Just crossposting a very alarming message
have permission to cross post and ask you all to do the same. Elections are coming up.....
Also something to think about. The liberals have 5 more breeds tabled to be added to the Bill, These breeds have not gone through yet but they are part of proposed amendments to the bill to include the added breeds.
Dobermans
Mastiffs
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Akitas
PERSECUTION, ONTARIO-STYLE
by Lori Gray
She was at home with her two young children one afternoon in July when
there was a knock at the door. An ACO officer said he was there to follow up
on a complaint. He did not specify what the complaint was, however later she
found out it was someone in her apartment building complained she owned “pit
bullsâ€.
This person has 2 dogs. One is 1 ½ years old (a Jack Russell Terrier
mix) and the other is a 4 month old pup she describes as a hound cross. The
hound cross was given to her by another couple who told her they could not
keep the dog and couldn’t think of a better home for him.
The ACO officer asked if he could come in. She then invited him in, not
suspecting any trouble since she had done nothing wrong. Her dogs are and
have been always under her watchful eye, leashed on walks and they play with
all the children who live in the apartment building. Once the ACO officer
was in her apartment he asked her “have you ever heard of the “pit bullâ€
ban� She was quite shocked and answered, “yes I have heard of it, but it
doesn’t apply to me or my dogs since I do not own ‘pit bulls’.†The ACO
officer then asked her if he could take some pictures of her dogs. She
agreed, thinking it was for a licensing infraction. He had also asked her if
her dogs were licensed. The woman told me her dogs sat quietly while he
snapped several pictures of them from several different angles. During this
process, the woman’s children were becoming quite nervous and upset with the
ACO officer’s tone. They started to ask if this man was going to take their
dogs and began to cry. The ACO officer then told the children he was not
going to take their dogs and asked the woman to come out to the hall to
speak to him privately.
He told the dog owner out in the hall that "having this breed of dog is
the same as possessing illegal drugs". He handed her his business card and
a blank SPCA card with 'Surrender for Destruction" written on it.
He also gave her three pamphlets: the City Bylaw, the Dog Owners'
Liability Act (DOLA) section on 'Pit Bull' Controls and the entire DOLA.
The dog owner was dumfounded. She didn't understand what was wrong.
He told her the dogs had to be destroyed. He made an appointment to
come back the next day at the same time to collect the dogs if she hadn't
already turned them in. He warned her to be sure the dogs were handed in or
were there when he returned. He cautioned her not to think of moving them
to a nearby town. "If they go anywhere, it has to be out of province".
When he returned the next day to carry out his task, she told him the
dogs were gone.
"What?" was his response "Where are they? Where are the dogs?"
"They're not here. If you have any paperwork, then charge me with
something".
"Where are the dogs?"
"Sorry sir, they're not here"
He tried to get into her apartment to look around.
She told him to come back with a warrant, slammed the door and locked
it.
It took one month for anyone to contact the woman again regarding this
matter. However, several weeks ago, police knocked at her door to formally
charge her with 2 counts of owning a prohibited dog under DOLA.
On August 29, 2005, against significant expert opposition, the Ontario
Liberal government implemented Bill 132 (2005) to amend the existing Dog
Owners' Liability Act. This document attempts to summarize the key changes
to the Act.
§ The law defines a "pit bull" as a pit bull terrier, a
Staffordshire Bull Terrier, an American Staffordshire Terrier, an American
Pit Bull Terrier, or a dog that has an appearance and physical
characteristics that are substantially similar to those dogs. If your dog
appears to be in this category and your dog lived in Ontario on August 29,
2005, or was born in Ontario before November 27, 2005, you own a "restricted
dog". Restricted dogs must be muzzled, leashed, and sterilized. If your
dog appears to be in this category and it was born in Ontario after November
26, 2005, or was brought into Ontario after August 29, 2005, your dog is
illegal. It could be confiscated and destroyed and you could be fined up to
$10,000 and sentenced to up to six months in jail.
