimum of $1001.
Please sign and help keep bsl out of Illinois! Let them know that PitBulls and the named dogs above are not VICIOUS DOGS! Let them know that we SHOULDNT have to muzzle our family pets just to walk to the sidewalk! Let them know that RACIAL PROFILING IS WRONG!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/192305999?ltl=1157408776

BSL Defeated in Historic Court Ruling

BREED SPECIFIC Legislation was dealt a savage blow last week in an historic victory for American campaigners when the Supreme Court in Alabama ruled that there was no genetic evidence that one breed of dog was more dangerous than another, simply because of its breed.

Around the world, anti-BSL campaigners are rejoicing at the ruling that drew on evidence provided by genuine canine experts, which was favoured by the judges over subjective evidence, put forward by veterinarians and politicians. The court ruling and the evidence used may now be legitimately used to fight BSL in other countries such as Germany and Australia, as well as other US States. In the UK, the Dangerous Dogs Act could possibly be open to a direct legal challenge in the same way.

The action in Alabama was brought by the Washington Animal Foundation (WAF) against the city of Huntsville, which had claimed that American Pit Bull Terriers were ‘genetically dangerous’.

The case centered on four Pit Bulls held in an animal shelter and adopted by three local women. The dogs were survivors of a group of over 50 Pit Bulls seized in a raid on a dog-fighting ring in April 2000. Half of the dogs died from injuries or disease, whilst the reminder –including four puppies – were held at the City pound and put up for adoption.

Shelia Tack, an emergency room nurse at Crestwood Hospital, adopted two of the puppies that she named Justice and Elizabeth. Whilst they remained impounded, she visited them twice a week.

The other puppies, David and Nellie, were adopted by Kay Nagel, a military officer’s wife and resident of Redstone Arsenal, and Loyce Fisher, a civil service worker from Cullman.

However, the City Council refused to release the dogs, stating that they were a potential danger to human beings, although none had apparently displayed any aggression.

The matter was referred to court for a legal decision on the dogs’ fate. During a hearing last year, lawyers representing the city, Michael Fees and Greg Burgess, told Madison County Circuit Judge Joe Battle the animals were vicious and should not be rehomed.

The Women, who did not have a lawyer, argued the animals were never trained to fight and conditioning can suppress any vicious tendencies the dogs might have.

Judge Battle agreed and on Nov 13 2001, declared the four young Pit Bulls were not dangerous because they were never trained to fight. The court allowed the city to destroy 21 adult Pit Bulls which had been used for fighting.

However, the City appealed Battle’s ruling to the Alabama Supreme Court and asked the court for an order preventing the women from taking custody of the dogs.

At this point, Seattle-based WAF became involved in the case and appointed Huntsville lawyer Mike Seibert to fight their case, based on evidence they gathered to counter the City lawyer’s claims that all Pit Bulls were ‘genetically dangerous’.

The foundation hired veterinarian Dr. Alan Jones of Hazel Green to examine the dogs. But the officers at the shelter do not allow anyone to have physical contact with the pit bulls, even vet Jones.

“They looked fat and happy,” he said. “They seemed starved for attention and not aggressive at all” Glen Bui, spokesman for WAF told a local newspaper that the dogs should be released.

“I believe that the City of Huntsville is wasting thousands of taxpayers’ dollars attempting to destroy innocent dogs that were already given by the circuit court to the three women,’ he said.

WAF filed an Amicus (third party) submitting genetic proof that Pit Bulls are not dangerous. The city of Huntsville were backed by the extremist animal rights organisation PETA that Pit Bulls were genetically dangerous, with evidence provided by veterinarians, none of whom was an expert in any specific canine or genetical field.

WAF cited case laws under Due Process of the law, and stated that it was unconstitutional to rule a specific breed of dog as ‘dangerous’ in this way. They also claimed it was ‘genocide’ to try to eradicate the Pit Bull breed.

WAF submitted evidence to the Supreme Court that they were able to provide:

• Identification of expert treatises regarding the genetics of the breed in question

   

• Testing and studies regarding genetics verses environment as the catalyst for a specific dog breed’s aggression

   

• Social contributions made by the American Pit Bull Terrier (i.e. as Assistance Dogs, Search and Rescue Dogs etc.)

   

• The associations brief assisted the court as it had substantial knowledge concerning the issue before the court

   

• The briefs filed by the City were insufficient to adequately address the far reaching issues involving genetic breed bias

   

• The Foundation read all briefs and believed that innocent pet owners and innocent pets were not represented by either brief.

