HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Sikeston MO begins pit bu...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:36 AM

Sikeston MO begins pit bull roundup

Sikeston MO begins pit bull roundup

Several years ago, Sikeston, MO passed a law that automatically made 'pit bull type' dogs automatically declared dangerous. In order for people to keep their dogs, owners had to license their dogs (which included taking multiple pictures of the dogs from various angles), keep them leashed and muzzled, and post 'beware of dog signs in their yards.

However, apparently that wasn't enough for the authorities in Sikeston -- and yesterday, they began rounding up 'pit bulls' out of people's homes to take to the shelter. Most will likely be killed there. It doesn't matter that these dogs were family pets. It doesn't matter that owners did everything to comply with the law. It doesn't seem to matter that the dogs had no history of aggression or complaints about them. It only seems to matter that they look like pit bulls, and the city authorities want them dead. All of them.

This isn't happening in a 3rd world country. Or some science fiction novel. It's happening in the United States. In 2012. And this isn't the only place it's happened.

Several years ago, a similar incident happened in Denver, when authorities began going around and rounding up 'pit bull' type dogs, leading to a massive pile of dead pit bulls in the city (note, the picture at the link may be disturbing). And this is even different than the killing of homeless animals in our shelters (which is its own travesty), this is the purposeful rounding up and killing of people's family pets that HAVE loving homes.

http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2012/12/sikeston-mo-begins-pit-bull-roundup-.html

56 replies, 6746 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 56 replies Author Time Post
Reply Sikeston MO begins pit bull roundup (Original post)
The Straight Story Dec 2012 OP
Occulus Dec 2012 #1
excringency Dec 2012 #11
proud2BlibKansan Dec 2012 #28
Enrique Dec 2012 #2
99Forever Dec 2012 #3
Enrique Dec 2012 #4
99Forever Dec 2012 #8
Enrique Dec 2012 #9
99Forever Dec 2012 #15
Myrina Dec 2012 #29
jackbenimble Dec 2012 #42
hedgehog Dec 2012 #48
Occulus Dec 2012 #14
PD Turk Dec 2012 #21
99Forever Dec 2012 #22
PD Turk Dec 2012 #32
99Forever Dec 2012 #45
Drale Dec 2012 #5
madokie Dec 2012 #6
Mangoman Dec 2012 #7
KamaAina Dec 2012 #10
Mangoman Dec 2012 #12
KamaAina Dec 2012 #13
Enrique Dec 2012 #16
KamaAina Dec 2012 #19
Mangoman Dec 2012 #27
KamaAina Dec 2012 #31
PD Turk Dec 2012 #17
KamaAina Dec 2012 #20
PD Turk Dec 2012 #26
Recursion Dec 2012 #24
PD Turk Dec 2012 #36
Berserker Dec 2012 #40
kooljerk666 Dec 2012 #52
Marrah_G Dec 2012 #18
Recursion Dec 2012 #23
MadHound Dec 2012 #25
Deep13 Dec 2012 #30
Mangoman Dec 2012 #33
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #34
Deep13 Dec 2012 #35
Lady Freedom Returns Dec 2012 #38
Mangoman Dec 2012 #53
Lady Freedom Returns Dec 2012 #37
jackbenimble Dec 2012 #43
Lady Freedom Returns Dec 2012 #54
TorchTheWitch Dec 2012 #39
flvegan Dec 2012 #41
Bake Dec 2012 #44
kooljerk666 Dec 2012 #56
brokechris Dec 2012 #46
Lycanthropy Dec 2012 #47
brokechris Dec 2012 #49
hedgehog Dec 2012 #50
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #51
Lady Freedom Returns Dec 2012 #55

Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:41 AM

1. People in Missouri killing living beings based solely on looks?

Where, and where oh where, have I heard THAT story before?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:14 PM

11. Look for a certain newsworthy event in Sikeston, Missouri in 1942.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to excringency (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:39 PM

28. It's the cotton belt

Sikeston is a strange city.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:45 AM

2. they can keep the dogs if they comply with regulations

the link in the OP says " It doesn't matter that owners did everything to comply with the law."

According to this news report, that is not true:


http://kplr11.com/2012/12/05/dozens-of-dogs-shipped-up-to-st-louis-to-avoid-mass-euthanasia/

Holly Jobe said officers almost got her pet.

Jobe explained, “They said they were going to take her because she does not like a man in uniform. Ha ha. And she tried to go after him because they were tampering with her property and I told them they was not taking my dog.”

