- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 



September 8th, 2005, 12:35 PM
Is it true that now the city police can come into your house at any time they want? I mean without a warrant if they even think something about your dog? :mad:

September 8th, 2005, 12:40 PM
yes and that is why Im giving up my pit bull so I can sell drugs. Your much more safer when you sell drugs!

Honestly I am not sure about the specifics of that clause so someone else I am sure will answer it for you.

September 8th, 2005, 01:26 PM
Well, I don't want to come home from work one day surprised to see that their aren't any dogs greeting me. I read it somewhere, but I can't remember where. Maybe I'll go look for it again. It pertains t a guilty until proven innocent theme.

September 8th, 2005, 01:40 PM
I actually read that in our local newspaper. The police have to be acting on complaint but they can enter your home and remove the dogs without you or your consent. You know what they say "you can't belive everything you read" so maybe the Provincial gov't has something in the Bill about that.


September 8th, 2005, 01:47 PM
It's not just the police, anyone enforceing the DOLA, may enter a dwelling, if they suspect there is a ferocious tail wagging pitty inside. But I seriously doubt that part of the DOLA will be used though,(unless the dwelling seems to be abandond) So don't expect your door to be knocked down any time soon, that part is just more of Bryants dillutions, thinking the police or anyone else would be that careless just becuse he say's it's OK. The police in my city don't deal with dogs, and the SPCA is not into breaking down doors. Sorry Bryant, I'm not going to be intimidated by your dillutions of grander.

September 8th, 2005, 03:18 PM
Trust me, and I am not the biggest fan the cops have but I am sure the police do not want to come in to your home and deal with your dogs. Alot of them are genuinely afraid of pitbulls because of thier experiences on the job with criminals using these dogs as protection. The police are busy so unless your dog is actively endangering anyone or they really want to enter your home for some other reason(suspected criminal activity)they won't be coming out. I really don't think the Citys 30 some odd animal control officers will be bustin down anyones door anytime soon either. IMHO

September 8th, 2005, 11:38 PM
I know police in certain areas are already trying to hand out tickets to people who are walking pitbulls without muzzles. I wouldn't just assume the police will not enforce the DOLA, yes, they should have other priorities but I am going to assume that some police will be enforcing it.

September 8th, 2005, 11:39 PM
(Caution! Rant in Progress. :sorry: )

Yes! they can do it & as I understand it, the By-Law(!) officers that have been hired will do the search & seizure. Presumably if you resist, then the police may be called in to assist them in the search of your :rolleyes: home..

The person who makes the complaint against you is allowed to remain anonymous, even if the dogs are found not to be banned breeds, or dangerous. So you get to try to bring a legal action against the local municipality or the police, rather than an individual. (Good Luck on that. :rolleyes: )

This is one thing I Do Not Understand -about the various groups/orgs. that have opposed both the Bill 132 & DOLA. Why did they Not Aggressively publicize this part of DOLA to the general public. :eek: It is a blow against the rights to personal freedoms, & actively prevents the wrongly accused from going after the perpetrators of frivilous searches, & incorrect accusations.

The media (who used to have some interest in person freedom & abuses by the State,) have not mentioned or explained this to the general public either!
Should we conclude from this that our media Likes the concept of anybody making a complaint in secret about anybody else & having authorities act on it?!!

IMHO- this is the beginning of a Police State & the beginning of the end of privacy for individuals. :ca: And more pathetic yet, !DOGS! (not guns, drugs or terrorism) were used as the instrument/patsy/red herring to get this draconian invasion of the public's personal space passed. DOLA makes the Homeland Security Act :usa: look tame.

There are times when I think Canadians/Ontarians scored 100% at obedience school, at least in the 'Roll Over & Play Dead' part. :sad: No other country would have put up with this even being suggested. (Or Sharia Law being incorperated into the Ontario legal system. Remember the concept of separation of church & state? Wave Goo'bye to that too, under the Fiberals.)

September 9th, 2005, 10:27 AM
no. there is nothing about having a "vicious" dog in your house in the legislation. Maybe illegal pups, ungrandfathered pits or unneutered or spay pits.

I guess the enforcement of this legislation will vary from municipality to municipality. I have read enough in the paper to be satisfied that both the police and animal control here in Toronto aren't as excited about this legislation as Michael Bryant.

September 9th, 2005, 05:51 PM
Hmm interesting.... I seriously don't think that anybody would actually go into your house without a HUGE reason to take away your dogs. I do understand if there was a report of somethig terrible happening but for someone to just come in and take your dogs away I just don't see it happening.

