Law Goes Into Effect Today

[keekee]

Senate Bill 696: Crimes - Leaving Dogs Outside and Unattended by use of Restraints - Penalties

Criminal Law Section 10-623, Annotated Code of Maryland (2002 Volume and 2006 Supplement)
Prohibiting a person from leaving a dog outside and unattended by use of a restraint that unreasonably limits the movement of the dog; that uses a collar that: is made primarily of metal; or is not at least as large as the circumference of the dog's neck plus 1 (one) inch; etc.

 

[Vince]

Senate Bill 696: Crimes - Leaving Dogs Outside and Unattended by use of Restraints - Penalties

Criminal Law Section 10-623, Annotated Code of Maryland (2002 Volume and 2006 Supplement)
Prohibiting a person from leaving a dog outside and unattended by use of a restraint that unreasonably limits the movement of the dog; that uses a collar that: is made primarily of metal; or is not at least as large as the circumference of the dog's neck plus 1 (one) inch; etc.

If I increased my dogs collar by one inch she would slip out of it. That is a stupid law that doesn't take into account the size of the dog. 7lb. Rat terrier, but then I don't keep her outside on a leash anyway so.....:shrug:

 

[cattitude]

If I increased my dogs collar by one inch she would slip out of it. That is a stupid law that doesn't take into account the size of the dog. 7lb. Rat terrier, but then I don't keep her outside on a leash anyway so.....:shrug:

Increasing the circumference of the collar by 1 inch isn't all that much, really.

 

[tommyjones]

If I increased my dogs collar by one inch she would slip out of it. That is a stupid law that doesn't take into account the size of the dog. 7lb. Rat terrier, but then I don't keep her outside on a leash anyway so.....:shrug:

I agree, obviously the MD senate was trying to plcate the animal activist and peta types.

All this law is going to do is cause bad blood between neighbors.

 

[RoseRed]

Funny!

This banner is right below this tread...
Dog Aggression - Training Aggressive Dogs

 

[Pandora]

I wish they would write these laws more clearly. If the average person comprehends at an 8th grade level, the laws should be written, so that, an 8th grader could understand them.

At first, it sounds like you cannot keep your dog chained up, outside, unattended? Then it gives a bunch of gibberish about collars?

Am I the only one not clear on the purpose of this new law? Maybe I just haven't had enough coffee yet.

 

[migtig]

Senate Bill 696: Crimes - Leaving Dogs Outside and Unattended by use of Restraints - Penalties

Criminal Law Section 10-623, Annotated Code of Maryland (2002 Volume and 2006 Supplement)
Prohibiting a person from leaving a dog outside and unattended by use of a restraint that unreasonably limits the movement of the dog; that uses a collar that: is made primarily of metal; or is not at least as large as the circumference of the dog's neck plus 1 (one) inch; etc.

I have a couple of dogs that I put outside in a fenced yard to play and potty. The fence is made of metal and it limits the movement of the dogs and I am usually inside.

On top of that one of my dogs has his "Mr. T" bling bling dog collar made of metal.

Guess the way this law is written, I'm gonna be paying a lot of fines.

 

[cattitude]

I have a couple of dogs that I put outside in a fenced yard to play and potty. The fence is made of metal and it limits the movement of the dogs and I am usually inside.

On top of that one of my dogs has his "Mr. T" bling bling dog collar made of metal.

Guess the way this law is written, I'm gonna be paying a lot of fines.

Do you chain him? If not, you are not breaking the law. The law is all about UNATTENDED RESTRAINT of the dog.

 

[LexiGirl75]

I wonder how many dogs will end up getting turned in to the shelter behind the fines.

 

[migtig]

Do you chain him? If not, you are not breaking the law. The law is all about UNATTENDED RESTRAINT of the dog.

I don't chain my dog. But the way this law is written, it sounds as if my stupid comments would qualify as a violation. :shrug: So whose to say my neighbors are ticked at me that day, and call somebody cause my dogs are outside running playing and barking. When whoever comes out and says - yep - unattended dogs in metal fenced yard - fine and penalty.

 

[cattitude]

I don't chain my dog. But the way this law is written, it sounds as if my stupid comments would qualify as a violation. :shrug: So whose to say my neighbors are ticked at me that day, and call somebody cause my dogs are outside running playing and barking. When whoever comes out and says - yep - unattended dogs in metal fenced yard - fine and penalty.

The law states "by use of restraint" which doesn't include dogs running and playing in a yard while the owner is inside.

 

[vraiblonde]

Do you chain him? If not, you are not breaking the law. The law is all about UNATTENDED RESTRAINT of the dog.

