Wednesday, June 17, 2009

City of Toronto granted an appeal in Ginger case

Have you ever had that feeling that you feel as though your head may explode?
I sometimes wonder if, (unbeknownst to me) I was plucked off the earth and placed on some idiotic planet where the opposite of common sense is the “norm”.

The city of Toronto was granted an appeal in the Ginger case.

To refresh your memory, Ginger was in a Toronto animal services kennel for three and a half years, accused of aggression after defending herself against an unprovoked attack by an off-leash dog.  She was freed a week ago after
a judge determined that she had been held illegally for over three years!  Today, we find out if the city of Toronto will be allowed to appeal that decision. To read more…

Chicobandido has an additional post with the link to the National Post. 

Earlier this week, a friend sent me the link to another story developing in Toronto.

For the second time this month, a dog has attacked another owner's pet,
leaving the animal in serious condition. This latest incident involved a
two-year German Shepherd named Rocky, who allegedly jumped over the fence in his yard on Enfield Ave. in the Lakeshore and Browns Line area around 2pm Monday and attacked another dog as its owner took it out for a walk.

Vets have told the family it will cost at least $4,500 to save their beloved
Boomer (top left), a Polish lowland sheepdog.

The wounded canine is on oxygen and is in stable condition. But he needs
surgery to have his trachea repaired and that's a major expense.

At the very least his owner wants an apology. “She knows I'm home all day. I would have most sincerely gone over there to apologize and say 'what else can I do?'” complains Yvette Drummond. “I think it's just not right.” She claims police told her it “wasn't their problem.”
Rocky's owner says she intends to issue that apology and feels terrible about what happened. But she insists her pet is usually very well behaved and there's no reason why the dog may have gone on the offensive. 

All I have to say is; WTF is wrong with people? 

Let's recap for a moment.

Phillip Huggins' mother was out for a walk with his dog Ginger, in compliance with the law. (Ginger was leashed and muzzled. Remember this was Nov 29th, 2005 so the ban had just come into effect.) Ginger is attacked by another dog and her muzzle was ripped off. Ginger defended herself by biting back. Phillip was charged and Ginger was seized, where she remained in custody until just this week. She has been in custody of the Toronto pound since Nov 29th 2005! Almost 4 years! Clay Ruby
got involved in the case 2 weeks ago. In a comment from Ruby; 

“Clearly she (Ginger) bit. The question was whether she was defending
herself against another dog or whether she was the aggressor,” said

So the question is not whether Ginger bit back but Toronto Animal Services are claiming they had no choice under judgment to order Ginger seized and  destroyed.

Two months ago, Ontario Court Justice Mary Hogan set the destruction order aside, stating her “concern … that such a dog would be ordered destroyed in circumstances where the dog had no culpability whatsoever.” The judge offered the analogy of a burglar breaking into a home where a pit bull resided and the pit bull biting the burglar, saying it would be “absurd” to destroy that dog.

She also found the justice of the peace erred in his judgment in several instances, “the most significant example in his finding that the dog Buddy was leashed and the dog Ginger was not. Clearly the evidence was the exact opposite.” Last month, the city filed its motion for leave to appeal Hogan's decision at the Court of Appeal. City of Toronto lawyer Kirsten Franz claims it should be “mandatory for the court to order the destruction once certain elements are found: that the dog is a pit bull and that dog has attacked or bitten a person or another domestic animal.”

If the dog is any other breed or cross bred other than a “pitbull”, there are no repercussions, nobody is charged and it isn't the police departments  problem???

The ban is an amendment to the Dog Owners Liability Act. The DOLA has been in place since 1876, however you would think it was new news for those enforcing the law! DOLA DOES apply to ALL dog owners, however for some reason someone doled out the kool-aid and there seems to be some belief that charges should only be laid when the dog is a “pitbull”.

Maybe it's the same lot of kool-aid the MSM lap up. I was quite surprised to see there was a NON 'pitbull' report. Slow news day I guess?

Maybe we should have a rag just for dog bites.. oh yeah, we do! Maybe we should have a bite registry?? What an abstract idea. Oh yeah, that was mentioned LOUDLY,  but it too was ignored by the ever incompetent government running this province since 2004!

All I have to say is WTF?

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Supreme Court of Canada denies appeal

Today the Supreme Court of Canada denied the leave for appeal. 

It is a dark day for Canada. 

This law strips the rights of law abiding citizens. 

This law is based on pure and simple propaganda and lies.

This law allows legislators to flippantly strip anyone of their rights and base it on opinions from dog catchers and media hype, not from scientific evidence! 

This law allows legislators to substitute their own opinions (or political agenda) of what is of value in this country and what isn't. What is morally acceptable and what isn't. What you can own or not own, what you can eat and not eat. What you can drive and not drive. Where you can smoke after they sell you the cigarettes in the first place. We all get it! Some things in life are bad for us, however you can't legislate against STUPIDITY and that is what they are trying to do, instead of educating those who need it. Those of us who are law abiding citizens are being forced into paying the price for the SMALL minority of people who make bad choices. That my friends is called EROSION OF CIVIL RIGHTS!

This law is still wrong and unconstitutional. 

This law has murdered thousands of good dogs not because they were dangerous or even because they were a certain “breed” of dog. They were killed because somebody who was unqualified to deem them as such; deemed them a 'pitbull'. 

For the record, there is NO PERSON qualified to deem a cross bred dog by breed or identify a cross bred dog's breed, because it is impossible to do so without doubt. That folks is why reverse onus was inserted to the law!

The Ontario Liberal government has used the precedence of this law for other bad laws. Your rights are being eroded as I write this post and sadly many people do not care or understand the magnitude of what that means! You just wait and I will be first in line to say “I told you so”. If past legislation is a predictor for future legislation, get ready for a wild ride on the legislation bus from HELL. The Fiberals still have 2 years to continue their preaching legislating of twisted propaganda, far right wing agenda and nanny state policies. 

Dogs love to roll over, but I sure don't! I won't be rolling over any time soon. I sure hope you won't either.