Print This Post
|
Email This Post
BSL ALERT! Michigan: Cheri’s Law
October 4th, 2007
This is fallout from the tragic deaths of Cheri Harper and Edward Gierlach in Iosco back in September. The deaths were caused by a pack of inbred American Bulldogs. Not sure if they are pushing for this legislature across the State of Michigan, or locally. I heard on the news tonight that part of the proposal includes owners of "high-risk breeds" to carry mandatory liability insurance as well the frightening restrictions listed below in the article excerpt.
The brother of Cheri Harper was interviewed on Channel 4 tonight and he claimed that he "didn’t want to take people’s dogs away from them" but that he just wanted people to be responsible.
The problem is, that’s exactly what this law would do – take people’s dogs away from them. See the highlighted portion below.
The "Cheri Harper Memorial Bike Run" mentioned in the article is occurring THIS SATURDAY, October 6th. This is the only article that I could find online. Click here to read the full article.
Family and friends of Cheri Harper are hoping to use her death as a catalyst for a greater cause.
They are trying to get legislation passed that would, among other things, require mandatory spaying and neutering of dogs unless the owner is a licensed breeder; limit three dogs at a location and only one of a "high-risk breed;" and create felony charges and mandatory prison time for any owner of a dog that maims or kills a person.
"I’m just hoping that all of our efforts will be able to get something done," said Jim Harper, Cheri Harper’s boyfriend, who carries a locket of his late girlfriend’s ashes in his pocket. "They need to be controlled."
Those who could not make it out to Saturday’s event will have a chance to donate money to the legislation effort during the "Cheri Harper Memorial Bike Run" Saturday at Motor City Harley off Grand River Avenue in Farmington Hills. Registration begins at 3 p.m., and the ride will go on to Milford.
"Hopefully," Jim Harper said, "they’ll do something with this law, so her life wasn’t lost in vain."
Entry Filed under: BSL: Breed Specific Legislation
7 Comments Add your own
1. jamonya311 | October 15th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
no one is trying to take anyone’s dog away. however there is no need for anyone to own more than three high risk breed dogs, unless your a breeder or a accreditable rescue league. No one should ever object to spaying or neutering a animal either, unless they are breeders… control the animal population.
2. amiela | October 17th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
I agree with you that the animal population should be controlled and that all companion animals should be spayed or neutered. There are too many animals being killed in shelters. However, a law that is breed specific will do nothing in the interest of public safety.
The problem is that banning a specific breed will not solve anything. Any type of breed specific legislation is bad, even if it’s just a ban on breeding, as that can lead to other types of restrictions. The problem with pit bulls & other “high risk” breeds is a people problem, not the dogs themselves. Since many criminal types own this breed, they will not follow a breed ban, since they don’t follow the law anyway. So what would that solve? Nothing, but to punish and restrict the hundreds of thousands of responsible, loving “high risk” breed owners such as myself. If the bad owners were to follow the law, then they would just move to another breed, and then the next until there are no dogs left. I am a pit bull owner and rescuer, so this type of proposed legislation touches close to home for me. All breeds of dog attack and inflict serious damage, and in some cases even death, it’s just that there are statistically more pit bulls than any other breed in this country right now, hence the reason that we hear so many more stories of pit bull attacks and abuse. Non-breed specific dangerous dog laws that place the liability on the owners are the best solution.
3. nikkii | October 17th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
I totally agree with the above statement. There are so many lovers of this breed and awesome owners that we should not be punished due to the ones that don’t know how to take care of their dogs and choose to go against the grain. These are the most awesome and loyal dogs you will ever encounter and BSL will not solve a thing because the ones that own these dogs and choose to do what they want with them dont care about them anyways and are going to do what they are going to do so there has to be a better solution. I love my Pit bulls with all my heart and feel so blessed to have them!
4. Misshopes | October 17th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
I feel for the families of the two people who were killed. What a tragedy. As it is with most things, however, this is a people problem, not a dog problem.
People create their problems. They abuse and neglect children into monsters–why is it surprising they do the same to animals? Then society has to deal with the aftermath, while the cause is still prevalent. I look at having children, and having pets in much the same way. To me, its a privilege, not a God-given right unless people can prove they can and will provide a safe loving home, keep them healthy and teach them to be good citizens. Our dog is a pit-mix. He’s the first dog I’ve ever had–we found him in a warehouse in Detroit when he was about a year old. He was in bad shape. We don’t let him off leash, he has earned his Canine Good Citizen certificate and is a model dog. He’s still a dog, however, and its my responsibility as his owner to make sure he’s under control at all times. I would never leave him alone with a child! I wish more people felt this way. I think owners should be responsible, and held accountable for their dogs–for any pet–cats, dogs, hamsters. As far as “high risk” breeds–I’ve been bitten twice in my life, and still carry the scars. My first attacker was…a Miniature Schnauzer! The second, a Standard Poodle. ANY dog can bite. Banning a specific breed of dog doesn’t solve the problem of irresponsible owners and breeders. If we can focus on holding owners accountable for the actions of their pets–and get beyond what “kind” of dog, ferret, whatever it is– concentrate on the “people” part of the equation, we’d be on the right path to solving the problem.
Thank you for the courtesy.
5. presalover0516 | October 17th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
My heart goes out to the people that lost their loved one. I can’t imagine the pain.
Breed-specific legislation does nothing to deal with the problem of dog attacks. It only focuses on a dog’s appearance, without regard to individual temperament or owner responsibility. I am curious to know how the legislation is proposed to be enforced. What guidline will be used to define “dangerous breeds?” Perhaps the American Temperment Test Society (www.atts.org) is a good place to start. In that case, the dogs that tested LOWER than american pit bull terriers include: Australian Cattle Dogs, Beagles,Dalmations, and Cocker Spaniels, just to name a few. Are we going to ban those breeds too? Or will the legislation be enforced by looks alone? In that case, please pick out the “dangerous dogs” in this example:
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html
The more effective thing to do would be to have the current dog laws enforced more, or to lobby for protection from ALL untrained, unsupervised dogs of any breed. There are thousands of responsible owners across the United States, please don’t punish us for the mistakes of people that aren’t.
6. kygirl | October 22nd, 2007 at 3:29 pm
So does this mean that my autistic brother has do without the pit bull that is his service dog, because our other pit bull is trained in search & rescue to find him when he wanders off? What good does it do to train his service dog to find him, if that dog goes with him when he gets lost? Breed specific laws are not supported by anything other than urban legend: there is no data to support the idea that some breeds are more dangerous or aggressive than others.
7. LydiaZ36 | February 14th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Hign risk cannot be defined by a breed, it can only be defined by the owner. That’s why BSL doesn’t work.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed