Despite being the highest sales taxed city in the nation.
The extremely high acts of gun violence bringing Chicago back to the prestigious title of Murder Capitol of the USA 2008.
The City trying to levy a $2,000 Promoter's License on event organizers.
The City that thinks only 4am bars cause problems and forces only those bars to install cameras and have special training for the door staff of these bars. Thus bringing us the Late Hour Liquor License Safety Ordinance.
The tearing down of Grant Park for a Children's Museum.
Now thanks to Bob Barker (the really old Price is Right Host) and the City of Chicago......
Let us present the newest idiocracy to come forth.
I don't know the official name for this new ordinance but let's call it the Cutting All the Nuts Around Barksville to Indulge Stupidity or C.A.N.A.B.I.S. for short. Because someone's obviously smoking a lot of herb.
The italicized text was taken from the Chicago Tribune article. The bold are my thoughts.
The ordinance is sponsored by Ald. Ed Burke (14th), chairman of the Finance Committee, and Ald. Ginger Rugai (19th). They cited dog attacks on Chicago residents and said sterilized animals are less likely to be vicious.
Has this been proven or is this just a speculation? Less likely doesn't sound like something that has a 100% guarantee.
It "strives to control pet overpopulation in the city, seeks to eliminate unnecessary tragic dog attacks [and] can be used as a law-enforcement tool against those who use pets as weapons on our city streets," Burke said.
I'm still waiting to see some reports on how many vicious dog attacks have happened within the year.
A violation would result in a ticket telling the owner to have the pet fixed. If that failed, a $100 fine would be issued after 60 days. If another 60 days passed, a second fine could reach $500, and the city could impound and sterilize the animal. Owners would be able to reclaim their pets after paying the fines and other related costs.
Pets with medical conditions that make sterilization unsafe, show dogs, guard dogs and service dogs would be exempt. Animals belonging to federally licensed breeders also would be exempt, and pet owners could seek an exemption by applying for a city breeder's license, which would require a criminal background check.
So what if your animal can't be spayed or neutered due to health reasons and you can't afford a city breeder's license? Or don't need a City Breeder's License because your not going to be breeding your animal? Looks like the animal will have to die.
The effort was backed by PAWS Chicago, a no-kill humane organization focused on reducing the number of stray animals, and the Humane Society of the United States.
But it was opposed by the Chicago and Illinois State Veterinary Medical Associations, which said decisions on pet sterilization are best made by a veterinarian and pet owner. The groups also said such laws can reduce rabies vaccination compliance.
Who should know better? An organization like PAWS that's worried more about the bottom line or Veterinarians that treat these animals?
"I believe the reason we have this problem is because we have irresponsible pet owners," Ald. Ray Suarez (31st) said, suggesting the ordinance could be viewed as government intrusion. "There are irresponsible parents that are having sons and daughters out there. What's the next step?"
So here's the deal.
Your walking your dog or cat. Yea, I've seen people walk their cat. Someone decides to call 311 and report that your animal isn't neutered or spayed. The cops show up, they feel around and ask to see your records to see if your animal is spayed or neutered. For sake of argument it's not.
Well then, now you get fined $100 and 6 months to get the animal spayed or neutered. Six months goes by and you haven't done this. Because yes, it does change your animals attitude or what ever reason you have. Now more than likely they're going to want you to bring the animal in to prove that you had the process done.
When you show up and your animal hasn't had the operation you get fined up to $500 and the animal gets taken away from you. They do the procedure without your permission and they alter your animal for the rest of it's life.
Then guess what? You don't get your animal back until you pay the fines and the costs of said procedure.
What is wrong with this? The City takes your property from you. They alter it. And then they keep it until you can pay for the fines and costs. Let's consider what the costs could entail. Costs could include the price of the operation, the fees associated with keeping your animal in the pound, food, and handling of your animal during all of this. Hey, someone's got to pay these people for taking away your animal and taking care of it. Don't expect the City to pay for something they're doing to you.
Granted, this could be all looked at the same way people look at The Boot. You know, that thing you get when you get 3 parking tickets. Well, if they boot you then they get to take your car. Then they get to sell your car if you can't pay the fines and fees. Then they keep all the money and add the fees to your fines. They don't even apply the money they get from the auction to your fines. They keep it.
So how bout just forgetting your animal when they decide to take it.
Sound cold hearted and bad? Well imagine how many people just happen to have the money laying around to pay for this procedure. How many of those people have the money laying around to pay the fines?
Sounds like there's going to be a lot of dead animals soon. Because obviously most people won't take the time to contact their Aldermen. They won't take the time to tell their legislative voices that they think this ordinance is ridiculous.
Here's an idea. Go to this website and tell your Aldermen to shoot down this ordinance. Remind them that Bob Barker is 85 years old and should get his head check. Can he even still drive or ride a bike?
Let them know that this isn't about the money. This has a lot to do with the personality of your best friend and they're well being. Most veterinarians will agree that an animal should not be nuetered or spayed before the ages of 6 to 8 years. This is after the animal has fully developed. Even then it's not necessary to spay or neuter the animal.
Contact your Aldermen and let them know what you think.
If you don't then you have nothing to complain about. Your animals will be altered. If any of you decide to relieve yourself of your animals after the operations then you should receive one swift blow to the back of your head with a shovel.
And to anyone that says this must be done in order to stop violent dog attacks.
You are a fucking idiot.
Do you really think that the people with the violent dog fighting dogs will even know anything about this ordinance? Let alone abide by it? They don't even register the animals.
And overall, here's my ultimate question.
Bob Barker, do you even live in Chicago?
3 comments:
This is what happens when you let Democrats run your city.
This is also why Im glad I dont live there anymore.
Honestly, doll, I think this is a great idea. Nothing makes me feel more stabby than people who don't spay and neuter their pets- it's tantamount to animal cruelty. *So* many animals end up in shelters, or on the street because people didn't feel the need to get their pets spayed and neutered. It actually doesn't even cost that much- there are places that will do it for practically nothing. And hey, anything that prevents people from breeding dogs for fighting is great in my book. Do you know what happens to those poor dogs? It's disgusting. They hang a slab of meat from the wall by a rope, and then get the dogs to jump up and bite it, and then beat the crap out of them while they're hanging there- to dislocate the jaw and make them more vicious. And then even when they're rescued they can't be adopted out because they're too dangerous. It's so so wrong. Oh, and it said in the article that if your pet can't have it done for health reasons it would be exempt from the law- not that you'd have to kill it.
Seriously, it's not a bad idea.
Honestly I think that the reasoning stating that it will reduce dog attacks is ridiculous. That being said, I think this law is a good idea. The shelters are not thinking of the bottom line, they are thinking of all the animals that have to come to them because they are strays or unwanted. If you are not a breeder or showing them then what is the big deal to get them fixed. If you can't afford it there are always places that have low cost deals. The amount of unwanted animals is staggering and allowing your pet to get knocked up because you didn't want to bother is pathetic. As for the strays, there are a lot of programs set up to spay and neuter them to help the population control as well. Head down to the shelter some time and look at all of the little lives that are on the line because their owners didn't want to bother fixing them.
Post a Comment