Oh and the thought of someone coming into my house with my dogs around without me being home would not be a nice scene :cool:


September 9th, 2005, 06:05 PM

The person who makes the complaint against you is allowed to remain anonymous, even if the dogs are found not to be banned breeds, or dangerous. So you get to try to bring a legal action against the local municipality or the police, rather than an individual. (Good Luck on that. :rolleyes: )

How can the person remain anonymous if theyre charging you with a criminal offence. Dont they have to testify? Oh this is terrifying! then mischief and nuisance :calls are totally legal as long as its against dog owners!!! :eek: :eek: :eek:

September 9th, 2005, 09:36 PM
AND anyone can bring a charge forward under the DOLA. Hope Mr. McGuinty's dog doesn't growl at anyone. Hell who am I kidding. It's a sweet little duck troller (one of my favs) but still anybody who doesn't like a dog can bring charges forward.

I would love to do so against the owners of the Jack that attacks us on a weekly basis but I would be laughed at and I don't really mond the dog just the twits that own it.

September 9th, 2005, 10:36 PM
Hmm interesting.... I seriously don't think that anybody would actually go into your house without a HUGE reason to take away your dogs. I do understand if there was a report of somethig terrible happening but for someone to just come in and take your dogs away I just don't see it happening.

Oh and the thought of someone coming into my house with my dogs around without me being home would not be a nice scene :cool:


So you don't have a neighbourhhod crazy or a local dog hater? The kind of person that wants dogs out of the neighbourhood on general principal? Or a local B. & E. artist who would like nothing better than to see watch dogs gone, so they can break into houses? Or the nasty ex-partner who has had no luck getting in & vandalizing or worse, cuz the dog warns the family when he/she is around the house? If this is the case, you are very lucky!

The person who reports you/your dog does not lay the charges, & does not need to appear in court or in any of the paperwork. The by-law officers or police lay the charges.

If local municiplaities are hiring extra by-law people to enforce, then you can bet your boots they will Enforce. Some of the more draconian areas of Ontario have made a point of saying the will enforce without mercy or exception, even before DOLA came into effect. If people are hired to do a job, the local gov will expect them to do it & collect money in fines to continue the program, & justify the paychecks.

If the by-law enforcement people came to your door & you got upset with them, I suspect your dogs would become aggitated (just like anyone else's dogs would) & the by-law people have made their case at that point to call police cuz "Your dogs are a threat'. Not so cool.. Dogs being what they usually are -Protective of their owners & more so of their personal space, this law is cooked in favour of finding dogs to be aggressive, because it creates the ideal situaion, maybe the Only situation where little fat house dog might really go nuts. (Likely out of fear, not aggression.)

September 10th, 2005, 11:43 PM
Oh let me tell you, I have neighbours that would(will) probably be the first to call in and make their complaints. To get rid of me (cause I bark louder than any of my dogs) and my dogs.
I am moving into a new neibourhood because of my neighbours (read entire street)can't stand having my dogs around. I have had by-law come to my house on 4 occasions for reasons that are too pathetic to even post here.

What I am saying is that I just don't see it happening that any law enforcement is going to burst into my house taking my dogs away without notifying me first. I just don't see that happening.

That is what the first few posts were talking about. Law enforcement coming into your house without prior notice and taking your dogs away just because someone complained.


September 11th, 2005, 10:44 AM
Tinkerbelle, I partially aree with you, but as far as people having pit bulls who are not complying with the ban in the beleief that they dont have a pit bull, we already know that WILL happen, because it has happened,,,,read Jen Steele-Saving Lily, however, since mosts of us will be complying with the ban, the questions are more about rotten neighbours making unfounded complaints about the dogs behaviour or maybe saying they saw your dog not wearing a muzzle after the date etc.....It seems from every persom I have spoken and who have read this law extensively, believe that this most certainly can happen! I hope we are all mstaken! However, it will reamain to be seen how the differant bodies enforce this, but they should not have these powers in the first place and I for one want to have something more tangible than the hope that whoever knocks on my door will be reasonable! I would like to have some rights here! (just wishful thinking for Ontarions I guess)

love my dogs
September 11th, 2005, 02:12 PM
Whether they will or won't come into your home to get your dog, is not so much the point, but the fact that they have the right to means that if they want to, they CAN!!

That is a scarey thing, and it does not comfort me to know, (or think) that they Probably won't do that.

September 11th, 2005, 06:53 PM
The fact that they Can is the worst. I guess we will all have to see how this plays out.

(When we lived in another house, my neighbour's husband used to beat the snot out of her on a regular basis, with a toddler in the house, too. Since we lived in a semi-detached we could hear everything & had a good idea of when to call the cops. One night, they did not come at all. A 5 alarm fire was in progress at a lumber yard & all the police were involved with that.)

So do we pray for more 5 alarm fires, or multi-car accidents to keep police from responding? On a 'slow night/day', I don't think they will have any choice but to respond to a by-law officer's request for assistance. They wouldn't really be able to Not respond to anybody's request for assistance. :sad:

September 13th, 2005, 10:14 PM
Some reading for you guys.

