Eight Million NYC Residents Face a "Humane" Law They Don't Understand
Sponsor Peter Vallone dodges and weaves
Will the author of NYC 10/2011, possibly the worst written law in the history of the City of New York, please step forward?
Cause you got some 'splaining to do, baby.
Reality is setting in, and the pet and animal owners of New York City are beginning to realize that -- thanks to a handful of radical animal rights whackjobs and extremists -- normal, everyday practices involving the leashing, collaring and humane restraint of animals are now illegal.
Read. The. TEXT.
February 2's blog was devoted to NYC's new and absolute prohibition on walking leashed dogs and other animals while using a "choke" or "pinch" collar. If left standing, could the new law be used to harass participants or even shut down purebred dog shows? Only time, the size of the balls on the animal rights freaks humane law enforcement personnel interpreting the law, and the city's justice system, will tell.
But one thing is absolutely certain: when the law takes effect in early May, NYC dog walkers using a choke or pinch collar -- popular training accessories and standard equipment for many dogs -- will be breaking the law. I'm guessing 99% of city dog owners have no idea that the city ruled on what sort of dog collar they can use. To be honest, I don't think the City Council members themselves realized they did that.
Swivel Trubbel: Peter Vallone Jr. haz it
It is clear that the new law's sponsor doesn't understand the law he introduced. In response to the Dog Federation of New York's criticism that, among many other flaws and failings, 10/2011 does not allow a family at a picnic to tie their dog's leash to a park bench or picnic table while they eat, Vallone issued the kind of embarrassing, food-spraying splutter most politicians would do anything to avoid.
And he lied.
No one listens to the head of that so called federation, even in animal rights circles, and as usual his reading of the bill is all wrong. Of course a family can tie up a dog at a picnic, just not for more than three hours straight. If he would do that, he probably shouldn't be in the animal rights business in the first place. If he has any problem with the bill, he should talk to the legitimate animal rights groups like the ASPCA who helped draft it.
Oh my. My, my, my.
Councilman Vallone is a city councilman, and a former Assistant District Attorney. Surely he knows that when a law says . . .
Any person who. . .leashes an animal. . .to a stationary object outdoors for a permissible period of time shall provide such animal with adequate food, water and shelter, and shall restrain the animal with a device with having swivels at both ends. . .
it means you better be damn sure you've got "a device with swivels at both ends."
Not a normal leash.
This dog is therefore illegally restrained--regardless of how long she's been there. Five minutes or five hours--it makes no difference.
She's also illegally collared.
And I don't see any food, water, or a dog house. That could be a problem for the dog's owner under the new law, too.
Without a caliper, I can't be sure about the thickness of the links of chain on her collar. But since the entire collar is illegal under this gibberish new law anyway, it hardly matters.
Finally, of course this dog appears to be a "pit bull." Peter Vallone Jr. wants her the hell out of the city anyway.
It doesn't matter that the dog is just fine, chomping on her stick and posing for the camera. Not bothering anyone.
This is a crime scene.
Fake Science Rules in NYC
Vallone and his supporters quote claims floating on the Internet that tethering dogs increases aggression, and cite a single, elderly study in which the finding regarding tethered dogs was a tertiary result.
That's it. That's all they've got.
The findings of that one study have never been reproduced.
On the other hand, Dr. Katherine Houpt of Cornell University’s College of Veterinary Medicine Department of Biomedical Sciences is the country’s leading expert on the issue of tethering. Dr. Houpt, who has studied the issue for years, found that tethering does not increase aggression in dogs.
Legitimate Animal Rights Businesses Chip Away at Animal Ownership
Peter Vallone Jr. chastised DFNY and referred them to the ASPCA, an extremist organization which opposes animal ownership. In Vallone-speak the ASPCA is a legitimate animal rights business and it helped draft his law.
Vallone also welcomed the support of PeTA on his law. The folks that donated money to felon, terrorist and convicted arsonist Rodney Coronado are legitimately in the animal rights biz, too.
HSUS's New York lobbyist Patrick Kwan ? The animal advocate who can't tell a hen from a rooster? Also a legitimate animal rightist and supporter of Vallone's law.
It's not personal. This is business. The animal rights business. The legitimate animal rights business in which any restriction on animal ownership is a "win." Any restriction at all.
Vague and arbitrary prohibitions
There is no logic here. No science. All we've got is bombast and attempted career enhancement.
What an embarrassment for the flim-flammed New York City Council. They were used and abused by Peter Vallone Jr., the animal rights extremist flunkey.
What a tragedy for NYC's many, many caring dog and animal owners. They have to comply with this mess -- and trust me, if you think the swivel thing is bad, stay tuned.