I have kept in close contact with this woman. She feels very isolated
and afraid for her dogs' lives, her children’s wellbeing (they have been in
a state of fear since this all began) and is nervous about having been
charged under provincial legislation, which carries a harsh penalty if found
guilty. In further communication with her I've learned of several different
points that have come to light since her initial visit from the ACO.
Apparently, there is a licensing push on at the apartment complex. Bylaw
officers have been visiting the apartment buildings, selling license tags
door-to-door. They are trying to boost licensing compliance, which is at
about 10% across the province.
The dogs in question are mainly white, medium-small dogs which to me
look like pariahs - I have pictures which I don't want to post here. They
could be anything but the Jack Russell mix description fits very well. The
pup is too young at four months to be more than a white, short-haired pup
with a longish snout and some black markings.
I asked if she had any ideas about how the officer happened to be
carrying a camera. She suspects, but can't prove, that the new
superintendents reported all the dog owners to Bylaw enforcement.
Apparently the new superintendents have been hassling people about their
dogs.
She has never had any complaints from anyone about her dogs. They are
well behaved and the older one is very obedient and gets along with
everybody. Immediately following the first visit from the ACO officer ALL
the children who live in the apartment building wrote letters to the officer
telling him how all the kids play with these two dogs. They expressed how
they know and love these dogs and that they would not hurt anyone.
For the dogs’ safety, they were sent to a safe place. They will not
return home until this court case is over. Their lives depend on it and the
woman is not willing to take any chances. The kids miss their dogs, Mum
misses the dogs and you can bet the dogs miss everybody. The woman has
retained a lawyer and her first day in court is next week.
MESSAGE TO ALL ONTARIO DOG OWNERS:
Please remember to VOTE on Oct 10th. Thank Dalton McGuinty for stripping
rights from Ontario dog owners! Thanks for targeting the responsible owners
in your lame attempt to protect the public from dangerous dogs!
I hope Dalton McGuinty realizes dog owners in Ontario have a strong
message for him and his Liberal caucus on Oct 10th. We are sending a message
they cannot ignore. Say NO to the Liberals on Oct 10th!
If you are an Ontario dog owner and your pet could be even remotely
construed to be a 'pit bull' as described in the Ontario Liberals' pet piece
of discriminatory legislation, please take steps to protect your pet.
What this story illustrates is that the message from above is that it's
OK to persecute people based on a subjective belief and that if they are
perceived as easy targets, all the better.
Until the Ontario law is overturned or repealed, please keep your dog
(and yourself) safe from harm.
1. Ensure that your dog is licensed and leashed in public, regardless
of breed. Avoid allowing members of the public to interact directly with
your dog.
2. If you think your dog fits the 'pit bull' physical description, or if
you've licensed your dog as a 'pit bull', American Pit Bull terrier,
American Staffordshire terrier or Staffordshire Bull terrier or cross of
those breeds, follow the leashing, muzzling and neutering restrictions in
the law. Be aware that you are at risk. You may be subject to spot checks
by officials in your area.
3. If your dog is a mongrel of unknown ancestry, license him or her as
a mixed breed - because that is the only possible description.
4. Don't let the authorities bully you or make you feel as if you are
breaking the law. Make them prove their case.
5. Your veterinarian will not divulge any treatment info or details
about your dog to authorities without your consent. It is similar to human
healthcare information - private. Your veterinarian may indicate that a dog
is a patient at the clinic but that's all they will say.
6. If you have not entered your show dog in a sanctioned conformation
event (CKC, UKC, ADBA, AKC) yet this year, don't put it off any longer.
Enter one now or your dog could be confiscated and killed for being intact.
7. If you find yourself in a position similar to the one described in
the story, do not say anything to officials. Do not invite them in to your
home. Do not let them interact with your dog(s) no matter what kind of dog
you own or how nice the ACO’s seem. Tell them that unless they have a
warrant, they cannot enter your premises and then close your door.
Hang tough.
Being a dog owner in Ontario doesn't mean you've given up all of your
constitutional rights, even though it often seems that way.
You are still a citizen of this province.
Oh, and did I mention:
Get out and vote against
the McGuinty Liberals on October 10
Tell your friends.
have permission to cross post and ask you all to do the same. Elections are coming up.....
