Need advice on constitutionality

[Ohiogal]

As I stated in a different thread, I know animals have no rights, BUT dogs, in Ohio are considered property and the 14th amendment states no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. How is it that 12 other states have outlawed such legislation on the grounds of it being unconstitutional?

It is NOT unconstitutional. The Ohio constitution does not prohibit any such thing. And there is due process. You can still own a pit bull in Ohio. Municipalities have laws regarding it. The state has laws regarding it. You can still own one however. Just like you can own a gun or tiger in Ohio. You just need to jump through hoops.

 

[cyjeff]

I have the constitutional right to bear arms.

That does not mean I have the constitutional right to own a suitcase nuke.

Why?

Because a suitcase nuke has been deemed too dangerous to other people to be allowed.

You say pits (and yes, I know this includes the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, and Staffordshire Bull Terrier) are not. The legislature disagrees. You need to convince your legislature that you are right and they are wrong.

Do it quick... before your pit bites someone...

And I have been raising dogs for longer than you have been alive. Pit Bull terriers were BRED TO FIGHT. Granted, originally they were bred to fight bulls that were out of control... but bred to have courage, endurance, a high tolerance to pain and a jaw strength that on the high side of the curve (in the neighborhood of 320 PSI)...

Now, I have met many kind and caring pits. I exercise my dog with one a couple of times a week. But unless the dog is cared for by a strong handed and compassionate master, it can turn mean in a hurry. I have seen it.

 

[justalayman]

Well, you are just as ignorant as coucil persons making life or death decisions for animals you know nothing about. You obviously believe the hype.

I bet you didn't know that american pit bull terriers placed higher with the american temperment testing society above labs and golden retrievers.

So no, they are not "known dangerous breeds" for one, as I stated before, pit bull is not a breed. It is a description. You need to research before you spout off ignorant remarks that are false

actually, a pit bull is a breed or more properly, American Pit Bull Terrier
and yes, they are known as having a greater propensity to exhibit aggressive behavior.
from our favorite place (Wiki)

, American pit bull terriers in general have a higher tendency towards dog aggression[

as well, bit bulls are more often associated with nefarious activities than just about any other dog currently and as such, more of them are trained as aggressive dogs, percentage wise, than most other dogs.

and yes, aggressiveness can be a hereditary trait.

BUT dogs, in Ohio are considered property and the 14th amendment states no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process

and you are really misunderstanding that amendment.

to deprive you of property, you must first own it, legally. If they then take it from you without legal justification and payment if proper, then your right to the property is being taken without due process.

 

[mike6623]

I have the constitutional right to bear arms.

That does not mean I have the constitutional right to own a suitcase nuke.

Why?

Because a suitcase nuke has been deemed too dangerous to other people to be allowed.

You say pits (and yes, I know this includes the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, and Staffordshire Bull Terrier) are not. The legislature disagrees. You need to convince your legislature that you are right and they are wrong.

Do it quick... before your pit bites someone...

And I have been raising dogs for longer than you have been alive. Pit Bull terriers were BRED TO FIGHT. Granted, originally they were bred to fight bulls that were out of control... but bred to have courage, endurance, a high tolerance to pain and a jaw strength that on the high side of the curve (in the neighborhood of 320 PSI)...

Now, I have met many kind and caring pits. I exercise my dog with one a couple of times a week. But unless the dog is cared for by a strong handed and compassionate master, it can turn mean in a hurry. I have seen it.

You may have been raising dogs for a long time but it is pretty evident that you have no REAL knowledge out the APBT. Yes, they were bred to be dog agressive, but NOT human agressive. They scored higher than golden retrievers, labs, and beagles with the american temperment testing society. They are not a breed for everyone, but DOGS is genreal are not for everyone.

 

[mike6623]

actually, a pit bull is a breed or more properly, American Pit Bull Terrier
and yes, they are known as having a greater propensity to exhibit aggressive behavior.
from our favorite place (Wiki)



as well, bit bulls are more often associated with nefarious activities than just about any other dog currently and as such, more of them are trained as aggressive dogs, percentage wise, than most other dogs.

and yes, aggressiveness can be a hereditary trait.




and you are really misunderstanding that amendment.

to deprive you of property, you must first own it, legally. If they then take it from you without legal justification and payment if proper, then your right to the property is being taken without due process.