WAF co-founder Glen Bui told OUR DOGS this week: “The court granted WAF’s petition and allowed us 7 days to file amicus curiae. Myself along with Attorney Mike Seibert worked on the amicus long hours into the night, while WAF members Kay Nagel and Sheila Tack proofread and added input. It was finished with less than one hour before the deadline to file and Shelia raced to the US post office and sent it certified mail.

”Huntsville’s entire case rested on affidavits from veterinarians claiming they examined the four Pit Bull pups and that were would pose a danger to the community because Pit Bulls are genetically dangerous. They also claimed the women had no legal right to adopt the pups, this was also addressed in the amicus brief.”

On Friday, August 30, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in WAF’s favour and ordered that the dogs should be released for adoption, accepting the evidence put forward by WAF that no breed of dog is genetically dangerous.

“This is fantastic news,” said Bui. “The city could appeal against the ruling, but I’d like to think they’ll give way and release the dogs to their new owners so that they can enjoy a good life. Two of them will be trained as Search and Rescue Dogs; the other two will become pets. The Pit Bulls have been evaluated and temperament tested before they are released, they are being spayed and neutered. The city did tell the media that the dogs would be released, so let’s hope they keep their word.”

Bui also told OUR DOGS this week: “For years the American Pit Bull Terrier has been alleged to be dangerous because of its genetics. Never has WAF found any genetic research proving that. When we were asked by three Huntsville women for help, they told us nobody else would help them, they had contacted everyone who fights BSL. We knew the women had to face the Supreme Court and this was a very serious case. We knew we had the genetic proof that no breed of dog is dangerous.

“We knew we also had statistics which proved the APBT has one of the best temperaments out of 185 dog breeds along with a strong legal defence. Being aware that never in the past had anyone ever argued the point, after contemplating the outcome if the women lost, I decided to bring WAF into the case, on the last day before the deadline for filing briefs in the Supreme Court WAF petitioned for Amicus Curiae.

”This case set a standard for future cases concerning BSL and genetics. We put several years of research into genetics and due process. We will use the statistics in Ohio; we have received assistance from state agencies in Ohio to investigate the Lucas County Dog Warden rulings on BSL in that State, as Ohio is totally BSL-controlled. Dog owners in Ohio really could use support right now. ”It was a long battle and now we have proved the American Pit Bull terrier is not genetically dangerous.”

