|
US
‘breed laws’ to extend to Chow Chows
BREED SPECIFIC Legislation has reared its head in another American
State, thanks once again to rules laid down by the powerful
insurance cartels, writes Nick Mays. In the town of Bozeman
the insurance carrier for two mobile home parks has said it
will drop its coverage unless the management bans several breeds
of dogs that the company considers dangerous.
Talbot Insurance Agency Inc. President Mary Snyder, whose Kirkland,
Washington, company covers the Bridger View and Covered Wagon
mobile home parks in Bozeman, said the ban reflects the danger
that certain breeds present especially to children.
The company wants the parks to ban Rottweilers, Pit Bulls, Dobermanns,
German Shepherds, chow chows and wolf hybrids.
Snyder said she loves dogs, but many companies have stopped
insuring mobile home parks altogether because they are considered
to be high risk, and dogs only add to the danger.
"We're being discriminated against based on what our dogs
might do," said resident Rhonda Hoyem, who has a German
Shepherd. Park owner Dave Rousher, who owns a Rottweiler, said
he wants to be able to keep the dogs, but also must have insurance.
"They backed us into a corner," Rousher said. "If
we had some claims against us, they would have a valid argument."
Rousher is seeking help from the Montana insurance commissioner.
Dog owners in the park also are upset because they will have
only 30 days to The park requires occupants to own their mobile
homes, so the dog owners can't rent out their homes and move
elsewhere. Hoyem suggested owners could raise their liability
insurance from the $25,000 minimum.
Dog owners also say they would be financially responsible for
any injury their dog caused, but Snyder said litigants also
would go after the park owners in a lawsuit.
The Washington Animal Foundation Inc. - a Seattle based national
non- profit organisation – is planning to take up cudgels
on behalf of the mobile home dog owners.
WAF was founded to educate and assist in promoting ethical and
responsible ownership of dogs, to actively assist or participate
in developing effective Local, State, and National Legislation
and to educate on responsible dog ownership and dog bite prevention.
Under the US Constitution 5th/14th amendment dogs are valuable
personal property, laws that take away ownership of property
(BSL) do not allow for due process of the law. Citizens are
entitled to court procedures to determine there right to own
and enjoy their property. It is unconstitutional to take away
the rights of the citizens of the US unless there is a serious
concern for public safety. It would need to be proven that an
entire breed of dog is dangerous. There is no genetic proof
that an entire breed of dog is dangerous.
There are many problems associated with breed specific ordinances
and some of the existing legislation. Such laws fail to address
the fact that most problems with dogs are due to irresponsible
ownership. Reports from local Humane Societies indicate that
the media attention given to the pit bull has actually increased
the demand for the breed.
Genetics were the pivotal argument in WAF’s successful
case against BSL in the recent Alabama Supreme Court case.
Argument
Both
PETA and experts from Huntsville provided affidavits that
pit bulls were genetically dangerous, but WAF’s own experts
and legal argument proved that genetically, no breed of dog
was inherently dangerous.
The recent mobile homes BSL case is yet another example of
the powerful sway that the insurance industry wields in such
matters. It was insurers which prompted American Airlines
to introduce an arbitrary breed ban against pit bulls and
several other breeds due to one isolated incident where a
pit bull escaped from its cage in the hold of an AA plane
on a domestic US flight.
The insurers and airlines did not seek any independent expert
advice but seemed to seize upon various breeds which they
considered to be ‘dangerous’.
|
