Wednesday, March 14, 2012

Dog Fight

Audra Jornov reports in today's Register-Star that an unleashed pitbull attacked a bulldog being walked on a leash: "Dog fights another dog, gets tasered by police." The incident took place on Columbia Street near Seventh Street. Lieutenant Richard Paolino, commenting on the incident, said that had the pitbull turned on the officer or the people trying to separate the two dogs, “The duty weapon could have been deployed.”


  1. I am glad that no one including the dogs, were injured
    that was a potentially very dangerous situation.HPD Lt. Richard Paolino
    handled it swiftly and successfully.Better tazer than Gun.
    Its so discouraging,just when we are getting some momentum back
    for a clean safe fenced in DOG PARK,
    some irresponsible Dog Owner gives Dogs bad press.
    all I can say is there are far more attacks between humans in Hudson,than dogs,
    not that that's good.
    The owner of the unleashed aggressive dog broke at least 3 City Codes
    It needs to be understood Dog Parks have to have very strict rules and enforce them
    and off leash untrained,unsocialized troubled dogs or dogs aggressive to humans or other dogs are banned immediately,til they can prove proper training.
    There are very successfully models for Dog Parks right in this County
    I hope the unleashed dog owner is fined to full extent of the law,to deter others.
    Please don't blame the dog

  2. Pit bulls are vicious. Haven't lots of places banned them? Aren't they the drug dealer's dog of choice?

  3. When the southernmost buildings of the previously-named Hudson Terrace Apartments were cleared of their Section 8 tenants in preparation for refurbishment with federal stimulus money, workers found different cases of pit bulls left behind in cages. Abandoned!

    Those buildings were the site a substantial drug-selling operation with clients that stretched out into the county. (All confirmed by the HPD.)

    There was a No Dogs policy at the apartments then and now, but the management looked the other way on the dogs, the drugs, everything.

    Because a disproportionate number of pit bulls end up in shelters, it's only logical that the kinds of communities that see abandoned pit bulls also see lots of pit bull adoptions.

    Is it possible that drug dealers use the shelters as a kind of canine pawn shop, or do they just get new pit bulls elsewhere and keep increasing the overall number?

  4. Prison Alley: I don't think this is bad press for dogs so much as it is evidence that the City's leash laws must be observed and enforced.

    Samuel: Hudson used to have a law requiring pitbulls and Rottweilers to wear muzzles when they were walked on public streets. That law had to be rescinded because there cannot be laws that discriminate against particular breeds. I'm sure the same is true for any law that tried to ban a certain breed from a municipality.

  5. Carole, pretty sure the City Code could discriminate between breeds provided that there was sufficient evidence of a particular breed's viciousness. The trust is that dogs, like people, are all individuals. Some pits are vicious (look to their owners); some are docile. When I was a boy, there were multiple news stories about a particular breed suddenly becoming vicious and turning on people, including their owners. There was a great deal of press calling for banning or otherwise restricting the breed. It all came to nothing. Oh, the breed at issue? St. Bernards. Yup, the friendly mountain dog with its traditional cargo of life-saving rum (or whatever it was). The fact is that all dogs -- like all animals -- have the capacity for viciousness. No one breed is better or worse than another.

  6. There's nothing in state law describing breeds of dogs (see Agriculture and Markets, Article 7 §123), nevertheless insurance companies DO discriminate between breeds.

  7. Questions about why the City of Hudson had to rescind their discriminatory muzzle law probably should be referred to Jack Connor, who was the city attorney at the time the City rescinded the law.