Skip to comments.
Burke wants to limit dog tie-ups to 2 hours
Chicago Sun Times ^
| March 2, 2006
| FRAN SPIELMAN
Posted on 03/02/2006 12:11:16 PM PST by george76
Chicago dog owners who tether their pets for hours on end without food or water would be reined in -- with a two-hour limit -- under a crackdown proposed Wednesday by the City Council's most powerful alderman.
"If dogs are tethered in this way, it makes them more likely to bite humans and makes them mean," said Finance Committee Chairman Edward M. Burke (14th).
"It's a question of cruelty to the animals. It's a question of responsible care of animals. If people own pets, they ought to treat them responsibly."
The Burke-championed ordinance introduced at Wednesday's City Council meeting would establish a two-hour time limit on tethering, with fines ranging from $100 to $500 for each offense.
In a blitzkrieg of proposals, Burke also took aim at the sale of gift cards, used cars and meat ...
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: blitzkrieg; blitzkriegproposals; burke; chairman; chicago; chicagodogowners; committee; dog; eddieburke; edwardmburke; finance; financecommittee; owners; proposals; revenooers
1
posted on
03/02/2006 12:11:19 PM PST
by
george76
To: george76
Yep, whenever I want to know anything about dogs I just ask a politician.
To: george76
""If dogs are tethered in this way, it makes them more likely to bite humans and makes them mean," said Finance Committee Chairman Edward M. Burke (14th). " So he wants them to run lose so they can bite people outside the yard or what?
3
posted on
03/02/2006 12:15:34 PM PST
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading since 2004)
To: D.P.Roberts
Ed burke must not have anything important to do like clean up the rank corruption in the Daly democrat party
To: HairOfTheDog
Get a stopwatch if you own a dog in Chicago now...
5
posted on
03/02/2006 12:16:33 PM PST
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading since 2004)
To: george76
"In further news today, Eddie Burke, the world's greatest expert on everything, enlightened us on gift cards, used cars, meat and how dogs think."
To: Abathar
so now people can sue the city of chicago in addition to the owner of that pit bull that had to be released??
7
posted on
03/02/2006 12:17:47 PM PST
by
GeorgiaDawg32
(Islam is a religion of peace and they'll behead 13 year old girls to prove it...)
To: Abathar
I'd prefer to have them fenced. Chaining a dog up does make it more aggressive to passer-by if it has those tendencies to begin with.
8
posted on
03/02/2006 12:17:57 PM PST
by
ahayes
To: george76
"If people own pets, they ought to treat them responsibly."
Can't argue there, stupid as this idea is.
9
posted on
03/02/2006 12:18:01 PM PST
by
Terpfen
(72-25: The Democrats mounted a failibuster!)
To: D.P.Roberts
In other words if you come home and there are chalk marks on the side of your doghouse you know the meter-maids are on to you.
10
posted on
03/02/2006 12:19:12 PM PST
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading since 2004)
To: george76
I thought you were talking about dog knots. I've never seen one last TWO HOURS!
11
posted on
03/02/2006 12:20:45 PM PST
by
colorcountry
(Some folks wear their halos much too tight)
To: george76
So will they do this like they do cars, by painting lines on their paws and seeing if they moved in the last two hours?
To: Abathar
To: ahayes
If its a big dog a chain is better than a fence, my chow can jump a normal fence without breaking her stride if she wants, and a lot of people don't allow fences because of deed restrictions too.
14
posted on
03/02/2006 12:21:55 PM PST
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading since 2004)
To: CharlesWayneCT
15
posted on
03/02/2006 12:22:45 PM PST
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading since 2004)
To: george76
Hell, let the dogs run free. Not much chance of getting bit by them. It's these damn run-a-muck politicians who should be chained up since they always end up putting the bite on everyone.
16
posted on
03/02/2006 12:22:54 PM PST
by
Ditto
To: D.P.Roberts
Can he find something important to worry about...like the underfunded City of Chicago retirement plans ?
17
posted on
03/02/2006 12:23:41 PM PST
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
To: Abathar
Too bad.
A chain contributes to aggression by frustrating the dog. It can see someone walking by on what it considers its territory, but it can't run them off because something holds it back. If there is a physical barrier it doesn't seem to aggravate them as much.
18
posted on
03/02/2006 12:27:25 PM PST
by
ahayes
To: Abathar
Are they going to install dog parking meters ?
19
posted on
03/02/2006 12:27:48 PM PST
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
To: CharlesWayneCT
Burke will hire thousands of his new, best friends to be dog watchers.