Also something to think about. The liberals have 5 more breeds tabled to be added to the Bill, These breeds have not gone through yet but they are part of proposed amendments to the bill to include the added breeds.
Dobermans
Mastiffs
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Akitas
PERSECUTION, ONTARIO-STYLE
by Lori Gray
She was at home with her two young children one afternoon in July when
there was a knock at the door. An ACO officer said he was there to follow up
on a complaint. He did not specify what the complaint was, however later she
found out it was someone in her apartment building complained she owned “pit
bullsâ€.
This person has 2 dogs. One is 1 ½ years old (a Jack Russell Terrier
mix) and the other is a 4 month old pup she describes as a hound cross. The
hound cross was given to her by another couple who told her they could not
keep the dog and couldn’t think of a better home for him.
The ACO officer asked if he could come in. She then invited him in, not
suspecting any trouble since she had done nothing wrong. Her dogs are and
have been always under her watchful eye, leashed on walks and they play with
all the children who live in the apartment building. Once the ACO officer
was in her apartment he asked her “have you ever heard of the “pit bullâ€
ban� She was quite shocked and answered, “yes I have heard of it, but it
doesn’t apply to me or my dogs since I do not own ‘pit bulls’.†The ACO
officer then asked her if he could take some pictures of her dogs. She
agreed, thinking it was for a licensing infraction. He had also asked her if
her dogs were licensed. The woman told me her dogs sat quietly while he
snapped several pictures of them from several different angles. During this
process, the woman’s children were becoming quite nervous and upset with the
ACO officer’s tone. They started to ask if this man was going to take their
dogs and began to cry. The ACO officer then told the children he was not
going to take their dogs and asked the woman to come out to the hall to
speak to him privately.
He told the dog owner out in the hall that "having this breed of dog is
the same as possessing illegal drugs". He handed her his business card and
a blank SPCA card with 'Surrender for Destruction" written on it.
He also gave her three pamphlets: the City Bylaw, the Dog Owners'
Liability Act (DOLA) section on 'Pit Bull' Controls and the entire DOLA.
The dog owner was dumfounded. She didn't understand what was wrong.
He told her the dogs had to be destroyed. He made an appointment to
come back the next day at the same time to collect the dogs if she hadn't
already turned them in. He warned her to be sure the dogs were handed in or
were there when he returned. He cautioned her not to think of moving them
to a nearby town. "If they go anywhere, it has to be out of province".
When he returned the next day to carry out his task, she told him the
dogs were gone.
"What?" was his response "Where are they? Where are the dogs?"
"They're not here. If you have any paperwork, then charge me with
something".
"Where are the dogs?"
"Sorry sir, they're not here"
He tried to get into her apartment to look around.
She told him to come back with a warrant, slammed the door and locked
it.
It took one month for anyone to contact the woman again regarding this
matter. However, several weeks ago, police knocked at her door to formally
charge her with 2 counts of owning a prohibited dog under DOLA.
On August 29, 2005, against significant expert opposition, the Ontario
Liberal government implemented Bill 132 (2005) to amend the existing Dog
Owners' Liability Act. This document attempts to summarize the key changes
to the Act.
§ The law defines a "pit bull" as a pit bull terrier, a
Staffordshire Bull Terrier, an American Staffordshire Terrier, an American
Pit Bull Terrier, or a dog that has an appearance and physical
characteristics that are substantially similar to those dogs. If your dog
appears to be in this category and your dog lived in Ontario on August 29,
2005, or was born in Ontario before November 27, 2005, you own a "restricted
dog". Restricted dogs must be muzzled, leashed, and sterilized. If your
dog appears to be in this category and it was born in Ontario after November
26, 2005, or was brought into Ontario after August 29, 2005, your dog is
illegal. It could be confiscated and destroyed and you could be fined up to
$10,000 and sentenced to up to six months in jail.
