WhatFinger


Nearly 45 million American homes have at least one canine or feline family member.

Your Dogs and Cats Belong to You, Not the Government – Maybe!



Dogs, cats, pets and other animals have never been more a part of our lives than they are today. Even though nearly 45 million American homes have at least one canine or feline family member, dogs are being forced out of their homes by various dog ban legislation, dog taxing licensing, and dog law tyranny through the mandatory requirements for home owner’s insurance outrageous premiums as a result of legislation dog insurance mandates.

Support Canada Free Press


These mandated dog insurance policies are being pushed by various animal rights activist groups, and law making people who ‘buy into’ the local media ‘hype’ when a dog bite incident occurs on private property or in the community. The erosion of our freedom to own dogs, cats, pets and animals, rings true of the current political climate in the USA Today. We the People who own dogs, cats, pets and animals are especially struck by the public’s statements concerning agreement or apathy towards all the various government licensing to include that of our dogs, cats, pets and animals. Definition of Licensing and the Misconceptions: Most people seem to believe that a dog or pet license is a freedom, when in true fact, it is a taking. A license is a temporary, revocable permit issued by government that allows the holder to have something or to do something that is otherwise illegal. For example, in the USA the licensing of firearms has virtually removed our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Any time a license is issued, a freedom is jeopardized. By the very act of licensing dogs, the act of owning or even possessing a dog has been made illegal. Animals are traditional property, now legally having “Intrinsic Value:” Animals are human-kind's most ancient and traditional property. Before ever we settled down to a plot of land and threw seeds in the soil, we numbered animals as our most valuable possessions. Wealth has always been associated with the number of animals that a person owned, and kept. Now animal ownership, use, and the ancient, honorable practice of animal husbandry are under global attack by dog laws, animal ID laws globally. It was initiated by the animal "rights" movement, and adapted by local, state, and federal governments throughout the world. A Dog's life has 'intrinsic value,' New York judge finds: Finding that a dog "is somewhere between a person and personal property," a New York trial court said a pet owner whose dog died following unauthorized surgery may seek damages beyond the purchase price of the animal. "[A dog] is not an inanimate thing that just receives affection; it also returns it," the court wrote, citing Corso v. Crawford, 97 Misc. 2d 530 (N.Y., Queens County Civ. Ct. 1979). Doing Away with Dog Ownership: All the dog legislation, animal control laws, dog ownership licensing, animal breeder licensing and animal ID programs will effectively do away with all but the largest commercial breeders and providers. When the small traditional owner and holder have been the basis for our animals and economy world-wide, it soon will end with all animals owned being controlled through licensing of many types and behaviors, as well as the food we all eat for life will be controlled by the seed products being copyrighted through large commercial concerns like Monsanto, and those of us who have traditionally grown our own food or owned animals personally for various reasons will be locked out or the owners will be locked up literally, also known as “Jail” or animal shelters, etc. A Cursory Review of Animal Care and Control Tyranny in Animal Law. Around the country, banning pit bulls has become the most popular answer to the potential ‘dangerous dog’ question. Many states and the municipalities alike, just like Omaha, Nebraska, and Mills County, Iowa, have now implemented major animal care and control legislation and these areas like the rest of the country have jumped on the animal rights dangerous dog 'ban' wagon. In Mills County, Iowa if your 'harmless' dog escapes off your property three times, the County will designate your dog as a “dangerous dog.” It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize this tyranny legislation is going to have a great economic hardship on the dog owner’s regarding