Dogs targeted for Breed Bans

A LEADING airline which banned five breeds of dog

BAD BANS

AMERICAN AIRLINES FINALLY LIFT BREED BAN – OFFICIAL

GERMAN FIGHTING DOG LAWS UPDATE

GERMAN FIGHTING DOG LAWS UPDATE: THE NAME GAME By A Special Correspondent

FACED WITH an embarassing setback over their plans to introduce Europe-wide breedspecific legislation via the European Parliament, the German Federal Government appear to have taken a new approach to the matter of getting other countries -es pecially Britain – to fall in line with their plans. It will be remembered, of course, that the canine holocaust in Germany came about due to the relentless political and media hype against so-called ‘Fighting Dogs’. By concentrating on a small number of dog attacks, caused by dogs owned by a tiny minority of irreesponsible owners, the public mood had been tainted against dogs. All that was needed now was a suitably alarming flashpoint to enable to authoroties to introduce the harsh laws and swingeing dog taxes thay had so long fought for. The flashpoint almost came in April of this year, when an 86 year-old woman was attacked and killed by a Rottweiler. But whilst there was public outrage – justified to a certain extent – it wasn’t ‘quite’ enough. However, the asvage and needless dath of six year-old Volkan Kaja, the son of Turkish immigrants, killed by two genuine, trained fighting dogs – an American Pit Bull Terrier named “Zeus” and and an American Stafford – as he innocently played in a school playground in Hamburg WAS the required flashpoint. Since then, as has been reported in OUR DOGS, there has been a consistent campaign against ordinary, law-abiding dog owners in Germany and their dogs. Whole groups of breeds are demonised, dogs have been taken from their families and destroyed, dog owners attacked in the streets by their fellow citiens, merely for owning a dog. But, as has also been reported, there has been a concerted worldwide campaign to fight back against these genocidal laws. Demontsrations have been staged, boycotts arranged, German politicians forced under the scrutiny of not just the German public, but the world at large, their actions dissected, their fragile credibility further undermined. In short, the campaigners have won many significant battles. The biggest humiliation for the German Government was, of course, their failure to secure a European law to ban three Bull breeds, the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Stafford and, crucially, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. It is the inclusion of the ‘Staffie’ which has incensed British dog owners. The help of MEPs has been sought and secured, and, thanks to timely intervention by the British Kennel Club’s Press Officer Phil Buckley, the British delegataion at the crucial EU meeting at the end of September were well briefed and able to get the German request deferred. Of course, the German Government are going to try to force EU Bred Specific legislation through again, but for now, their plans have been thwarted. So perhaps it should come as no surprise that the authorities have decided on a stealthier approach, one well known to lobbyists for a particular cause; the steady “Drip-Drip-Drip” of publicity, of misinformation, to impinge infoirmation upon the public subcionscious. We’de seen it before: “Tail docking is cruel mutilation.” “Fox Hunting is the barbaric sport of upperclass animal abusers.” “Microchips are the ONLY effective form of dog identification.” “Dog registration will solve all the problems of stray and dangerous dogs.” Therefore, at the beginning of October, campaigners around the world were surprised – to say the least – that any written or e-mailed enquiries to German embassies in several cities all met with a similar response. By some strange quirk, the dog which killed Volkan was NOT an American Pit Bull Terrier, it was a Staffordshire Bull Terrier. One campaigner received a letter from the office of Rainer Dobblestein, Head of the Legal and Consular Department at the German Embassy in London in reply to her letter about the state-sanctioned killing of dogs in Germany. The letter, signed by Herr Dobblestein’s Deputy, Wolfgang Drautzcontained the contentious “Staffie” remark: ” There is no question of entire breeds or large numbers of dogs being destroyed in Germany, since this would represent a violation of German animal protection law. To my knowledge, only one dog was recently put down, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier which killed a child in Hamburg.” (see letter reproduced in full….) The letter was passed to OUR DOGS’ Chief Reporter Nick Mays, who duly contacted Herr Dobblestein and queried the apparent change of breed. “Yes, I too was surprised at this when I received the information from the City of Hamburg,” said Herr Dobblestein. “I queried it twice with them, but I was told that the Hamburg police had confirmed that the dog was a Staffordshire Bull Terrier.” Having no reason to doubt Herr Dobblestein’s word, Mays duly sent a fax to the Press Office of the City of Hamburg and asked on wehaty basis the breed of dog had been changed from a Pit Bull to a Stafford. The very next day, an e-mail was received from Stefan Marks, Spokesman for Hamburg’s Ministry of the Interior Health Department. Herr Marks’ reply was brief and to the point: “The press office of the Ministry of the Ineterior handed your questions out to my office. I can confirm that ZEUS was a Pit Bull. The accompaning bitch was an American Staffordshire Terrier. I don´t know where different information came from.” So there it is: An official e-mail which confirms that someone, somewhere, gave false information to German Embassies around the world, to “incriminate” Staffordshire Bull Terriers. The reason can only be to use the “Drip-Driop-Drip” method to strengthen the support for a Euro-BSL ban on Staffords. However, this ploy, like others, is now dead in water – lkargely thanks to OUR DOGS’ intervention. However, it just goes to show how devious and underhand the enemy can be in their plans to ban dogs. Let all British dog owners beware. Today it was ALMOST a Staffie. Tomorrow it may be YOUR breed. After all, as the Bard of Avon said; “What’s in a Name”? And similarly, as the anti-dog lobby may say; “A dog is just a dog, isn’t it?”

BSL at an all time high

It is NOT a coincidence that in 2005 and 2006, the amount of BSL and Breed Ban laws have reached it’s highest ever in the history of this country.

And laws against dog breeds is NOT a surprise. 

Since businesses have no faith in people to take responsibility, insurance companies said let’s make it difficult and expensive to own dogs that have a higher probability of creating the most injury.  State Farm paid out $318 million in dog bite related incidents alone. This does not include the 100s of other insurance companies out there.

This industry has the only $64 Billion dollar industry in the world that does not have any regulation what so ever, allowing well-funded groups like the AKC and Vets to be drivers to a standard and are capitalizing tremendously on this opportunity.

The lack of structure in pet ownership and pet businesses in this industry will also be the target of reform.

Lost battle to smoke where ever you want. Similar to all the Restaurants and Night Clubs not being able to get together and decide that they can collectively build designated smoking sections in their facility that removed almost all the smoke from the area and piped all the smoke to the outside of the facility so that smokers and non-smokers can co-exist in the same area.  These people running these businesses could have gotten together, but they didn’t see any value in it and thought it was to hard.  Because of that, now new laws are being passed that there is no smoking allowed in any nightclub, bar, or restaurant and in fact, you cannot be closer than 500 feet to a door when doing so.