Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good Lord--say it isn't so. And how long would it be before "OH I thought it was a pitbull" for a boxer or other breed. Nobody should be able to enter a home without a warrant and especially start shooting what they thought was a pit bull which might even be a child. This simply cannot happen. What kind of moron would propose such a bill? There are many many mild and cherished pit bulls all over this country but any dog will start to protect its family if they think there is danger.
I would be really surprised if something like this could even pass Constitutional muster. Seems an overt violation of the Right to Protection from Unreasonable Search and Seizure.
There is much more to this proposal than that. Read the whole thing.
What, specifically, are you referring to. I read the whole thing. What is very troubling is that this bill targets only one type of dog.
Quote:
“This bill would make Mississippi the only state in the nation with a statewide policy discriminating against a specific dog breed, and the impact on local communities, animal shelters, and law enforcement would be disastrous,†Chloe Waterman, the senior manager of state legislative strategy for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals said.
This is the text of the proposed bill, but I read another article that said the author of the bill was asking for it to die in committee because it needs lots of work. http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/doc...9/HB1261IN.pdf
Needs more than "lots of work." Need a re-write of the 4th amendment of the US constitution, and unless I missed something, Mississippi is still a state that is part of the US. You need some type of warrant (Feds can get a FISA warrant in some cases...too many cases for me), or exigent circumstances to enter without a warrant.
So, it would be thrown out in Federal courts (I would hope). Since this is coming from a state, I hold faith it will be shut down. If it was from the Feds...I would expect it would be ok via an executive memorandum. Since 9/11 the constitution has been ripped up, but in the past few years, it has been shredded. So who knows!
Now, if the law was that a cop could shoot any pit bull on the streets...well that is another matter since pit bulls have no constitutional rights. HOWEVER, the out-roar from ANY dog owner, and there are a lot of those, should be enough to scare the pants off any state legislator who votes for something this ludicrous. Even for people who do not like pit bulls (and I'm one), it is easy to understand, if it is pit-bulls today, it will be German Shepherds tomorrow, Dobermans the next day, etc.
What, specifically, are you referring to. I read the whole thing. What is very troubling is that this bill targets only one type of dog.
If you look closely to this sensationalized article, it does say that there are exceptions and specifics that need to be met before a police officer could actually shoot the dog, or enter a premises. For instance, even this article includes the info that the officers have to first attempt to take the dog without force.
This law is about dogs that are aggressive and dangerous. If a law says you can't have dangerous dogs, and the dogs have been found to be dangerous, and the cops show up to see if it's true, and the dogs then attack the cops - hello, the dog will be shot.
This is not about cops going into the homes of people with one mellow pit bull.
I am always amazed at people who believe a headline on something like this, without researching it. The best rule of thumb is to first think, Hmmmm, is this website just trying to get more hits - this seems kind of sensationalistic. And do thorough research before you play into their hands and try to send the thing viral without knowing the truth. You just play into their hands.
Drug dealers here use the dogs for drug stash security. Inside and outside the house. Police can always enter without a warrant in pursuit of a suspected criminal, but the dogs can be convicted of a crime so they do not qualify in justifying police pursuit.
I'm all for taking action against people whos dogs run loose and terrorize a neighborhood, that said that is much different from police entering a private residence and shooting a dog thats not bothering anyone. I just skimmed the article anddidn't read the actual bill but looks like it comes from some wierd website so not sure how accurately they are describing the bill.
This said if this is true let the cops try to go busting down doors killing peoples dogs for no reason. This isn't new york or chicago where peole dont own guns, this is mississipi where alot of people own firearms. Gonna be a lot of dead cops with the dead dogs if they tried this.
I don't think this is as extreme as the article is making it sound though I am against any degradation of the 4rth amendment
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
