In an attempt to deal with bad guys, like dogfighters, Elgin is supporting a breed ban. Oh, they're not calling it a ban. Technically, it's not a ban. Well, you decide - here's the deal: All Pit Bull-type dogs (however that is defined) will instantly be deemed dangerous in Elgin (even if the dog is anything but a danger). All those owners of Pit Bull types will require $100,000 insurance. Most companies won't insure dangerous dogs (even if they are not really dangerous - but deemed dangerous by the community), or they will charge lots more money for the policy. Another requirement is a 4-foot high fence, even if fencing in some subdivisions is not allowed. Pit Bulls must also be spay/neutered, microchipped, licensed and muzzled in public.
Elgin Mayor Ed Schock and some Elgin Council members are saying they need to give local police "tools" to go after those bad guys with the bad dogs - and they don't want to wait for a dog to be deemed dangerous because of an attack.
I understand that - so how about licensing ALL dogs, and writing into the ordinance that any dog suspected of not having a license can be checked by police. As it is now, police could similarly check for proof of a rabies vaccine (a state law).
As it is dogfighters do what they do in secret....After all, it's felony to fight dogs. I can't comprehend how taking good dogs away from good residents is fair, or helps attain coucul member goals for public safety which most residents agree with. I agree too!
I've expressed my views on the air, and offered to have Mayor Schock
join me or the prime ring leader of this ordinance, Councilman John
Prigge. No calls have been returned. What's more, the City's public
information officer will longer even return my call (or others from at
least some people I know, even from Elgin residents). Elgin maintains
that while I may be an expert, I'm an outsider (I suppose Chicago is
outside Elgin). Ed Fritz of Best Friends Animal Society
flew in from Utah to testify and was not given the opportunity. Still,
local experts - veterinarians and dog trainers tell me they have the
same problem, their calls aren't returned either, and their voices
aren't being heard.
I remain hopeful that city officials want
to sincerely do what is best. I remain optimistic that Elgin considers
a FAIR alternative, so responsible dog owners who are abiding by the
law with their well behaved Pit Bulls are not punished.
Listener Carlos called in on my WLS Radio show.
It's one of those calls that I will always remember. Carlos lives in
Elgin. After serving our country, and being injured in action he bonded
with one special dog. It just so happens that dog isn't a Labrador
Retriever or a Colllie named Lassie, but instead a Pit Bull. His dog is
well behaved - yet, instead of being treated as the hero is he is, if
the ordinance passes - he will be treated as if he's a dogfighter.
Let's be honest. I realize not all Pit Bulls are good dogs. However, the majority are
good dogs. In America, we're supposed to directly go after bad guys and
not restrict the rights of people who are abiding by the law, and
causing no law enforcement problems. That's why immigrants from all
around the world relocated to this country.
Also, dog bites (despite popular press) can come from the jaws of any breed, this is not my opinion but rather it is fact.
Here's another fact:
The Centers for Disease Control no longer tracks the breed responsible
for fatal dog attacks because too often the breed is misidentified,
but mostly because breed is considered "irrelevant." It's what
prompts any dog of any breed or mix to attack that should be considered
(the American Veterinary Medical Association, Centers for Disease Control
and Humane Society of the United States, et al).
When there is a fatal dog attack, or typically a serious bite one or more of the following is true.
- Dogs are involved in crime or
used as accessories to crime. - Dogs are involved in the particular
crime of dog fighting. - Dogs are purchased for the sole
purpose of 'protection.' - Dogs that are tethered -
they break through from tethers and create havoc in the neighborhood;
and tethered dogs' entire disposition often changes as a result of
being tethered. - Unaltered male dogs - not
because they are more aggressive - but because they want to meet,
well, a hot looking babe - and they find ways over or under fences
and roam neighborhoods, sometimes threatening people in the process. - Public complaints about individual
dogs not being acted upon by officials.
The bottom line question I have - if breed bans have not worked anywhere else in America, why would they work in Elgin?
The proposed breed ban is scheduled to be discussed tonight, March 10, at the Elgin City Council meeting, 7 p.m., 100 Symphony Way.
The problem lies with people not with the dog. Dogs are not born mean they are trained by people to become mean. Banning the Pit Bull will not stop the problem; making people accountable is the logical 1st step to stop the abuse of all animals. Animals can't speak for themselves and need our voice to be heard!
The arrogance being shown by the council members pushing this ordinance is unbelievable.
I could be mistaken, but to the best of my knowledge, this city council has refused to allow any expert in behavior to present any information. They've refused to acknowledge ONE article that they've read that counters their biased opinions.
Prigge has stated that "his staff" has done extensive research on the issue, but can't come up with ONE article that is in opposition to his ban.
So what does it say about any politician who says that they are concerned about the public safety, but won't allow any input contrary to their view.
No wonder this guy's business is having troubles. Apparently only HIS opinion is what matters. Could you imagine working for a boss who only wants to hear views that agree with his?
Could you imagine someone wanting to build any type of business in Elgin that might have some dangerous side affects and the city council refusing to listen to any views outside of the business.
If this doesn't demonstrate to the residents of Elgin that these folks need to be replaced, I don't know what would.
