- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 


Bill Would Ban Pit Bulls In New Mexico

December 15th, 2004, 01:17 PM
SANTA FE, N.M. -- Legislation was expected to be proposed Tuesday to ban the breeding of pit bulls in New Mexico.

Sen. Sue Wilson Beffort was expected to introduce legislation that would prohibit pit bull breeding and require owners to neuter or spay them. Under the proposed legislation, pit bulls would not be permitted in New Mexico after July 1, 2005.

In the penalty section of the bill, pit bull owners could face a fine, jail time or both if their dogs attacked.

Beffort's legislation comes after several pit bull attacks this year.

One of the most recent happened in Socorro, where dogs attacked an 8-year-old girl and her pregnant aunt. Both received stitches for their injuries.

The dogs were put down.
Copyright 2004 by All rights reserved. This material may not be published,

December 15th, 2004, 01:18 PM
I had no idea this was happening in the united states,wow what is the world coming to

December 15th, 2004, 01:41 PM
I had no idea this was happening in the united states,wow what is the world coming to

Type Breed Specific Legislation into Google and see what comes up. I think that there is BSL in every state in the union. Ohio's Supreme Court just ruled that states BSL illegal this past summer.

Someone I know bought a new car this spring. They called Geico to see about CAR INSURANCE and were told that they could not be insured through the company because they owned a rottweiler! Just for fun, try calling a few insurance agents and see about getting homeowner's insurance after telling them you own a pit bull.

December 15th, 2004, 01:43 PM
Wow that is crazy.....I just think anyone that ants to own one should be screened,it is the problem with the PEOPLE that own these dogs,not the dog itself.............................

December 15th, 2004, 01:58 PM
While screening sounds like a marvelous idea, let's just think about it for a minute.

Who would be responsible for screening for potential owners?
What criteria would they use?
What would be the ramifications if you didn't pass?

Puppymills for example.

Commercial breeders who sell to brokers who sell to pet stores are required to be USDA registered. The USDA is supposed to inspect all commercial breeders and make sure that "kennels" are up to "strict" USDA standards. Papers are very easily created to show that puppies come from such kennels even when they do not. Inspectors are few, far between and overworked. Inspections are rarely violation free yet CB's continue with business as usual. The chances of a commercial breeder losing it's USDA license is slim and besides, even if they do - they will have some licensed friend sell their puppies and still make a fortune. Any fines levied for USDA violations are nothing compared to the money being made off of those pups.

Sorry, but if I was screened today to see if I could own a large breed "dangerous" dog (rottweiler), I doubt I would be allowed. No fenced yard, lousy finances and a rotten job that pays little but takes up way too much of my time. Having said that, my rottweiler is the best behaved dog in my neighborhood. Screening potential owners isn't the answer. Enforcing laws that are already on the books is.

December 15th, 2004, 02:06 PM
I just think there has got to be a better way,than banning the dog..I am not talking about every large dog,just pit bulls because that seems to be the only one that people train to be fighting dogs..We are punishing the dog,when it is the people that own them that shoudl not own them..I do not know how it would work,they check your backround,you rhome,just like they would if you were adopting a child......I really have no answer,but it is the human side of this that is the problem..

December 15th, 2004, 02:53 PM
You are right LR I would not be a candidate for my dangerous dog either. Same here no backyard, work all day, crumby pay, but my dog never wants for anything I would feed him before myself if it ever came to that. I have spent money and time with him when I have other things that are important but not as important as my little boy. Screening candidates would be impossible for a government that can't even police themselves and I certainly would not want them to be able to decide what kind of dog I am capable of handling. I am sure they would say how can you own a dog that weighs more than you it would be impossible for you to handle him. I think one of the routes would be mandatory training programs. I also think if you have a criminal record involving violence you should not be allowed to own a "dangerous breed".
By the way Heidi if they ban pits you can be assured you will start seeing more Presa Canarios and Dogos and these dogs will do even more damage if put in the wrong hands. But in the right hands well mannered and non aggressive.

December 16th, 2004, 08:43 AM
I see your point,but my theory is if the choice is banning the breed ,or screening potential owners than i say screen owners................Just as you would when you adopt a dog and they screen you then..

December 16th, 2004, 09:16 AM
I love pitbulls, and I'm the first to defend them...I'm going to be honest, though. If I thought that banning them would stop the attacks, I would, reluctantly, be for it. But it won't. If it would, we wouldn't have had the same problem in the '70's with German Shepards, the '80's with Dobermans and the '90's with Rotti's. I know I'm preaching to the choir, but something has to be done. I'm not sure what criteria needs to be set for screening the owners, but it sounds like a good start, anyway.

December 16th, 2004, 09:46 AM
That is the only way i see it also,we screen people that adopt children,rescue dogs and such......I would have NO problem if i wanted one and they had to screen me............