If she puts her dog in a fenced yard, he is unattended and restrained. Who gets to define what "unreasonably" means with regard to limiting the dog's movement?

This is a stupid law made by stupid people, who were inflicted upon us by stupid voters. I'm not a huge fan of chaining dogs outside, but the law should address how long the dog is chained up and under what conditions, not the circumference of the collar.

So all you Democrats out there, no complaining. YOU voted for these morons.

 

[cattitude]

If she puts her dog in a fenced yard, he is unattended and restrained. Who gets to define what "unreasonably" means with regard to limiting the dog's movement?

This is a stupid law made by stupid people, who were inflicted upon us by stupid voters. I'm not a huge fan of chaining dogs outside, but the law should address how long the dog is chained up and under what conditions, not the circumference of the collar.

So all you Democrats out there, no complaining. YOU voted for these morons.

Never mind.

 

[vraiblonde]

The law states "by use of restraint" which doesn't include dogs running and playing in a yard while the owner is inside.

Catt, that would be a reasonable definition of "restraint", but the law isn't clear on that. And you know as well as I do that there are many people out there who think a dog in a yard is "restrained".

Bad law. Poorly written. Knee-jerk reaction.

 

[vraiblonde]

Never mind.

No "never mind".

You, because you are a reasonable sane person, interpret the law as a dog chained in a yard, unattended. But the law isn't clear exactly what they mean by "unreasonable restraint", and there are a lot of kooks out there.

 

[LexiGirl75]

If she puts her dog in a fenced yard, he is unattended and restrained. Who gets to define what "unreasonably" means with regard to limiting the dog's movement?



This is a stupid law made by stupid people, who were inflicted upon us by stupid voters. I'm not a huge fan of chaining dogs outside, but the law should address how long the dog is chained up and under what conditions, not the circumference of the collar.

So all you Democrats out there, no complaining. YOU voted for these morons.

It seems like they're saying they want you to basically be outside when they're outside.
This is really going to hurt my dog. He is put outside on the leash to roam the side of the home. The leash is fairly long as he can probably go mid-driveway from the stairs of the porch.

He hates our yard, it's wood fenced and he can't see out/over it. He is not outside for more than 5-20mins depending on if children are showing him attention. There is always someone inside if he's outside and a lot of the times my boys are out playing and they see when he is ready to come in. He scratches the door and gives one bark when he's ready to come in.

I've had him almost 2yrs can't see what harm could come out of it at this point. I don't have a problem with complying I just think it's an unecessary demand unless there is a high number of incidents stemming from this.

 

[Pandora]

I think it is unreasonable to leave a dog chained outside, unattended, PERIOD and that the use of a leash, no matter what collar is connected to it, unreasonable restricts the dog’s movements.

The dog should have a yard or kennel. JMO, It is sad rolling up to a residence and seeing a dog tied to a tree with a 3 foot leash.

 

[Unbelievable]

If she puts her dog in a fenced yard, he is unattended and restrained. Who gets to define what "unreasonably" means with regard to limiting the dog's movement?

This is a stupid law made by stupid people, who were inflicted upon us by stupid voters. I'm not a huge fan of chaining dogs outside, but the law should address how long the dog is chained up and under what conditions, not the circumference of the collar.

So all you Democrats out there, no complaining. YOU voted for these morons.

JMO, but a dog isn't "restrained" if he's in a fenced yard, he is "contained" and, therefore, I think the law is, while not totally clear, focusing on the chain/collar restraints that we see all too often in and about the area. Restraint generally implies some sort of physical holding back of the actual animal and that isn't present in a containment situation. Again, JMO.

 

[tommyjones]

I think it is unreasonable to leave a dog chained outside, unattended, PERIOD and that the use of a leash, no matter what collar is connected to it, unreasonable restricts the dog’s movements.

The dog should have a yard or kennel. JMO, It is sad rolling up to a residence and seeing a dog tied to a tree with a 3 foot leash.

thats ridiulous, and YOU are the problem.

 

[vraiblonde]

I think it is unreasonable to leave a dog chained outside, unattended, PERIOD and that the use of a leash, no matter what collar is connected to it, unreasonable restricts the dog’s movements.

The dog should have a yard or kennel. JMO, It is sad rolling up to a residence and seeing a dog tied to a tree with a 3 foot leash.

So if the little dictators pass a law that says no one may own a dog unless they have a yard or kennel, would you agree with it?

It seems to me that we're legislated to within an inch of our lives, so now the lawmakers don't have anything better to do than come up with crap like this.