Dogs and Politics

Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Monday, June 12, 2006

More from another GP candidate Noreen Hartlen of Richmond County:

Libelle is hard at work, gathering opinions:

As regards breed-specific legislation, I believe all breeds have rights as sentient beings and ought to have the opportunity to live.

This relates to a principle in the Green Party's global charter: "respect for diversity."

I have personally known dogs in each of the groups you've mentioned, and they were terrific pets. Each of them was extremely gentle and loving. It is a shame that dogs are bred and/or raised in a manner that causes them to become a threat to society. Stories of dogs attacking children, other animals, and people in general are very worrisome and sad. We cannot ignore these issues, and there are things that can be done about managing the danger to some extent. The problem is the potentiality that incidents may still occur--and these incidents involve traumatic outcomes in many situations.

People have to live with extreme fear and/or phobias as well as disfigurement in too many cases. These are serious issues! There is a responsibility to protect people as well as animals, however, which creates a dilemma, and people are working hard on a solution. It is too easy to just ban breeds.

Rather, there could be an effort put forth to ensure applicable breeds cease to be dangerous. This involves strategic breeding practices and regulatory measures. Responsible pet ownership falls into the latter category, but it is difficult to enforce as well as to monitor.

Nevertheless, it must be undertaken. Public education and efforts to reduce the attraction troublesome people have to owning dangerous dogs are also necessary.

Hmm I don't really care for that answer either. Sad Sounds a bit too... well, they're still dangerous breeds so we'll just regulate them to extinction instead of outright banning them.

Still no answer from my personal NDP (incumbant) and/or the PC candidate.

The liberal for my area was just to my door (well, his guy was, he was up the street still). I grabbed Titus and leashed him up, and we went politicking!! Titus was a HUGGGGGE hit (of course!) and the liberal (Jim Hoskins) was all over him, hugging and even stooped down to get a kiss (talk about politicians and babies!). He's a retired police officer and was a K9 OFFICER!! Obviously, he had a GSD as a partner, but also had his own GSDs. He hopes to get a rottweiler in the future, and says it's not the breed of dog, it's the owners. He's very adamant in that.

Saturday, June 10, 2006

NDP backtracking...

NDP says Dexter has no plans for breed-specific bans on dogs

The New Democrats say they’ve made a faux paw.

Spokeswoman Barbara Emodi said Wednesday said she made a mistake when submitting leader Darrell Dexter’s answer to a question about banning some dog breeds.

The questions were posed in The Chronicle Herald’s Petpourri column, published Tuesday.

She said Mr. Dexter does not support breed-specific legislation.

"I wrote it down wrong," she said.

Janet Chernin, the Atlantic chairwoman for the Dog Legislation Council of Canada, wrote to Mr. Dexter after seeing his answer in the paper.

Ms. Chernin, the owner of two bull terriers and a Rottweiler, said she could not support a party that backed a breed ban.

Do we believe them? Do we want to put people into power, that may take away our rights as dog owners?

The Green Party

Libelle emailed the Green Party's main email address and received a response from a candidate in Cape Breton:

Here's Libelle's post:

OK, here's the deal. Someone wrote to the Green Party at the email address of askng for their stance on BSL. The person who answered said they fully support BSL, HOWEVER the person responding was Chris Milburn, GPNS candidate CB-Nova...NOT the Green Party leader. I am going to assume Mr. Milburn thought the original email was directed to him personally and not the party as a whole.

So, since the party leader did not answer personally, the party's stance is still in question.

Libelle and I are still awaiting response from the leader of the party, with the party's stance.

Conservative Leader, Rodney MacDonald:

Libelle found this:

Q: Where do you stand on breed-specific legislation that would ban certain breeds of dogs like Rottweilers or pit bull terriers?

Rodney MacDonald: I’m assuming this question deals with public safety, given the breeds you’ve mentioned. I believe there is a half pass, half fail rate with this type of legislation across Canada. I’m not entirely convinced that by banning certain breeds would prevent dog attacks from happening. Other breeds can also demonstrate aggression toward people depending on the circumstances, how the dog was raised and treated itself. I think I’d be more supportive of legislation that addresses the causes of aggression rather than targeting the banning of specific breeds.

This is from Rick Conrad's questionnaire which the Conservatives returned after the deadline and therefore was not included in the article.

Wednesday, June 07, 2006

The NDP are FOR BSL!!

Do you know where your party stands on pet issues for this upcoming provincial election?

I'm just fucking sick. I've ALWAYS voted NDP. I won't be voting for it again, as long as Darrell Dexter is leader. Sonuvabitch.

Well today I felt let down. Why, you ask? I trusted in the ideals of the NDP. They stood for a lot of the things that I have always valued, and agreed on. And now Mr Dexter has stated in PRINT, that he would legislate my dogs into oblivion.

Don't misunderstand me. I fully support DANGEROUS DOG LEGISLATION, in which dogs that cause harm to humans are targetted with tough penalties, up to and including imprisionment. But it should be the same all across the board, be it a chihuahua, a cocker spaniel, a labrador, or a Saint Bernard, not just a rottweiler or pitbull.

ALL DOGS are capable of causing harm.

Responsible ownership of any dog is KEY.

We shouldn't have to legislate common sense. But alas, common sense just isn't that common.

*sigh* I never thought I'd see the day in which I'd vote Liberal. Even the transgressions of the Liberals in Ontario can't sway this (it's important to remember that both the Ontario Liberal party and the Nova Scotia Liberal party have different leaders, and different ideals.) One is for BSL and one is NOT. And THAT's in print too!