Tuesday, May 12, 2009

News Reel - Higher Fines

Check out this article, DeRidder adopts new ordinances regarding dogs. Apparently city council has increased the fines for loose dogs and strongly encourages dog licensing. It also addresses dangerous dog legislation. Here is another article that explains specifically what these new "ordinances" are: City Council approves John Gott as Chief of Police

I would like to take a moment and applaud the city council of DeRidder for introducing stiffer penalties regarding animals at large and dangerous animals in the community. It is a step in the right direction. For those of you who (like me) don't know, DeRidder is in Louisiana (yes, I had to look this up on Google).

And hey, go figure, someone is opposing this. Surprise surprise. Resident Steve Green suggests it will penalize 'responsible' dog owners. Couldn't you at least find a good argument, Steve? I think each and every person opposed to this sort of legislation (regardless of the location) says the exact same thing.

How in the world will this penalize responsible dog owners?

The responsible ones are they who have their dogs contained or under control.

The responsible ones are they who work their dogs through any aggression issues, exercise regularly and teach obedience to produce a well rounded, balanced and happy dog.

The responsible ones are they who spay and neuter their dogs that aren't stud-worthy or shouldn't reproduce.

The responsible ones are they who vaccinate their animals regularly and continue a relationship with their veterinarian (if you don't have a good relationship with them or don't feel comfortable making one, find a new vet!).

The responsible ones are they who register their animals at City Hall and get a dog licence (or at least have some form of identification on their animal at all times such as rabies tags, Microchips, etc. - I know many people who refuse to license).

All others in my opinion are not very responsible. So tell me this, how is it again that this new legislation penalizes the responsible owners?

Probably this guy is an asshat and not looking at the whole picture. Or perhaps his animals are those running at large? Hard to say. Either way, Canine Control might want to keep an eye in his direction.


GoLightly said...

I think old Stevie means irresponsible, he just likes to talk in opposite speak.

Or something.
Or maybe he's just dumb.

Stiffer fines for out-of-control dogs, fine by me.

OldMorgans said...

Maybe Stevie has a fence that leaks dogs so his dogs are loose a lot, but hey he is still a responsible owner (snerk).
But all the laws won't help unless they are enforced.


DogsDeserveFreedom said...

Yeah, you're right GoLightly ... maybe he is using opposite speak. If this were opposite world it would make perfect sense.

Never know if they will enforce them until they are in place. The ones regarding animal control will be, but the others, well we'll see.

DogsDeserveFreedom said...

(By animal control, I mean when canine or animal control is called into a situation and they have to deal with it; if they get the call, they will charge more on their fines.)