Criminal background checks… for dog owners?

by Walter Olson on April 25, 2013

North Carolinians should hold on to their long-established right to own whatever dog breed they prefer without having to petition the authorities for permission, argues Patrick at Popehat. The bill, filed by state Rep. Rodney Moore (D-Charlotte), would give police departments discretion to deny permits to would-be owners and would require that owners “submit to a criminal background check and enroll in a four hour course sponsored by the Humane Society on responsible ownership of pit bulls, rottweilers, mastiffs, chows, and similar ‘aggressive dog breeds.’” More: OhMiDog.

P.S. Flagged by GraniteGrok, a commenter at the News & Observer: “When are we going to close the dog show loophole?”

{ 3 trackbacks }

Government: wanta a dog? Background check and dog class for YOU! — GraniteGrok
04.25.13 at 11:04 pm
Regulation Roundup
04.26.13 at 2:13 pm
Regulation Roundup | Inertia Wins!
04.26.13 at 2:14 pm

{ 8 comments }

1 DensityDuck 04.25.13 at 12:19 pm

Welp. Pro-Pit advocates always tell us how it’s the owner not the dog, there are no bad dogs, people should be responsible pet owners, etcetera.

Why isn’t that a position of support for strong licensing and mandatory training, with permission to own dependent on these official showings of responsibility?

2 Bumper 04.25.13 at 12:48 pm

I dare say that a loose pit bull would be more likely to create mayhem than a loaded gun left on the front porch.

One local community semi-solved the problem by requiring insurance in case your dog goes ballistic and attacks someone.

Lots of stats over at http://www.dogsbite.org

3 Western Rover 04.25.13 at 1:06 pm

I make no argument on the background check or mandatory training, but how has giving police departments “discretion” worked with concealed carry permits?

I’m not saying that owning a pit bull is a constitutional right, but I’m wondering what is the justification for making this bill “may-issue” instead of “shall-issue”?

4 William Nuesslein 04.26.13 at 7:13 am

I can not understand how people with toddlers and young children have big dogs as pets. One bite can be disastrous. I mentioned that to my cousin Raymond, who had a dropout from police dog school as a pet in his high crime neighborhood. A couple month later, his father’s dog attacked Raymond’s son and did considerable damage to the child’s face.

But, I have never heard of a dog killing more than one individual at a time, as did the guy in Aurora, Colorado.

5 Gary Archer 04.26.13 at 9:52 am

The problem with this country is the number of people who think they need a law for everything under the sun to force everyone to think or act the way they do. If everyone takes responsibility for themselves and their own actions, that is all that is required of society. Lawyers are not the answer to everything in your life. They are abused by the weak and weak minded as a tool for the timid. Grow a pair and quit worrying about what everyone else is doing. Take care of your own business and when someone fails to do that and actually infringes on your personal rights then talk to a lawyer. But quit trying to make others conform to your fears by making so many laws that know one could possibly know what they all are, which is where we are today! There are so many laws on the books of state and federal gov. that no one, not even lawyers or judge know what they all say and if you lived your life by all of the laws there would be no point in getting out of bed ever! There are so many that I don’t even care anymore, I just live my life and try to respect others God given rights.

6 Pan 04.27.13 at 10:16 pm

FINALLY a step in the right direction.. even though its steeped in misinformation.. there isnt aggressive breeds.. dogs become aggressive for a variety of reasons.. working and sporting dogs are more inclined to have any of those reasons to affect them more because of thier energy level and prey drive.. but to start making people prove thier knowlege in the care and control of the size dog they want, is a positive approach.. public education on do n don’ts and how to read a dog’s signals of being provoked, would go a long way in avoiding people from provoking a dog to bite.. this year a jack russell (small dog) killed a baby.. the reason is the same reason so many victims are toddlers and babies.. The child was left alone with the dog.. dog bites are preventable.. and this article gives hope that people are FINALLY seeing the problem for what it is.. people cause dog bites..

7 Pan 04.27.13 at 10:25 pm

Bumper there is no stats at that website.. do some research on the founder.. and the only “stats” are a misused CDC report, that the CDC provides a disclaimer for.. they at the CDC are aware that thier stats were gathered solely from news reports that are often found unreliable.. just because the report “pit” doesnt make it so.. and the retractions are always non sensational.. unlike when first reported.. some people shouldn’t own any animal.. some people shouldn’t own an animal they can’t or prove they won’t control.. prevent those that shouldn’t from owning a dog and dog bites will drastically fall..

8 MSK 04.28.13 at 7:39 am

I have two main passions: (1) Liberty; and (2) Dogs. This measure may very likely lead to the death of more dogs, because people could refrain from adopting due to not wanting to go through the hassle of a background check and training. Or more insidious, crowded shelters will not put euthanasia on hold while awaiting the adopter/rescuer’s background check and training. The Law of Unintended Consequences. What the North Carolina Legislature should focus on instead, is the immediate ban on inhumane and ironically more expensive, gas chambers, as North Carolina is one of the few States which has not yet outlawed this barbarism.

Comments on this entry are closed.