So she complied with a long list of regulations that only apply to pit bulls in Sikeston — put up a ‘beware of dog’ sign, get insurance, put on a hard collar on the dog, take multiple pictures and so on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:50 AM

3. I'm without words.

I can't imagine what I would do to defend my dogs from this. It would be ugly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:57 AM

4. would you go so far as to comply with the town's regulations

put up a sign, get the collar, take the pictures, etc.?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:07 PM

8. We hold a private kennel license..

.. and comply with far more restrictive codes than that. And we don't have pits. I'm sure there are two sides to this story, of that there is no doubt. I was speaking from the personal level of one who has the kind of bond with my PETS that only those who have also had, truly understand. That's all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:10 PM

9. then why would it "get ugly"?

you would comply with their regulations, like the lady in the video, and they would let you keep your dogs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:00 PM

15. Are you seeking an argument from me?

You're not going to get it.

We had to deal with same kind of small town political asshole mentality that is driving this. My dogs are nicer people than the dickheads on most hick "zoning committees" and "town councils."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #15)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:48 PM

29. +100

My dogs are nicer people than the dickheads on most hick "zoning committees" and "town councils."

As a rescue foster mom and adoptive momma of 4 multi-breed hounds, thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:17 PM

42. The problem with complying is that they (the city) have no idea what they are enforcing.

The chick in the video did not have a pit bull, her dog was a Boxer. The other lady said her family's Bulldog was taken. Boxers and Bulldogs are not Pitbulls. So do they have a pitbull ban, a short haired dog ban, or just a general bully breed ban?

I personally don't care for pits. But I don't think breed bans are the answer. If someone is going to be irresponsible with a pitbull they will be just as irresponsible with a poodle.

Absolutely horrible what they are doing there. Not only that but now there are 150 extra dogs in another area that need adopting, as though they don't have enough homeless dogs of their own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jackbenimble (Reply #42)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:31 PM

48. " If someone is going to be irresponsible with a pitbull they will be just as irresponsible

with a poodle. "

I suspect that if some people aren't allowed to get a pit bull, they will adopt another dog perceived as threatening - German shepherd, doberman, mastiff, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:44 PM

14. The "other side to the story" is that many "pit bulls" aren't pits at all

but entirely different breeds that only look, superficially, like pit bulls.

That's what makes this so terrible. The law isn't even anything close to precise. They just don't want to spend the money to verify that they're actually seizing pits.

They're killing things based on their looks. Again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:04 PM

21. Exactly

My neighbor has a dog whose father is a Boxer and mother is a Red Heeler/Lab mix. To the uninitiated, the dog looks like a "pit", even though it is no such thing. The dog is really friendly but if it ever bit someone, the local media here would have it branded as a "pit bull attack" before sundown and no amount of facts will change their mind, I've seen them do it before

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Occulus (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:26 PM

22. As I see it...

.. the "what really is a pit bull?" tactic is problematic, at best. It reeks of being dodgy and playing semantics (much like legalese) to cover for not just irresponsible owners, but also those that deliberately have pit bulls for precisely the reasons that make them dangerous. Like it or not, people harboring viscous dogs, and not absolutely making sure they don't attack innocent members of society, are harming the entire dog loving population in general. We go to great lengths to make sure our pets are not a problem to our community, unfortunately, many others do not. I wish ALL pit bull owners would devote as much time to being responsible owners, as they do mounting "defenses" of the breed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #22)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:17 PM

32. but that's the crux of the problem

A mythical "breed" called "pitbull" was created out of a colloquial description and every suspicious looking Molloser under the sun and the kitchen sink has been thrown in. Now we have a "breed" of dog that supposedly accounts for the largest share of dog attacks and unfortunately, little or no way to separate bullshit from fact amid all the hype and hysteria.

Hell, if we wanted to make the statistics more realistic, why not throw other groups of dogs together, like the shepherd breeds for instance, lets mash them up under one "breed" classification and then take a look at their bite statistics, I wonder what that would look like?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PD Turk (Reply #32)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:46 AM

45. That isn't at all what I was saying.

The waters have been muddied purposely by pit bull owners and breeders, not the other way around. If you want to pretend it isn't so, that is certainly your right, just don't kid yourself into thinking you are fooling everyone else.