Steve,
If it is possible to contact you privately, could you please send me an email at elginfour@comcast.net.
You'll find this part of the story even more ridiculous.
I really think the problem lies within the economic structure of Elgin. I would imagine without digging very deeply that the city is in just terrible straights money wise, like all cities and states are presently...and this type of ordinance probably is expected to give the coffers some sorely needed money. Do they even have a guess at the number of
kra I have a better idea,if the Gangs are the problem.GO AFTER THE GANGS Arrest them,Run them outtatown,Euthanise them there are very many options.But leave Family-Pets alone.This Council definitely has to be the most useless on the Planet.
GET RID OF THEM starting with Prick I mean Prigge.
smarock10@yahoo.com
I find it interesting- and unbelievably hypocritical- if the supporters of this BSL say they don't want to wait for a dog to be deemed dangerous because of an attack.
Aside from pits, every other breed would not face being classified as "dangerous" unless that dog commits a dangerous act or behavior.
In addition, for a person to be determined a "Problem Pet Owner" the stipulations are:
three or more separate and unrelated violations of Sections 7.04.020 (Unlawful Treatment of Animals), 7.04.110B (Restrictions on Dangerous Dogs), 7.04.120B (Restrictions on Vicious Dogs), 7.04.180 (Animal Fighting Prohibited), or 7.04.190 (Tethering) of this Chapter in one 36 month period or
(ii) two or more separate and unrelated violations of [Sec 7.04.020, 7.04.110B, 7.04.120B, or 7.04.180, or 7.04.190]... at any time after having a dog owned by him or her designated as a Dangerous Dog or a Vicious Dog.
Oh, and they are still given due process before a determination is made.
The consequence for someone categorized a problem pet owner is a bar on licensing or owning animals, which is great. But only for a period of 24 months! (Why not interminably?)
So I ask the city of Elgin: Exactly where is the equal protection for everyone and every pet in that??
"it's that simple"
Yes Steve, one would think.
So unfortunately, Elgin is on the verge of enacting BSL, which has proved a failure in so many other areas. BSL not only kills well-adjusted family pets (causing great emotional pain on the families who have owned these dogs), but does NOT improve public safety, and even ends up costing more money for the municipalities which enact such laws!
One example of this is Aurora CO which enacted BSL in November 2005. Through 2007, over 600 dogs of the so-called "restricted breeds" were seized and killed. Instead of improving public safety, an official Aurora CO report detailing dog bite statistics, released in February 2008, revealed that the number of reported dog bites for 2006 and 2007, the first two full years after the breed ban, actually had increased over the previous year! In 2005, the year the BSL was enacted (in November), dog bites to humans totaled 179, with 35 (or 20%) of these committed by "restricted breeds", and 144 bites (80%) by all other breeds. 2006 was the first full year of BSL in Aurora CO; in 2006, a total of 182 bites were recorded - a small increase; only 11 (or 6%) were committed by "restricted breeds", and 171 (or 94%) by non-BSL breeds. The numbers in 2007 were similar to that in 2006: 180 total dog bites, of which just 13 (or 7%) were by banned breeds, and 167 (or 93%) were by all other breeds. Therefore, despite killing over 600 "restricted breed" dogs in those two years, and costing Aurora a great deal of money in enforcement and (later) legal defense of this ordinance, public safety did NOT improve, since the total number of bites did not decrease. The only observed change was that a higher proportion of bites were committed by non-restricted breeds instead of the breeds targeted by the BSL ordinance. Aurora proved that the real failure of BSL laws is their inability to target the irresponsible dog owners
I am an owner of two of the most wonderful pit bulls. They don't have a mean bone in their body and all they want to do is please. Both of my dogs lived in harmony with our two Shih Tzus and now live with three border collies. I compete in agility with my two dogs and my one is a Grand Champion in UKC ranking 19th and 27th in 2007. It the stupidity of people who don't research what they are deciding on. Spend the money on getting law enforcement after the bad people who are fighting these dogs and not waste money on going after families that have chosen this breed as their family pet. If I can help in anyway, please let me know. I always said I was going to make a movie called "A Day in the Life of Alphie." He is my red nose pit that is just a big dope (in a loving way). Maybe I have to hurry up and do this so that people can see what great dogs they are.
Linda from Rockford
"WE WON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The Elgin City Council reconsidered the pit bull portion of the Animal Ordinance and removed it! Thank you, thank you, thank you Mayor Schock and Councilmen Prigge, Dunne, Gilliam, Kaptain, Steffen and Warren. We cannot thank you enough!!"
Okay, we've won.
That being said we need to do two things.
Make the city council of Elgin feel that we still want to help them.
More to the point, we need to help them get REAL dangerous dogs off of the streets of Elgin.
Keep your eyes and ears open for the next BSL battle. Unfortunately, we all know that there will be another one somewhere.
Enjoy the taste of victory
You and I aren't having too much success at this.
I tried emailing you and mine bounced.
Try this.
wallyobrien@msn.com
Use the same strategy they wish to rid Elgin of "Bad Guys" go after a few of these useless councillors starting with Prigge VOTE HIM OUT.
Residents of Elgin have the Vote USE IT.