Friday, July 6, 2007

Well, well, Sarnia finally gets mobile

You may remember how an at-large pack of hounds trapped a woman in her house and savaged her cats and kittens. Well, Sarnia police have charged the hounds' owner, read about it here.

I don't like the "fail to take reasonable precautions" charge, think the charge should have been tougher. A snip from the Ontario Dog Owners' Liability Act says,

4. (1) A proceeding may be commenced in the Ontario Court of Justice against an owner of a dog if it is alleged that,

(a) the dog has bitten or attacked a person or domestic animal;

(b) the dog has behaved in a manner that poses a menace to the safety of persons or domestic animals; or

(c) the owner did not exercise reasonable precautions to prevent the dog from,

(i) biting or attacking a person or domestic animal, or

(ii) behaving in a manner that poses a menace to the safety of persons or domestic animals. 2005, c. 2, s. 1 (6).

I vote for charges under 4(1)(a) and (b), not just a lame charge under (c).

Is the lame charge so the guy gets to keep his dogs and not have a substantial fine slapped on him?

Throw the book at this guy. Let's see....euthanize the dogs, a lifetime prohibition on dog ownership, a $10K fine and 6 months in jail. And I hope the cats' owners sue this dog owner in civil court. Am I vindictive? You bet.

Contrary to the Fiberals' braying, irresponsible dog owners create problems for the majority responsible dog owners, and it ain't the "pit bulls" that are the problem, it's the irresponsible or criminal person who owns a dog of any breed or type. If irresponsible dog owners aren't appropriately punished, those of us who are responsible dog owners suffer.

4 comments:

Jamie,Mac and the "Pack" said...

I also vote for tougher charges.
Jail time and large significant fine for owner.
Dogs would certainly be euthanized if they were "Pitbulls".
I wouldn`t like to see these dogs put down,maybe the irresponsible owner!
I`m just glad to see any DOLA Charge being brought against the owner,at this point.
NOTE to Michael Bryant-Don`t ban Hounds.This is just one pack and one irresponsible owner.Get it Michael?

chico bandido said...

These were dogs acting like dogs. They would not have been a danger to other domestic animals if they had been properly contained. I do not believe that they should be euthanized.

However, at this point in my frustration zone, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If Sarnia is willing to destroy three seven-week-old puppies for being a "menace to public safety", then they should remain consistent with these dogs, regardless of breed. Let the newspapers report that "hounds" are going to be euthanized at the same rate and for the same reasons as "pit bulls" and let's see the public's response.

And for the owner, I believe that every owner of every dog that chases, bites, or attacks should be judged with the same ruler with which they would be judged if they had personally performed that action towards another person or animal.

These charges (not necessarily specific to this case) could include:

Assault.
Assault causing bodily harm.
Manslaughter.
Uttering threats.
Destruction of property.
Trespassing.
Criminal trespassing.

They are all applicable in various dog chase/bite/attack situations and, if people were held entirely and unequivocally responsible for their dog's actions, using the concept of strict liability, then a lot less "accidents" would happen.

Anonymous said...

Living in the area I was very upset to hear about this happening. I hope the owner is found guilty and given the maximum fines.

I would like to point out though, this did NOT happen in Sarnia but in St Clair. (Just outside of Brigden to be exact) Sarnia police have no jurisdiction in the area. It is policed by the OPP.

Anonymous said...

Learn something new every day. Thanks, Anonymous.

The media should report with more detail. It wasn't clear that this was outside of Sarnia's boundaries, nor that the OPP (rather than Sarnia city police) were responsible for the area.