We own German Shepards and French Bulldogs, and have never tried to disown that these are their breeds. Ever. Nor have I ever seen that tactic used by owners and breeders of Rots, Dobies, Shepards, or any other breed, except Pit Bulls. that, in and of itself, makes a statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:58 AM

5. This makes me so angry that I CAN NOT formulate a reply that is not angry

so I'll leave it at that and come back later when I've calmed down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:01 PM

6. I've had several neighbors with many different kinds of dogs

and the only ones who have caused us any problems has been pits. For instance about 6 weeks or so ago I returned from a mushroom foraging trip with out pet and our neighbors pit, who I've been friends with since she was a puppy and been around our dog and played together all of a sudden as we got out of my truck attacked our dog and it was all I could do to choke it down and get it off our 14 year old border collie, It was trying to kill our totally non aggressive border collie and would have had I not been there to protect our pet. I don't trust pits any more.
For the record both dogs are female and neither have puppies, ours is spayed and the neighbors had the pit spayed after 2 litters of pups about 2 years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:03 PM

7. This sounds perfectly rational to me

 

If a dog owner is willing to sacrifice their dogs life just because they refused to comply with a few simple regulations , then they shouldn't be dog owners to begin with

What's with people ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:12 PM

10. A possible loophole: service dogs

Breed-specific laws DO NOT apply to service dogs. And service dogs DO NOT need to be licensed. All anyone is allowed to ask of a service dog user is this: "Is that a service animal?" "Yes." "What does he or she do for you?" That's IT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #10)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:15 PM

12. Another loophole is to ...

 

Just comply with their simple regulations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mangoman (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 12:36 PM

13. That one's not that simple, nor, it seems, terribly effective.

http://fox2now.com/2012/12/05/dozens-of-dogs-shipped-up-to-st-louis-to-avoid-mass-euthanasia/

So she complied with a long list of regulations that only apply to pit bulls in Sikeston — put up a ‘beware of dog’ sign, get insurance, put on a hard collar on the dog, take multiple pictures and so on....

About 20 dogs from Sikeston were shipped up to St. Charles to make room for seized pit bulls in Southern Missouri. The reported pit bulls may have no reported problems. Some may not even be pit bulls, like Yulonda Mitchell’s dogs. Mitchell said officers took her brother’s dogs, even though she believed they were bulldogs.

She said her family dogs were, “…licensed and up to date on their shots. We did everything, you know, complied with the City ordinance but they still wanted to remove the dogs.”

Chris Hayes asked, “This was a family pet?”
Mitchell, “It was a family pet.”


Yulonda Mitchell, eh? That's kind of an unusual name. Wonder what race she is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:06 PM

16. she's black

there's video at the link. She's black and there is a white lady later in the video that said she got to keep her dogs. It could very well be discrimination and this town might be in trouble, who knows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:43 PM

19. I had a feeling.

Sikeston is in southeast Missouri's "Bootheel", which is more like the South than the Midwest. (Poplar Bluff, Charlene's home town in "Designing Women" as well as that of creator Linda Bloodworth, is nearby.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:38 PM

27. Are you implying

 

That the lady you posted about followed the regulations and they still took her dog ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mangoman (Reply #27)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:08 PM

31. Well, actually, she's implying that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:10 PM

17. 'pit bull type' dogs

Pit bull "type" dogs. Almost every time I see "breed specific" legislation it usually has the same problem, the "breed" covered in the legislation is anything but specific: According to the Sikeston city code, a "pit bull" is:

SECTION 205.450: PIT BULL DOG -- DEFINED

A. The Bull Terrier breed of dog.

B. Staffordshire Bull Terrier breed of dog.

C. The American Pit Bull Terrier breed of dog.

D. The American Staffordshire Terrier breed of dog.

E. Dog of mixed breed or of other breeds than above listed which breed or mixed breed is known as pit bull, pit bull dogs or pit bull terriers.

F. Any dog which has the appearance and characteristics of being predominately of the breeds of Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, any other breed commonly know as pit bulls, pit bull dogs or pit bull terriers or a combination of any of these breeds


So all that is required is if the dog has a certain look, it's a "pitbull"

A Bull Terrier is a pit? Who knew?

I am strongly in favor of laws against harboring viscious animals and don't want to see them roaming the streets menacing people and pets, but IMO this isn't the way to do it. Strict enforcement of laws covering ANY breed of animal that proves itself to be dangerous is much more effective IMO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PD Turk (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:49 PM

20. I hope there isn't a Target in Sikeston



or, for that matter, anyplace that sells Bud Light.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KamaAina (Reply #20)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:37 PM

26. no kidding

I think Spuds just crossed this burg off his publicity tour

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PD Turk (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:33 PM

24. Good lord. A bull terrier?

The stupid... it hurts...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #24)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:46 PM

36. Yeah

They might as well have included "and the kitchen sink" the way they have it written.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PD Turk (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:39 PM

40. I feel that

 

there is not a problem with the breed. You can make ANY animal as mean as you want even humans.
But I do see a discrepancy here. As I myself am a Liberal I see the attacks on Liberal gun owners because they have guns in their homes or carry guns. As a dog can be a killer so can certain humans. This thread shows me that if it is and animal and can and will kill you it should not be called out as a killer but a pet. Most pit bulls are just pets as most guns are just for hunting, target practice or self defense. Why then are Liberals so lope sided in these two examples. There really are bad pit bulls and there are really bad humans. Pit bulls and guns are not bad it's the asshole humans that make them so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PD Turk (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 10:43 AM

52. Pick out the Pitbull

 

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Here are 25 dogs, only 1 is a pit bull.