The police have to be acting on complaint but they can enter your home and remove the dogs without you or your consent.

This is not true.

Yes they must be acting on a complaint.This complaint better not be that the dog was being walked without a muzzle.This needs to be a VERY serious complaint.Like your dog got loose and terrorized kids/adults.Bit/attacked a kid/adult or another animal

No they can't/won't enter your home and remove the dog if your home or not.

Not to many of the forces I know are partaking to this ban.I don't know of any,including mine that are giving out tickets for dogs that are not muzzled.

September 14th, 2005, 08:01 AM
Thanks for that mona-b, I was wondering about your force, I know for a fact our local police will NOT be inforceing this ban for now, they have enough to do. But unfortunatly there are some pretty nasty uniformed local reporters, who hate pits, have never met a pit, but feel they are pit experts, if they knew what I know, about how this ban is going to be inforced here, they could really make thing hard for the mayor,the police, the spca, and dog owners, so I really hope they keep liveing in there little content dream world(like Bryant), thinking all the pits will be rounded up an put to sleep. With all there pitty expertize, they failed to notice that the people in charge of inforceing the ban, are the same people who appose this bad piece of legislation, and they still have the nerve to call themselves reporters.

September 14th, 2005, 06:54 PM
Heres some irony for you...two days ago I took Rocky out for a walk in the middle of the aft. there were a few police cars and I wondered if they would bother me, he was not muzzled of course, next thing I knew there were some detectives, Rocky sniffed them and they ignored him, now Im getting curious, along comes a Global TV reporter who told me there had been a homaside! They wouldn't let him on the scene for a while so he and his camera guy stayed outside waiting and playing with Rocky! It turned out to be yet another shooting right across the street from where I live but luckily no one in my neighbourhood will have to fear for there safety cause Rocky and Harley the other pit bull in the neighbourhood will soon be muzzled! :rolleyes:

September 14th, 2005, 09:10 PM
And that's what is ticking me off bluntman.People are just "hearing" things about this ban that's not true.And it is scaring the heck out of people.People are thinking they are going to loose their dogs over stupid complaints.This is farthest from the truth.So everyone just take a deep long breath.. :) .And just remember this,some of the cops do own Pits also ;)

Oh no,a reporter and camerman playing with Pits.Will this madness never end......LOL..... :D :p

September 14th, 2005, 11:47 PM
I'm assuming that you are from Toronto, & I hope the situation is like that here. I know police in this area have done a lot for animals, & have gone out of their way to not only lay cruelty charges where warranted, but have also assisted the animals & the SPCA with crisis situations.

I'm hoping that towns like K/W & London police will not get pushed into it. The situation is these areas has been one where everybody gets lead around by some local politicians & Bill 132 & DOLA are almost 'business as usual'.

In my own area, there seen to be a few well connect/affluent people who seem to be able to have hissy fits & circumvent what the police want to do.

('Wonder what will happen if Bryant finds out that everybody isn't on side with his witch/dog hunt? Will he hold his breath until he turns blue? ;) )

One of the people who has been researching on another board mentioned that the 'onus on the owner' feature of the Bill 132 legislation is going to be challenged in court. The onus to prove that a dog is a Pit Bull ought to be on the prosecution, not the defendent. Or so says the Charter of Rights & Freedoms - we hope!

September 15th, 2005, 05:21 PM
Good News Akeeter, i think shes from Hamilton! Im not worried at all about the police enforcing it. I know that they won't want to be bothered and they know what is he said she said type stuff. Id be more worried about people being contracted specifically for this. Untrained, low waged, maybe even a quota system. who knows. Do you know if the person who is launching a suit from your other board is the person who called in to City TV and said he had filed suit? If not I guess that makes 3 :D

September 16th, 2005, 01:26 AM
'Could be though. CITY seems to be the only consitently objective news station on BSL issues.

(Andy Barrie, formerly of CBC radio's Metro Morning show is now working at another station while the CBC labour dispute gets settled. He confessed to 'crossing to the other side of the road' if he sees a Pit Bull coming toward him. I guess the Metro Morning show's bias was his, & not network policy?)

September 16th, 2005, 06:21 AM
I was born and raised it T.O...And I mean the original T.O...... :D...But I am in Hamilton now...... :)

We definately have better things to do then burst into your home and take your dog.Or even to give out tickets.I have already had 4 calls(complaints).No matter what the complaint,we do have to act on them.And of course it was about the no muzzle and the no muzzle in the yard.And one was because the neighbours dog was barking at someone while being walked.As we were greeted by licks,I did have to explain to the owners that we had to act on the call.But I let them know that if these same people call again,I will be at their door.And yes,we do take the names,numbers and addys when people call.We don't need people like this wasting our time.