pet licensing fees, and the home owner insurance premiums and even the dog, if the owner can no longer afford to keep the dog due to pet license fees, animal law fines, and potential confiscation and euthanasia of the dog. Additionally, a cursory review of the Mills County, Iowa animal care and control ordinance disclosed there is no lawful and constitutional ‘due process’ afforded in the legislation for proper hearings and testimony for the dog owner, before the county animal control authorities can ‘legally’ confiscate, seize or euthanize your dogs. Like Mills County, Iowa a vast majority of these ‘animal care and controlling’ dog ordinances and legislation ‘fail’ to implement any constitutional ‘due process’ what so ever in their animal control regulations. Instead these ordinances and legislation designate animal control authorities the ability to ‘make life altering judgments about your dogs, without fact or proven evidence’ to ‘label’ your dog as a ‘dangerous dog.’ Without any lawful and constitutional means of evidence or hearing to do so animal control can invoke search, seizure, confiscation, and euthanasia of your dog on private property without a criminal act having taken place. These tyranny dog legislation and ordinances in all communities are insuring that any lawful attempt by you as good law abiding citizens to prevent access to your dogs on your private property can be overcome by animal control simply going to a magistrate and stating the owner refuses inspection access to their private property, in these tyranny animal ordinances. No evidence of a ‘crime’ need be presented to obtain a warrant to enter your private property anymore with this kind of tyranny in the legislation and ordinances. Good bye dog owners, if you resist, and goodbye to your dogs through fees, fines, confiscations, seizures, and dog euthanasia without any legal and proper constitutional hearing to prevent these ‘assassinations’ by animal control authorities nationwide. And if you manage to even get your confiscated dog back, it will cost you dearly, in fees, fines, RFID mandatory chipping, spay/neuter before they can be returned, license fees, and boarding for the animal, or you will ‘not’ get your dogs back from animal control and their humane society shelters. Essentially this is a 'perverted' legal maneuver for the county or municipality to ‘steal’ your dogs away from you, and sell them for a profit (as a rescue) while billing you for the expenses of the entire affair. The insurance companies making these dog ‘ban’ lists or ‘blacklists” of dog breeds may not be the direct ‘villain’ in these tyranny legislations, but they sure are playing directly into the hands of the law makers that are ‘mandating’ these tyranny insurance policies on owners of the newly designated ‘banned’ or designated ‘potentially dangerous’ dog breeds, which also include any ‘look alike’ dogs as well. There are currently 75 restricted or banned dog breeds across the U.S. that are banned by various home owner insurance companies and Animal laws as follows: 1. AIREDALE TERRIER 2. AKBASH 3. AKITA 4. ALAPAHA BLUE BLOOD BULLDOG 5. ALASKAN MALAMUTE 6. ALSATIAN SHEPHERD 7. AMERICAN BULLDOG 8. AMERICAN HUSKY 9. AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER 10. AMERICAN STAFFORDSHIRE TERRIER 11. AMERICAN WOLFDOG 12. ANATOLIAN SHEPHERD 13. ARIKARA DOG 14. AUSTRALIAN CATTLE DOG 15. AUSTRALIAN SHEPHERD 16. BELGIAN MALINOIS 17. BELGIAN SHEEPDOG 18. BELGIAN TURVUREN 19. BLUE HEELER 20. BOERBUL 21. BORZOI 22. BOSTON TERRIER 23. BOUVIER DES FLANDRES 24. BOXER 25. BULLDOG 26. BULL TERRIER 27. BULL MASTIFF 28. CANE CORSO 29. CATAHOULA LEOPARD DOG 30. CAUCASIAN SHEPHERD 31. CHINESE SHAR PEI 32. CHOW-CHOW 33. COLORADO DOG 34. DOBERMAN PINSCHER 35. DOGO DE ARGENTINO 36. DOGUE DE BORDEAUX 37. ENGLISH MASTIFFS 38. ENGLISH SPRINGER SPANIEL 39. ESKIMO DOG 40. ESTRELA MOUNTAIN DOG 41. FILA BRASILIERO 42. FOX TERRIER 43. FRENCH BULLDOG 44. GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG 45. GOLDEN RETRIEVER 46. GREENLAND HUSKY 47. GREAT DANE 48. GREAT PYRENEES 49. ITALIAN MASTIFF 50. KANGAL DOG 51. KEESHOND 52. KOMONDOR 53. KOTEZEBUE HUSKY 54. KUVAZ 55. LABRADOR RETRIEVER 56. LEONBERGER 57. MASTIFF 58. NEOPOLITAN MASTIFF 59. NEWFOUNDLAND 60. OTTERHOUND 61. PRESA DE CANARIO 62. PRESA DE MALLORQUIN 63. PUG 64. ROTTWEILER 65. SAARLOOS WOLFHOND 66. SAINT BERNARD 67. SAMOYED 68. SCOTTISH DEERHOUND 