Pit Bulls used to be smaller like 45lbs.
What we see today are just big mutts so BSL is not a way to deal with them.

HINT: Out of all these dogs the real pit bull is one of the least scary looking...............

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:22 PM

18. Less then 7,000 households

How many pits can there be and then how many pits can there be who's families refused to comply with the laws?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:32 PM

23. Ooh... "pit bull type" dogs... even better (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:35 PM

25. More breed specific stupidity.

 

I will be thankful when America's pit mania goes away. Trouble is, another breed will simply take their place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:49 PM

30. this is unconstitutional under the takings clause. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Deep13 (Reply #30)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:44 PM

33. I thought the Takings Clause

 

Was about land.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mangoman (Reply #33)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:45 PM

34. Any kind of property without due compensation. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mangoman (Reply #33)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:37 PM

35. No, "property" which can be real or personal. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Deep13 (Reply #30)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:37 PM

38. See post #37...

There is a widely believed theory that dogs are more weapons than pets. And if you have an illegal weapon you are breaking the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lady Freedom Returns (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:34 PM

53. Yep

 

Got a unregistered gun ?

Then it might get taken , and you cry all you want about the "Takings Clause"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:35 PM

37. Being from Missouri at one time, this does not surprising.

There is a widely believed theory that dogs are more weapons than pets. And if you have an illegal weapon you are breaking the law. Many areas in Missouri things happen that defies what people think of as personal rights and hurts one's pursuit of happiness.

There are times one thinks that "It is just the way things are, get use to it" should be the State motto.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lady Freedom Returns (Reply #37)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:22 PM

43. You could say the exact same thing about any state in the union. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jackbenimble (Reply #43)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 06:09 PM

54. I just have 33 years experience in Missouri.

So that is the only real state I can talk about. Still learning Arizona.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:50 PM

39. this is disgusting

And shows how crazy ignorant whoever came up with such grotesque laws are.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:03 PM

41. No comment. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:56 PM

44. And in related news, Florida wants the pit bulls

Seems there's a shortage of babysitters there ....

:rimshot:

Okay, poor taste perhaps.



Bake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bake (Reply #44)

Wed Dec 12, 2012, 11:55 AM

56. Good Taste & funny..............

 

I expected the dogs to be made into food for jails & the elderly poor.


So, I was surprised & got a nice laff, thx.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 12:29 PM

46. wow! that is drastic.

I am not a big fan of the breed, however all I would do is require the owners to have insurance to cover any potential harm caused by the dogs. (and enforce leash/muzzle rules--which would apply to all dogs)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:27 PM

47. Shit

I think I just puked a little. The first dog I ever had that was actually mine was a pit. My best friend has 2 of them. The sweetest, most loyal dogs I have ever met have been pits. Excuse me while I cry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:31 PM

49. the city manager of Sikeston MO claims the

reports of a pitbull round up are false:

http://www.kfvs12.com/category/99578/home-state-missouri

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:37 PM

50. I am very ambivalent on the subject of pit bulls.

I wouldn't trust one, I wouldn't have one. We had one hound mix that got nervous as he aged and he did nip a delivery person one time. I was really wondering if I would have to put him down at some point.

On the other hand, many would describe Rottweillers as aggressive dogs, and we have Good Dog Carl!



http://www.amazon.com/Good-Dog-Carl-Alexandra-Day/dp/0689817711#reader_0689817711

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:09 PM

51. My town only allows you to have 4 cats

And there are several regulations about having them licensed, up to date on vaccinations, etc.

If your cat isn't spayed, and she has more than 3 kittens...yes, you can get fined!

So many animal laws are ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #51)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 06:14 PM

55. Joplin Mo is somewhat the same.

They do give you some time if your kitten has more that 3 kittens so you may find a home.

But the rules are 4 dogs and/or cats. There is a legal loop to get free shots by having your pets spaded or neutered. Good way to keep animal numbers down and keep things like rabies under control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread