BSL implementation question (Denver, Aurora, Golden: insurance, transfer, to buy)

[ayoitzrimz]

Hi there forum members!

First: mods please don't close this yet. I know these threads usually cause strife and if that happens close it then but this is a legitimate question.

Members: please don't get this thread closed !

Here's my question and I couldn't find anything online. What happened when BSL was introduced to existing owners of pit bulls?

Or let's say hypothetically Denver adds GSDs to the BSL next year. What would they require of me to do with my two shepherds? Am I to give them up immediately or do they get some sort of "grandfathered in" loophole? Assume both my dogs are registered with the city. Would owners have to give up their existing dogs or does it prevent registering new dogs?

[turbospartan]

I'm pretty sure everyone who had an existing dog was grandfathered in, but could not breed them / buy new puppies. Not 100% certain, though.

[mic111]

Each city does it a bit differently.

Aurora did this:
Owners of pit bull dogs and restricted dogs licensed within 60 days of the ordinance's effective date could keep their dogs only under restricted conditions, including:

• if the dog is licensed, spay/neutered, vaccinated against rabies, and has microchip identification;
• the owner is at least 21 years old and has at least $100,000 US liability insurance
• the dog is kept indoors or locked in a secured pen, with government-provided warning signs posted at entrances to the property;
• when off the property, the dog must be kept in a secure transportable container or must wear a muzzle while held on a four-foot long non-extensible leash;
• the dog may not be sold or transferred to anyone outside the owner's immediate family
• the owner must notify the government immediately if the dog is loose, stolen, at-large, unconfined, has mauled, bitten, attacked, threatened, or in any way menaced another animal or human, or has died.[32]

Denver did this:
The law allowed owners of pit bulls living in Denver in July 1989 to keep them provided the owner:

• Registered the dog with the city and allowed the city to tattoo it with the registration number
• Was at least 21 years old
• Had $100,000 US in liability insurance
• Kept the dog confined
• Did not sell or otherwise transfer the dog to anyone except someone in the owner's immediate family.
• Posted a sign of specified dimensions and lettering ("PIT BULL DOG") at every possible entrance to the property where the dog was kept.

The problem was if they did not follow the rules or if neighbors complained or the dog got out, the dog was at a high risk of being killed by the city. Best to buy in a city without BSL.

[davidv]

Originally Posted by mic111

Denver did this:
The law allowed owners of pit bulls living in Denver in July 1989 to keep them provided the owner:

• Registered the dog with the city and allowed the city to tattoo it with the registration number
• Was at least 21 years old
• Had $100,000 US in liability insurance
• Kept the dog confined
• Did not sell or otherwise transfer the dog to anyone except someone in the owner's immediate family.
• Posted a sign of specified dimensions and lettering ("PIT BULL DOG") at every possible entrance to the property where the dog was kept.

The problem was if they did not follow the rules or if neighbors complained or the dog got out, the dog was at a high risk of being killed by the city. Best to buy in a city without BSL.

Since Denver's ban dates back to 1989, you'd probably have a hard time convincing them that the dog was one of the ones grandfathered in 26 years ago.

As for other dogs, I have not ever heard of anyone attempting to or wanting to extend the ban to other breeds.

[ayoitzrimz]

Originally Posted by davidv

Since Denver's ban dates back to 1989, you'd probably have a hard time convincing them that the dog was one of the ones grandfathered in 26 years ago.

As for other dogs, I have not ever heard of anyone attempting to or wanting to extend the ban to other breeds.

I don't own pitties so nobody for me to convince

I was just curious what happened to existing owners and their dogs when the law went into effect which mic11 very eloquently explained

[cowboyxjon]

I'm curious to know if this is actually enforced. I see pit bulls quite a bit in Denver.

[turbospartan]

Originally Posted by cowboyxjon

I'm curious to know if this is actually enforced. I see pit bulls quite a bit in Denver.

I'd like to know too. My fiance sees them almost every day while she is downtown, walking in plain view.

[Timmyy]

There are sure a lot of them in the shelters which is quite sad.

[GoldenZephyr]

Pit bulls end up in shelters because most people figure out that they are just plain aggressive.

They are like a loaded gun with their own brain.

Too many children and adults have been "loved" to death by a pit bull.

Pit bull's account for the vast majority of ER visits related to dog bites. They are simply more dangerous.

National Institutes of Health did a long term (15 year) study.

Mortality, mauling, and maiming by vicious dogs. - PubMed - NCBI

OBJECTIVE:
Maiming and death due to dog bites are uncommon but preventable tragedies. We postulated that patients admitted to a level I trauma center with dog bites would have severe injuries and that the gravest injuries would be those caused by pit bulls.
DESIGN:
We reviewed the medical records of patients admitted to our level I trauma center with dog bites during a 15-year period. We determined the demographic characteristics of the patients, their outcomes, and the breed and characteristics of the dogs that caused the injuries.
RESULTS:
Our Trauma and Emergency Surgery Services treated 228 patients with dog bite injuries; for 82 of those patients, the breed of dog involved was recorded (29 were injured by pit bulls). Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS:
Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites.

Que the pit bull fanatics talking about how its not the breed but the owner.

[ayoitzrimz]

Originally Posted by GoldenZephyr

Pit bulls end up in shelters because most people figure out that they are just plain aggressive.

They are like a loaded gun with their own brain.

Too many children and adults have been "loved" to death by a pit bull.

Pit bull's account for the vast majority of ER visits related to dog bites. They are simply more dangerous.

National Institutes of Health did a long term (15 year) study.

Mortality, mauling, and maiming by vicious dogs. - PubMed - NCBI

OBJECTIVE:
Maiming and death due to dog bites are uncommon but preventable tragedies. We postulated that patients admitted to a level I trauma center with dog bites would have severe injuries and that the gravest injuries would be those caused by pit bulls.
DESIGN:
We reviewed the medical records of patients admitted to our level I trauma center with dog bites during a 15-year period. We determined the demographic characteristics of the patients, their outcomes, and the breed and characteristics of the dogs that caused the injuries.
RESULTS:
Our Trauma and Emergency Surgery Services treated 228 patients with dog bite injuries; for 82 of those patients, the breed of dog involved was recorded (29 were injured by pit bulls). Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS:
Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites.

Que the pit bull fanatics talking about how its not the breed but the owner.

Of course the Californians come in with their nonsense and misinformation. Cue the mod locking this thread