Quote: Connie Sutherland

I was kind of impressed that no breed is mentioned in the proposed legislation, though.

But it kind of does with a wink and a nod, we all know what kinds of dogs they're targeting with this. They're just putting a weight on things to make their jobs easier rather than evaluating the entire picture. Seizing property that would otherwise be 100% legal based upon a technicality like weight is wrong... pure and simple.

I have a friend with a felony that is considered violent and a family member with a felony. In both cases neither one of them are continuing criminals and frankly the life of a felon outside prison isn't an easy one. Why add the fear of losing one's dog to the mix or make it so prohibitively expensive that people are driven underground?

It's easy to jump on felons, their defenders are few and far between. In my eyes however coming up with something like this is ignoring the larger picture of behavior problems related to crime. It would be cheaper to put out bounties on actual crimes related to dog fighting based upon convictions than to enforce a program built to target less than 5% of convicted felons.

 Quote: Melissa Thom

It would be cheaper to put out bounties on actual crimes related to dog fighting based upon convictions than to enforce a program built to target less than 5% of convicted felons.

Now, that's a creative idea...

leih

 Quote: Tammy Moore

Hmmm...Couldn't we just take all the felons wanting a large dog and give them the already aggressive/handler aggressive dogs, those dogs being euthanized, and see if they can rehabilitate them {secured location}? Community Service project...may the best one win!

I like how you think. lol