Dog Law - Anyone know of this? - Page 1

Ok, some yahoos in IL (Cook County) had dog fights in their home, which also houses a day care. 

www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/09/24/2009-09-24_3_charged_in_illinois_dogfighting_ring_at_day_care_.html

But look at this:

"All three charged were from Maywood: Charles Sutton, 42, the husband of the day care operator, and Lance Webb, 27, were charged with felony dogfighting. Martez Anderson, 38, was charged with being a felon in possession of an unspayed or unneutered dog."

That's a charge?  If so, how terrifying.

Anyone know more about such laws on the books?

Didn't California and/or Louisiana pass something in regards to dogs older than 4 months of age requiring to be spayed/neutered?  I thought that was struck down in Louisiana though...

Anderson, is a felon and therefor is not allowed possession of such dogs......

"Anderson, of Maywood, was charged with being a felon in possession of an unspayed or unneutered dog, a misdemeanor. "



http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/illinoisnews/story/7A561FC83BFC95C08625763B00004744?OpenDocument

"Investigators learned the dogs were housed nearby at 2025 S. Sixth Avenue, the home of an ex-convict who charged $60 a month for dogs to be kept there. Martez Anderson, 38, was released from prison on a drug conviction in 2006 and was cited Tuesday for being a felon in possession of an unneutered or unspayed dog. In the garage at Anderson's home, police said they found an 18-month-old pit bull with three 4-week-old puppies. They were all kept in a wire cage soaked in feces and urine, with no signs of food or water for them, Dart said. "

Okay, so who has access to the Illinois penal code to verify that this is a crime? Staates typically prohibit felons from possessing firearms, but an intact dog? What's Bubba gonna do with an intact teacup Yorkie?

Hey Tess and Mystere,

Here's a link : 

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=2946&GAID=8&GA=94&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=18993&SessionID=50

Deletes everything after the enacting clause. Amends the Criminal Code of 1961. Provides that it is unlawful for a person convicted of a forcible felony, a felony violation of the Humane Care for Animals Act, a felony violation of Article 24 of the Criminal Code of 1961, a felony violation of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, or a felony violation of the Cannabis Control Act to knowingly own, possess, have custody of, or reside in a residence with: (1) an unsterilized dog or puppy older than 12 weeks of age or (2) an adult dog weighing more than 30 pounds. Provides that any dog owned, possessed by, or in the custody of such a person convicted of a felony must be microchipped for permanent identification. Provides that a violation is a Class A misdemeanor. Exempts felons who owned, possessed, or had custody of the dog before the commission of the felony, but these felons must have the dog microchipped for permanent identification and must have the dog sterilized.

I don't know how often it is enforced, kinda strange.  But, that guy needed to be charged with everything  possible.  The descriptions of some of the dogs were horrific.

Jim

Jim,

I can understand prohibiting someone with a felony convistion from owning another animal, period, but this is only intact dogs. AND, I wonder, are there provisions for keeping them out of homes occupied by intact CHILDREN?? Or, more to the point, being within a mile of a daycare or school?
 
Thanks for the link. I can see I am going to have fun this weekend, combing for provisions to protect children and dogs to see who got priority in Illinois.

For God's sake, SitasMom, get a clue.  You simply duplicated the information I gave.

Slamdunc, thank you.  What a terrifying piece of legislation.  So this has nothing to do with fighting dogs, which are illegal for anyone, but if I understand this right: anyone convicted of ANY felony, no matter what, is forbidden by law to own an un-neutered dog of ANY kind, not even a fighting dog, but a puppy poodle or golden retriever, ANYTHING?  This is horrible!

I agree that the guy is scum and should be punished.  But I do NOT agree with criminalizing simple ownership of an unspayed or neutered puppy.

And if he's convicted of dog fighting, sure, prohibit ownership.  But convicted of something else?  Hmmmm, shaky, shaky ground here to then say you were convicted of a non-animal related crime (what? what would be a felony?  Like stealing a certain amount of money, maybe?) and as a result you are prohibited from owning an unspayed puppy?  Bad, bad precedent in taking away animal ownership rights.

You throw the book at this guy hard on the "he owned an unspayed dog!  GASP!" - separate from fighting, that's a whole other thing - but to throw the book hard because of simple ownership of an unspayed animal is going to set a terrible precedent since it will come up when other, law-abiding citizens like you & me own unspayed animals.

According to that law, it's not only an unspayed dog, it's ANY dog, even if neutered, over 30 pounds.   So you couldn't even have a pet mutt unless it was very small. 

I'll say it again. This is a terrifying law.
 

this is the law, it also applies to vicious dogs intact or neutered.


720 ILCS 5/12-36
Sec. 12-36. Possession of Certain Dogs by Felons Prohibited.
(a) For a period of 10 years commencing upon the release of a person from incarceration, it is unlawful for a person convicted of a forcible felony, a felony violation of the Humane Care for Animals Act, a felony violation of Article 24 of the Criminal Code of 1961, a felony violation of Class 3 or higher of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, a felony violation of Class 3 or higher of the Cannabis Control Act, or a felony violation of Class 2 or higher of the Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act, to knowingly own, possess, have custody of, or reside in a residence with, either: (1) an unspayed or unneutered dog or puppy older than12 weeks of age; or
(2) irrespective of whether the dog has been spayed or neutered, any dog that has been determined to be a vicious dog under Section 15 of the Animal Control Act.
(b) Any dog owned, possessed by, or in the custody of a person convicted of a felony, as described in subsection (a), must be microchipped for permanent identification.
(c) Sentence. A person who violates this Section is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(d) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this Section that the dog in question is neutered or spayed, or that the dog in question was neutered or spayed within 7 days of the defendant being charged with a violation of this Section. Medical records from, or the certificate of, a doctor of veterinary medicine licensed to practice in the State of Illinois who has personally examined or operated upon the dog, unambiguously indicating whether the dog in question has been spayed or neutered, shall be prima facie true and correct, and shall be sufficient evidence of whether the dog in question has been spayed or neutered. This subsection (d) is not applicable to any dog that has been determined to be a vicious dog under Section 15 of the Animal Control Act.

 This is a canned statement, I think: "No food, no water".. Then, where does all the feces and urine come from? Think about that one, awhile. They said the same about my place, and there was food and water clearly in evidence, also edited out from their "evidence" video. Coincidence? I don't think so. It just happens that I had over 300 lbs of food on the premises, purchased only 36 hours before. Why didn't the super sleuths discover it? OK.. Most of it was in metal cans, to prevent vermin from getting in, but there was so much there, that one big bag of it was sitting out in plain view.. too much to put in all the cans. 

 The very idea that anyone could support dogs on an ongoing basis on a premises, with no food and no water, is absurd. Dogs don't live long without food and water (much less would they be in condition for competitive sports or dog fighting, LOL) . The "no food, no water" claim has been repeated so often, but doesn't hold up in every case, and should be more closely scrutinized, especially if used as a basis to impound the animals. The chances of someone showing up at the exact time when the last bit of food had been used, and not yet replaced, are slim.. not probable. Even so, how long would it take to go buy more food? 1/2 hour? The "no food, no water" claim is bogus, in my opinion.. which makes the rest of this story stink. 

I don't see any redeeming qualities in dog fighting, and I think it should be against the law. 
That said, I think that there is a much more serious and heinous offense against society when law enforcement agents commit perjury on the witness stand, especially if they are coached in their statements. 

Thank you, divmstr1988.  Wow.

I understand prohibiting ownership of a "determined to be vicious dog,"  although who "determines" and what is "vicious" is going to be a disaster, as shown by BSL.

But to ban ownership of ANY type of unspayed puppy/dog as punishment for a non-animal related crime seems like cruel & unusual punishment to me. 

So if my community does not have mandatory spay/neuter, I can own a 12wko unspayed puppy, but my neighbor who has a felony conviction for embezzlement or marijuana or something is forbidden by law to have a 12wkold unspayed poodle puppy?

See, this is how the anti-pet people/animal rights people are insinuating anti-animal laws into being.  So what's next?  You have a non-felony crime and you can't own a dog?  You get a few traffic tickets and you can't own a dog?  You're divorced?  You make less than $30,000 a year? and you can't own a dog?

Bad, bad news.