Pitbull ban in Oregon!? Nooo!

Crowsfeet

facetious.
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
579
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Portland
#1
This may just be a scare, but I keep seeing whispers about a pending "Pit Bull Ban" in Oregon. I haven't even adopted any sort of bully breed, but I never wanted to see this happen. I moved to a different city in a small effort to get away from/change some of the ignorance in my old city. Not to find more!

Anyway, does anybody know more about this?
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Messages
2,434
Likes
1
Points
0
Location
Oregon
#2
Oh bleep, they're trying to slip it in pretty quietly.

A local newspaper poll shows 70% opposed. I don't think it will get far, but do start writing letters.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Messages
2,434
Likes
1
Points
0
Location
Oregon
#6
Slightly better.

How much does 1 million in liability insurance cost? Do any companies actually provide it?

I can't get to letter until this weekend or so. We'll see i guess.
 

ogr420

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
7
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
pa
#7
Thats messed up. Hopefully that doesn't happen.

I have a pitbull and I lost my job not long ago, a friend said I could move in with him and he could get me a job. But he lives in a city that has a pitbull ban. Its a bummer.
 

Miakoda

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
7,666
Likes
0
Points
0
#8
Slightly better.

How much does 1 million in liability insurance cost? Do any companies actually provide it?

I can't get to letter until this weekend or so. We'll see i guess.
I still don't believe in singling out owners who own a certain type of dog and forcing them to carry large liability insurance own them.

In fact, those owners who are responsible for BSL in the first place are not going to adhere to such a law anyway as it's obvious they have no adhered to any other ones that strive to prevent things such as loose dogs being a nuisance an/or terrorrizing people and those biting people.

With that said, I personally feel that everyone with a dog or cat (or animal capable of inflicting harm upon another person) would be smart to carry extra liability. Our standard homeowner's insurance came with a $50,000 liability and we upped that drastically (but not quite to a million). However, that was my choice and IMO the responsible thing to do to protect my family from ending up in a cardboard box or a homeless shelter someone because someone I thought I knew decided to sue the bejeezus out of me because one of my dogs knocked him/her down.

And some people don't realize that you are held responsible even if someone is tresspassing on your property. Even though that might affect the total amount of the judgement, it won't stop you from having to pay out. I've heard of several such scenarios in this area. For example, one of my old neighbors in Hammond had a Boxer they would put on a runner during the day. Because it was a rental house, they were not allowed to build a fence. Well, their other next-door neighbor was a mom who let her 2-yr-old wander alone outside with absolutely no supervision. One day the child made his way over into the Boxer's backyard and got close to the dog. The dog, a very hyper and under-stimulated dog, knocked the child down and did jump on him giving him several scratches and bruises. Those owners were sued by the child's mom (even though it was the dog's owner who noticed the child & they had to take him home themselves), and I believe that woman got well over $15,000 in a settlement and the dog was taken by AC as "vicious" and the owners' had to move from that house.

Truth is, there is no justice for the responsible. So why punish them even more that asinine requirements that only they will follow while the irresponsible continue to carry on causing havoc and fueling the fires of BSL.
 

Miakoda

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
7,666
Likes
0
Points
0
#9
Thats messed up. Hopefully that doesn't happen.

I have a pitbull and I lost my job not long ago, a friend said I could move in with him and he could get me a job. But he lives in a city that has a pitbull ban. Its a bummer.
Whatever you do, do not bring that dog into a city with a breed ban. You will only be signing his death warrant. Once the dog is found out, there are no second chances to get him out of there. He will be killed that very same day.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2006
Messages
2,434
Likes
1
Points
0
Location
Oregon
#10
I still don't believe in singling out owners who own a certain type of dog and forcing them to carry large liability insurance own them.
Well the point is the approach. Is it really BSL based on no one being able to afford it, or do I need to approach it in a more nuanced way, stating why its still a bad thing.
 

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
#11
out of state hunting guides won a suit against the AZ wildlife management agency when they changed their rules limiting nonresident permits on the grounds that it violated their right to commerce.
very real possibility of breeders being able to challenge since only pitty breeders would be required to carry the insurance.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top