I have kept in close contact with this woman. She feels very isolated
and afraid for her dogs' lives, her children’s wellbeing (they have been in
a state of fear since this all began) and is nervous about having been
charged under provincial legislation, which carries a harsh penalty if found
guilty. In further communication with her I've learned of several different
points that have come to light since her initial visit from the ACO.
Apparently, there is a licensing push on at the apartment complex. Bylaw
officers have been visiting the apartment buildings, selling license tags
door-to-door. They are trying to boost licensing compliance, which is at
about 10% across the province.
The dogs in question are mainly white, medium-small dogs which to me
look like pariahs - I have pictures which I don't want to post here. They
could be anything but the Jack Russell mix description fits very well. The
pup is too young at four months to be more than a white, short-haired pup
with a longish snout and some black markings.
I asked if she had any ideas about how the officer happened to be
carrying a camera. She suspects, but can't prove, that the new
superintendents reported all the dog owners to Bylaw enforcement.
Apparently the new superintendents have been hassling people about their
dogs.
She has never had any complaints from anyone about her dogs. They are
well behaved and the older one is very obedient and gets along with
everybody. Immediately following the first visit from the ACO officer ALL
the children who live in the apartment building wrote letters to the officer
telling him how all the kids play with these two dogs. They expressed how
they know and love these dogs and that they would not hurt anyone.
For the dogs’ safety, they were sent to a safe place. They will not
return home until this court case is over. Their lives depend on it and the
woman is not willing to take any chances. The kids miss their dogs, Mum
misses the dogs and you can bet the dogs miss everybody. The woman has
retained a lawyer and her first day in court is next week.
MESSAGE TO ALL ONTARIO DOG OWNERS:
Please remember to VOTE on Oct 10th. Thank Dalton McGuinty for stripping
rights from Ontario dog owners! Thanks for targeting the responsible owners
in your lame attempt to protect the public from dangerous dogs!
I hope Dalton McGuinty realizes dog owners in Ontario have a strong
message for him and his Liberal caucus on Oct 10th. We are sending a message
they cannot ignore. Say NO to the Liberals on Oct 10th!
If you are an Ontario dog owner and your pet could be even remotely
construed to be a 'pit bull' as described in the Ontario Liberals' pet piece
of discriminatory legislation, please take steps to protect your pet.
What this story illustrates is that the message from above is that it's
OK to persecute people based on a subjective belief and that if they are
perceived as easy targets, all the better.
Until the Ontario law is overturned or repealed, please keep your dog
(and yourself) safe from harm.
1. Ensure that your dog is licensed and leashed in public, regardless
of breed. Avoid allowing members of the public to interact directly with
your dog.
2. If you think your dog fits the 'pit bull' physical description, or if
you've licensed your dog as a 'pit bull', American Pit Bull terrier,
American Staffordshire terrier or Staffordshire Bull terrier or cross of
those breeds, follow the leashing, muzzling and neutering restrictions in
the law. Be aware that you are at risk. You may be subject to spot checks
by officials in your area.
3. If your dog is a mongrel of unknown ancestry, license him or her as
a mixed breed - because that is the only possible description.
4. Don't let the authorities bully you or make you feel as if you are
breaking the law. Make them prove their case.
5. Your veterinarian will not divulge any treatment info or details
about your dog to authorities without your consent. It is similar to human
healthcare information - private. Your veterinarian may indicate that a dog
is a patient at the clinic but that's all they will say.
6. If you have not entered your show dog in a sanctioned conformation
event (CKC, UKC, ADBA, AKC) yet this year, don't put it off any longer.
Enter one now or your dog could be confiscated and killed for being intact.
7. If you find yourself in a position similar to the one described in
the story, do not say anything to officials. Do not invite them in to your
home. Do not let them interact with your dog(s) no matter what kind of dog
you own or how nice the ACO’s seem. Tell them that unless they have a
warrant, they cannot enter your premises and then close your door.
Hang tough.
Being a dog owner in Ontario doesn't mean you've given up all of your
constitutional rights, even though it often seems that way.
You are still a citizen of this province.
Oh, and did I mention:
Get out and vote against
the McGuinty Liberals on October 10
Tell your friends.
