“Maybe all the legislators/regulators/bored children currently in power around the country are staying home glued to their TV’s enthralled by our democratic process, but it’s been a pretty quiet month in legal-landia, to paraphrase the recently retired Garrison Keillor.
NJ: If anyone would like an object lesson in sloppy bill crafting, have a peek at SB 1013. A bill crafted, as always, ostensibly to solve problems, but inevitably winds up causing unintended consequences. This gem has to do with what I’ll call the general topic of “confining” dogs. As currently written (badly) it would mean that dog owners would be liable to legal recourse for such things as leaving a dog in a crate at a show, or leaving dogs in an climate controlled RV. Garden State owners can review the law and the AKC’s position on it here: http://www.akc.org/government-relations/legislative-alerts/nj-sb1013-threatens-responsible-care-dog-shows-travelling/
and contact State Senator Raymond J. Lesniak, Committee Chairman – SenLesniak@njleg.org in order to equate the good gentleman with the sport of dogs, a topic of which he is apparently ignorant.
NM: Another one that won’t go away. As previously reported, the doges of Santa Fe have continued to have hearings on some deeply stupid proposed rules that would adversely effect every legitimate breeder and dog owner in the area. One can read more here: http://www.akc.org/government-relations/legislative-alerts/santa-fe-proposal-hearing/, but the gist is always the same; punish legit owners and breeders by the imposition of unnecessary fees (as if paying a fee is going to stop a junk breeder), exposing legit owners to unannounced inspections, demanding that any dog impounded, even while being on owners property, must be neutered before being returned, etc. ALL dog owners in NM need to get in touch with these dolts and snap them to their senses. Start with this guy: Commissioner Robert A. Anaya – email@example.com
FL: Fresh from the dog-ravaged environs of Palm Beach (I mean, seriously?), the locals obviously have nothing better to do than dream up ridiculous dog laws. In this case, anyone selling even ONE dog would be considered a “dealer.” These “dealer” would now be “governed” by Animal Services, to which there is no legislative or legal recourse. These “dealers” private homes would be subject to unreasonable search (have none of these nitwits actually read the 4th Amendment?) and the list goes on and on…and since much of the language is identical to bills being proposed from CA to NJ, loyal readers will know exactly who is behind these bills (for you novitiates, that would be the HSUS). Dog owners in PB need to get all over these know-nothings. Start here: Janet C. Long, Commissioner/Vice Chairman, http://www.pinellascounty.org/forms/commission.htm.
And, proving that neighbors 30 miles away can be smarter than those living North of them, the Commissioners of Miami-Dade are actually considering repealing their “Pit Bull” ordinance. Locals should contact the Commissioner in the personage of one: Esteban Bovo, Jr., Vice Chair to voice their support of this all-too-rare instance of elected officials reversing past stupidity. Good on them, unless HSUS gets to them first.
That’s it for now. And lest we forget our monthly Menckenism, “The only good bureaucrat is one with a pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it’s good-bye to the Bill of Rights.”