69. SIBERIAN HUSKY 70. SPANISH MASTIFF 71. STAFFORDSHIRE BULL TERRIER 72. TIMBER SHEPHERD 73. TOSA INU 74. TUNDRA SHEPHERD 75. WOLF SPITZ How's that for scary? Are you as a responsible owner, of one of these dog breeds wide awake now? How about just owning a dog that looks like one of these restricted or banned dog breeds? The disadvantages of dog “number limits” in homes by Animal Laws. Dog owners in some communities face a limit on the number of pets they can own, but these limits, too, are counterproductive. Laws that criminalize pet ownership based on numbers alone have been declared unconstitutional in some states because they do not address the need to control nuisances or provide for the health and safety of residents. The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, the state’s highest court, has declared such a law unconstitutional in that state, citing a precedent in Kadash v City of Williamsport: “What is not an infringement upon public safety and is not a nuisance cannot be made one by legislative fiat and then prohibited.... “Even legitimate legislative goals cannot be pursued by means which stifle fundamental personal liberty when the goals can otherwise be more reasonably achieved.” A dog or pet limit ordinance is difficult to enforce without increased presence of animal control or police agencies and often leads to a decrease in pet licensing to prevent cross-referencing of license records. If the law is enforced only upon complaint, it becomes just another law for people to circumvent and further erodes confidence in legislative bodies. Numbers have no relationship to nuisances. A person with one dog that runs loose or barks all night is a greater nuisance than a person with a dozen dogs that are quiet, clean, and kept at home. Limiting people to four dogs (or fewer) puts an unreasonable strain on people who raise show dogs, compete in performance trials, participate in canine rescue operations, foster dogs for service dog organizations, etc. and can lead to those responsible dog owners leaving the community. A number limit causes dog deaths by forcing people to give up dogs they own, thus causing crowding in local shelters; denying people the opportunity to buy an additional dog from a shelter or a rescue; and adversely impacting rescue groups and foster homes that help find new homes for dogs whose owners cannot keep them. Your Pet Belongs to YOU, Not the government! Animal laws are not always a result of state and federal battles. Squabbles between neighbors often erupt over animals, squabbles that often spill over into law enforcement or animal control filed complaints to local governments. As an emotional result the local government greases the squeaky wheel complaints by citizens with even more stricter ordinances or other tacked on to the zoning code or the criminal codes to existing animal ordinances. Dog limit ordinances are often passed out of frustration, with little consideration for the consequences or valid and factual basis to make any “positive or constructive” benefit to the community dog complaints, other than a government official “feel good” action giving We the People even more tyranny in our local animal control ordinances. You dogs, cats, pets and other animals are the victims, not just of irresponsible breeders and pet or animal owners but of the violence that pervades of our whole society. No one in Animal law considers the ‘Intrinsic value’ established by precedent setting lawful court cases that establish dogs as being more than just ‘chattel.’ No lawful ‘due process’ is included in the animal control legislation that meet a constitutional challenge. Rather these tyranny animal care and control laws are approved ‘knowing’ that virtually no one owning a pet, can sustain a lengthy and costly court battle to establish the ‘unconstitutional’ provisions within these tyranny animal care and control laws on the nation’s various law books. As a consequence of all the Animal care and control laws being imposed, it now begs the question: Does your dog, cat, pet or other animals still belong to YOU, or the government? And by the way, please tell Mills County, Iowa. "We the People Have the Right to Bear F.arms!" ...AND OWN OUR DOGS, PETS AND ANIMALS WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INTRUSION! image


View Comments

Dean A. Ayers -- Bio and Archives

Dean A. Ayers is a freelance Reporter


Sponsored