Let Hizzoner Mayor Bloomberg know: repeal 10/2011 in its entirety. The sooner, the better.
New York City Council Backdoors BSL and Screws Responsible Dog Owners
Peter Vallone Jr.'s "humane" triumph in New York City
Heavily restricts humane, responsible containment of dogs
First Casualties of Humane War Against NYC Dog Owners:
Uno the Beagle and Madison Square Garden ?
Makes you wonder how it all came about, doesn't it?
Vallone's career as a pit bull hater
NYC's premier pit bull hater, shoulder to shoulder with the city's most elite animal rights types ?
What's wrong with this picture?
For years, City Councilman Vallone has been an outspoken "pit bull" hater who repeatedly sought to stigmatize pit bull owners as gang-banging lowlife criminals.
When his proposal to ban pit bulls from New York City failed, he teamed up with animal rights extremists.
Why not?
Flash forward to 2011
The ASPCA strongly supported Vallone's Int. 425, a proposal to restrict tethering, along with PeTA, HSUS, the Humane Society of New York and others.
Can anybody say "quid pro quo"?
Int. 425-A united a fear-mongering pit bull hater with the blind ambition of politicians and animal extremists in a perfect storm of anti-animal, anti-animal owner legislation.
More than one way to skin a cat
Following Vallone's pin-headed logic, if he couldn't ban pit bulls outright, he could kick the legs out from under their owners by making their stereotypical nasty practices illegal and drive them out of the city that way.
Except Vallone doesn't know shit about dogs in general, or pit bulls specifically. And he cares even less.
A former Manhattan Assistant DA, son of an ex City Council president and mayoral hopeful, would-be Queens Boro President Peter Vallone Jr. is all about Peter Vallone Jr.
Int-425A had nothing to do with the humane treatment of dogs, and everything to do with his career aspirations.
And his humaniac co-conspirators on Int-425A? Heh. Same comments apply.
Not just pit bulls: blowback takes out unexpected targets
Heralded by Gotham's strident animal rights community as a "huge success for dog welfare" in reality the new law invents an artificial new class of animal cruelty: one that has nothing to do with the condition of any particular animal and the care it receives.
The new law prohibits NYC dog owners from humanely and responsibly containing their dogs by proper tethering and creates substantial penalties for those who do, even if their dogs are perfectly well-cared for and healthy. All that matters in NYC is the amount of time elapsed.
NYC's new law offers no solutions and zero support for struggling owners who cannot restrain their dogs by other means. Especially in NYC, quality, dog-proof fencing is expensive and very often prohibited by zoning and/or landlord restrictions.
Dogs previously contained by proper tethering may well wind up in the hands of New York City's Animal Care and Control -- where the chances are pretty good they will sicken and die.
But Vallone's proposal wasn't just about tethering. Nope.
Hasty amendments on the down-low
On the very morning of January 18, Int. 425 was heard in committee, it was amended and passed by the NYC Council's Committee on Health.
That same afternoon, the City Council voted to enact the amended version. The ink on the amendments was hardly dry.
Apparently the group of know-nothings that put the amendments together consulted each other, and no one else. They made a couple of teensy blunders. . .
Artificial crimes lead to unwitting perps.
Uno the Westminster Best in Show Beagle Pit Bull
The collar Uno so graciously models above?
The ones worn by virtually every dog exhibited at the world's most celebrated dog show, the Westminster Kennel Club show at Madison Square Garden?
The dog show that brings in tourists, exhibitors and camera crews to New York City from across the country and around the world?
Well, Uno's collar is now illegal in New York City. Uno just became an honorary "pit bull."
I guess his owners are now honorary criminal gangbanging lowlifes. Welcome to the club.
ASPCA "humane law enforcement officers" swarming Westminster?
So, will spectators at Madison Square Garden be treated to the sight of an ASPCA raid? With something like 2500 entrants at Westminster, virtually all wearing dogfighting paraphernalia . . .um nasty pit bull equipment . . .uh show dog collars no, no make that "prohibited choke collars" it would sure make for a great episode on Animal Planet. Imagine the royalties.
Go west, kennel club. Go west.
To the Members of the Board of the Westminster Kennel Club: take your show to New Jersey. Please.
The Meadowlands would welcome you with open arms.
And the parking is way cheaper.
It's clear that New York City doesn't want you, doesn't value the millions of dollars you bring to the local economy each year and all the positive publicity you generate.
The City Council considers your practices abusive.
Its time to blow that fire trap, and leave the explanations to Peter Vallone Jr. and the ASPCA.
I'm thinking Mayor Bloomberg, the rest of the City Council -- not to mention the owners of Madison Square Garden and other NYC businesses that will miss Westminster -- are going to be interested in hearing them.