You really have no idea what you are talking about, sorry. APBT have never been proven to be any more dangerous than any other dog. You, like most others, are getting statistics from media outlets that deem every short stalky dog a "pit bull". My city/state makes people with American bulldogs (and some with boxers) register them as pit bulls when in fact they have professional pedigree from organizations around the word such as the UKC and AKC showing that no where in the dogs liniage is there pit bull. So, if there boxer bites someone, guess what? A pit bull bit someone, even though the dog is a pure bred boxer or american bulldog. Which are completely different breeds.

Some cities such as Denver, WILL come to your house and take your dog and kill it just because it looks a certain way. Peoeple that have owned these dogs for years all of the sudden had to surrender them to be killed becasue the law was passed. Some had there dogs for 7 years or more.

AND no one can answer why 12 other states deem this type of law unconstitutional. Why is that?

 

[justalayman]

you are simply a jerk. You get help and all you can do is tell everybody they do not know what they are talking about. Well, who came here looking for info?

You. If you know everything, then be on your way and go fight city hall. You got all the help from me that you will and most likely everybody else.

 

[justalayman]

AND no one can answer why 12 other states deem this type of law unconstitutional. Why is that?

and list the 12 other states and cite the proof. I believe you are incorrect.

 

[goddessoflubboc]

Cities and states have the autonomy to enact legislation as they see fit, so long as it is not unconstitutional - which in most states includes the banning or restricting of ownership of breeds of dogs. It is akin to legislation regarding the ownership of certain weapons, such as assault weapons.

My city requires every residential property to fence in at least the entirety of their backyards. They further insured this would happen by placing a deed restriction to that effect on every property that qualified by zoning. This is *my* property, I am paying a lot of money for it. Still doesn't mean I get to do whatever I want.

The fence regulation only allows for a 6 foot fence. However, my next door neighbor had a "pit bill" that could leap the existing 6 foot fence, and so I got a variance to go 7 feet. Now, when my children play in the backyard they are only menaced by the dog's nose popping over the top. When we try and eat outside we only see the constant up and down of the dog's nose. This despite the fact that we really only use the half of the yard away from that side. So the dog growls at people just sitting and talking.

I am a responsible pet owner, I have a rider on my homeowner's in the highly unlikely event that one of my two dogs (daschund and poodle) were ever to bite anyone.

You may laugh, but the poodle I had as a child was very aggressive-territorial. The difference here being that while I don't know the exact statistics (and I surely won't invent some!) the number of people who have died or sustained serious injuries from a poodle is *significantly* less than from a dog with the jaw power of any "pit bull".

I've seen firsthand a pitbull attack, and it was a most terrifying thing. While I've seen plenty of dogs go after each other, seeing one (who lived with a nice family with small kids who trusted him before) literally shake another animal to death was unbelievable.

My state chooses not to ban any specific breeds, but at least once a week we have a cop shooting a pit bull. Can't be a coincidence.

 

[Ohiogal]

You really have no idea what you are talking about, sorry. APBT have never been proven to be any more dangerous than any other dog. You, like most others, are getting statistics from media outlets that deem every short stalky dog a "pit bull". My city/state makes people with American bulldogs (and some with boxers) register them as pit bulls when in fact they have professional pedigree from organizations around the word such as the UKC and AKC showing that no where in the dogs liniage is there pit bull. So, if there boxer bites someone, guess what? A pit bull bit someone, even though the dog is a pure bred boxer or american bulldog. Which are completely different breeds.

Some cities such as Denver, WILL come to your house and take your dog and kill it just because it looks a certain way. Peoeple that have owned these dogs for years all of the sudden had to surrender them to be killed becasue the law was passed. Some had there dogs for 7 years or more.

AND no one can answer why 12 other states deem this type of law unconstitutional. Why is that?

Because those states have laws that are written differently AND they have different constitutions. It is NOT a federal constitutional question but a STATE constitutional question.

 

[cyjeff]

You may have been raising dogs for a long time but it is pretty evident that you have no REAL knowledge out the APBT. Yes, they were bred to be dog agressive, but NOT human agressive.

Never said they were.

However, a dog that is aggressive to other dogs is still an aggressive breed.

They scored higher than golden retrievers, labs, and beagles with the american temperment testing society.

Reread your statistics. They scored 10% lower.

They are not a breed for everyone, but DOGS is genreal are not for everyone.

Really... spellcheck is your friend.