20
posted on
03/02/2006 12:29:36 PM PST
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
To: george76
Are they going to install dog parking meters ?
They'd have too, probably would look something like this
21
posted on
03/02/2006 12:30:54 PM PST
by
Mcirrus
(Future Reference)
To: george76
I kind of agree. If you can't properly take care of an animal, if you don't have the time, or the space or the money, you shouldn't have a pet, because they take up all three.
22
posted on
03/02/2006 12:31:18 PM PST
by
Hildy
(The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth)
To: Ditto
"Hell, let the dogs run free. Not much chance of getting bit by them. "
Good idea. If they run free, they can come in my yard, where they're subject to my rules: Loose pit bull in my yard = dead pitbull. One less gangsta dog to worry about.
23
posted on
03/02/2006 12:34:49 PM PST
by
MineralMan
(godless atheist)
To: Mcirrus
24
posted on
03/02/2006 12:35:28 PM PST
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
To: Hildy
The Vietnamese will apparently take care of any loose dog problem.
25
posted on
03/02/2006 12:38:18 PM PST
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
To: george76
It's a question of responsible care of animals.To many, it is no different than child abuse. Barf bag please.
26
posted on
03/02/2006 12:40:17 PM PST
by
taxesareforever
(Government is running amuck)
To: george76
Two-hours is way to long for a dog to play tetherball anyways.
To: george76
The Vietnamese will apparently take care of any loose dog problem. Hey...don't dis the Cambodians, Koreans etc. by omission.
28
posted on
03/02/2006 12:42:37 PM PST
by
ncountylee
(Dead terrorists smell like victory)
To: Always Right
No law should be enacted that is obviously onerous to enforce absent a defined enforcement plan.
I have three dogs, a fenced backyard and a fenced courtyard, they sleep in the house.
29
posted on
03/02/2006 12:46:45 PM PST
by
Old Professer
(The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
To: Abathar
I agree with him. Dogs become aggressive, and frankly I would too if tied to a tree w/o food/water or companionship. Some folks just should not own animals.
When i see a tethered dog, it's just about all I can do to stop myself from freeing him. I know it's none of my business, but it's just not right to treat animals the way some are treated.
30
posted on
03/02/2006 12:49:29 PM PST
by
SnarlinCubBear
(I love mah dawgs ;o))
To: MineralMan
Loose pit bull in my yard = dead pitbull. Don't I know you from that sidewalk meat market in Saigon?
31
posted on
03/02/2006 12:51:49 PM PST
by
Ditto
To: SnarlinCubBear
I won't say there are people out there who have no business owning a dog, there are a lot of people who fall in that category. But I don't think its right that if you are having your carpet cleaned, or having guests over for dinner and put your dog out in the back yard for a while that your neighbor can complain and get you a serious $$$ ticket either.
(I had neighbors from hell for a few years, if they could get me fined for something like that they would call 911 so fast it would make your head spin.)
32
posted on
03/02/2006 12:54:59 PM PST
by
Abathar
(Proudly catching hell for posting without reading since 2004)
To: george76; Abathar
The article isn't clear on exactly what the law would probibit. If it's only tethering without food or water for more than two hours, as the first sentence says, then it's a very sensible law, both on animal cruelty grounds, and because as the legislator points out, desperately hungry dogs are much more likely to attack. Prohibiting ANY tethering for over 2 hours is absurd.
To: george76
How much are they going to pay the dog tie up police to stand around and time dog owners..
And as for them having food and water....if I put food down for my dog...he will eat it
So how do you have food down for a dog that wont eat it right away..and cause you to violate the food & water rule...
34
posted on
03/02/2006 1:04:22 PM PST
by
joesnuffy
(A camel once bit our sister..but we knew just what to do...we gathered rocks and squashed her!)
To: george76
In a blitzkrieg of proposals, Burke also took aim at the sale of gift cards, used cars and meat Pretty fitting.
35
posted on
03/02/2006 1:07:15 PM PST
by
beltfed308
(Cloth or link. Happiness is a perfect trunnion.)
To: D.P.Roberts
In this case he is correct that dogs that are tied up for long periods of time are more likely to be aggresive. I might be because the dog lacks socialization because of the minimum contact it has with its owners.
36
posted on
03/02/2006 2:12:45 PM PST
by
lastchance
(Hug your babies.)
To: beltfed308
Sounds like Burke wants to manage everything and every person...all the time.
He looks like a socialist.
37
posted on
03/02/2006 2:23:57 PM PST
by
george76
(Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson