Getting Involved is easier than you think!

A lot of the time I think that people want other people to do everything for them. But, when you're a dog you know that doing things your self will reap you bigger rewards. This stands true for getting involved in the fight against Breed Specific Legislation.

There are a lot of ways to do this. Some really easy ways include joining positive online forums, attending positive events, Purchasing literature to further your preparedness and donating to anti-BSL causes through merchandise purchases.



This show season there will be lots of chances to get involved in your area. Something as simple as attending a dog show can help further the positive image of the breed, its owners and breeders to your community. Something as inconsequential as buying a shirt or bumper sticker may support a cause which in the long run will save your dogs.

Either way, when you get decide to get involved you can make a difference for more than just yourself. That's why Owners, Breeders and Dogs Against Breed Discrimination focuses its efforts at helping people make a difference in their community. Whether you need help changing the perception of American Pit Bull Terriers in your town. Or you need information on why BSL is wrong and doesn't work they can help you.

That's why this dog supports Owners, Breeders and Dogs Against Breed Discrimination- they empower you to change your community.

Official Statement Regarding Libel Blog

To whom this may concern,

A recent internet slander article has drawn our attention at Stop-BSL.com. The website dogsbite.org has decided to "oust" Owners, Breeders and Dogs Against Breed Discrimination founder, Allie Renar, as a "dog fighter supporter" or something of the like. This gross misrepresentation of the facts has lead us to address you here. This email is being sent to anyone I think it may concern and will be posted on our website shortly for visitors.

Several things were written about Allie and Stop-BSL.com which are much less true than they are blatant lies.

First off the claim that this organization is some sort of cover for dog fighters is absurd. Allie has never supported dog fighting and has never said that she does. The truth is that some funds have been routed through Stop-BSL.com and donated from Allie herself to help support ACCUSED dog fighters who were beleived innocent. The supposedly great thing about American society is how you are innocent until proven guilty. In the cases which Stop-BSL's reasearch dept has taken time to find information to help the defense and money has been sent all parties were beleived innocent and had been illegal searched, violationg their Consitutional Rights. All money which went to these people was sent with the request that it reach them. It was sent through Stop-BSL.com to avoid posting personal addresses on the internet. No general donations were routed to these people or used for this cause.

The outcome of these trials and investigations has shown us why we felt we should be involved. Thus far one person plead guilty (due to threats of losing his home which he is currently investigating appealing), four were acquitted, one had his dogs returned without charges being filed and one plead no contest with no jail time served. With these type of statistics it is very hard to believe that these people did not deserve their day in court. Out of over 150 charges the HSUS and local law enforcement had come up with for seven people total only one person has plead guilty to anything. That one person plead to INTENTION TO FIGHT A DOG, which is NOT the same as ever having done it. We know many of you who do not know the background of these cases or know in depth what the HSUS and groups like dogsbite.org are doing will not understand this. For that we are sorry. However, this issue cannot be ignored. The HSUS is trying to make America a country where simply owning a dog allows them to barge in your home without a warrant. They use false allegations and missing evidence to get warrants, kill dogs and then blow it off like it never happened when no one is found guilty of anything. This issue falls squarely in the realm of our mission. We help only those people we feel are innocent from either looking at the evidence presented or from speaking to character witnesses who are willing to bet their lives these people are innocent. Five out of seven times we were right in a court of law.

We fight BSL every day and know that the number one reason it passes is fear. The HSUS and other organizations have long perpetuated the myth that only dog fighters, drug dealers and criminals own pit bulls. They continue to raid innocent dog breeders in order to further perpetuate that myth. These groups know that the acquittal will not warrant much press and the initial media frenzy is all they need to bump up their donations and get more politicians on board with BSL.. We make countless phone calls, orchestrate petitions, inform the public of REAL statistics and yes, we support innocent people with information and some funds in order to help stop the spread of this stereotype.

A largely ignored and forgotten part of fighting BSL is stopping the proponents from polluting the media any more than they already are. And, that is what we did in these cases. We provided information that John Goodwin is adimittedly not an expert on dog fighting or trained in any animal service or care field. Additionally, we provided evidence that Goodwin is a high school dropout with airtight connections to a domestic terrorism organization. This got him removed as an expert witness in several cases because he is not an expert. We helped innocent people prove that they were innocent- that is all. Those parties who were acquitted are not "known dog fighters" as dogsbite.org and the HSUS would like you to beleive. They are dog breeders who had their lives taken from them and slaughtered by pit bull hating fearmongering people and in the end were found to have done nothing wrong.

Groups such as dogsbite.org actively advocate for unfair pit bull restrictions and breed based laws. It is no wonder they would decide to slander a young non profit who is trying to stop them from perpetuating lies and passing useless laws which kill innocent pets. The Humane Society of the united states also advocated sterilizing all pit bulls and is actively offering rewards of $5000 for any information (true or not) which may lead to the senseless killing of more innocent dogs owned by good people.

We truly feel that our organization has been making waves and we have been doing more with getting people to act than we have done to raise money. This is complete retaliation to our blogs and our efforts in which have helped people at least get a fair day in court. Stop-BSL has been around about a year now and this recent attack happens only after the HSUS was embarrassed by it's own ignorance and ill preparedness in court.

As it stands we have not raised a lot of money. What we have done is created a lot of awareness and convinced a lot of people to become active in their communtiy. That is our ultimate goal. To stop BSL at it's roots, in your communities and in the minds of the public. As far as the alleged advertisement in "Scratch Back" we did not pay for this ad. It was donated by someone who saw our site and believed in our mission. As a group that does not have a war chest of money we do not turn down ads offered to us. We do not subscribe to this magazine or know the details of it's contents. Apparently the people at dogsbite.org do have the connections to the "dog fighting" world that our founder is being accused of having.

Sincerely,
Owners, Breeders and Dogs Against Breed Discrimination

Animal Owners Devoid of Constitutional Rights?

Recently I have begun to wonder if the United States has somehow amended the Constitution to exempt animal owners from certain "rights" which other citizens enjoy. For example, the the 5th Amendment which says "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." However, every day laws are being passed which allow cities to take dogs (aka property) from their owners without the due process of a trial. The alarming rate with which this questionable practice is spreading has lead me to this idea. . .

Perhaps the United States of America no longer views animal owners as having equal rights afforded under the Constitution.

There are many examples in today's society of this phenomenon from breed specific ordinances to so called "dog fighting investigations." What they have in common is simple, the government and private organizations support of violating the Bill of Rights in favor of Animal Rights propaganda over real public safety and animal welfare considerations.

To many people who have not witnessed this firsthand it may seem far fetched. So, let me give you a short test . . .

TRUE OR FALSE?

1. Pit bulls are owned only by drug dealers, gang members, criminals and DOG FIGHTERS!

2. Pit Bulls have locking jaws which will never let go of an animal or person they are biting

3. Treadmills are only used by dog fighters

4. Weight pull and conformation shows are cover for dog fighters

5. Pit bull bans do not affect any other types of dogs

6. Shelters are greatly over crowded with pit bulls and mandatory spay/neuter laws will fix this

Thought it over? Well, you may be shocked by the real answers.

1. FALSE. People from all walks of life enjoy owning athletic, short haired, loyal dogs (which includes the pit bull breeds) and many famous people have and do own pit bull dogs. For example, Rachael Ray, Frankie Munez, Benjamin Franklin and Helen Keller.

2. FALSE. There has never been a study to confirm this. However it has been properly disproved. As explained below by Dr. I. Lehr Brisbin of the University of Georgia.

“The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of Pit Bulls show that, in proportion to their size, jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of “locking mechanism” unique to the structure of the jaw and /or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier.”

3. FALSE. Treadmills have been used in the dog show world for years to keep dogs of all breeds fit and healthy. Many veterinarians and dog trainers also advocate their use.

4. FALSE. Weight pull and conformation, along with many other dog sports and acitivities are undergone by many fanciers of different breeds. Some enjoy the bonding with their dogs and fellow fanciers, others compete in order to test a dogs structure and athletic ability which they want to breed.

This is a myth created in order to cast doubt on innocent dog owners so that certain groups could continue to blemish their reputation in the court of public opinion.

5. FALSE. There are 75 breeds of dogs currently being targeted somewhere in the United States by BSL. They range from the Labrador retriever to the Boston Terrier.

"BSL Pandemic" by Scot E. Dowd Ph.D of the Canine Research Institute suggests that by the year 2022 at least 25 additional breeds will join that list. This would effectively make owning the majority of popular dog breeds illegal in the United States.

6. FALSE. Nathan Winograd's Redemption has blew the lid off the pet overpopulation myth, proving that a more active role in animal sheltering can effectively reduce the number of animals killed in American shelters each year. Additionally, mandatory spay/neuter laws have been seen to actually raise shelter populations because many people surrender dogs or have them confiscated as opposed to complying with these laws, not to mention they violate your rights just as much as BSL does.

If you were surprised by the factual answers to the above questions you have been the victim of media biased. You have watched news stories, read articles and heard tall tales for years about evil pit bull owners and how BSL would save children and kittens from being eaten. Fact is, that's a load of crap.

The reason you may find it hard to swallow that dog owners are having their rights violated every day in this country is because most of those dog owners are pit bull owners. Even when the evidence is overwhelmingly stacked in their favor the pit bull owner has a hard time getting a fair shake with the media.

Here are some facts for you to ingest. Breed specific legislation is a growing problem. It in no way solves the problems which cause a danger to the community like irresponsible ownership and violation of existing fair laws. What it does accomplish is to criminalize innocent people based on information supplied by biased sources and verified by other biased sources which has no factual basis.

Dogs are the property of their owners. Seizure of a dog based on breed and without trial is a violation of both the 4th and 5th Amendments.

Fair and reasonable laws can be created to uphold public safety. All it takes is intelligent legislators with constituents who do not buy all the media bull. The Responsible Dog Owners of the Western States has created the Model Dog Owner Regulations for this purpose. If implemented it could drastically change the climate of a community, leading to responsible ownership practices and a drop in dog bites and other animal control issues.

On a whole other topic, and yet the same problem, is the recent string of high profile dog fighting busts. I know when I say "dog fighting bust" you most likely think Micheal Vick. But, for a moment, wipe that overplayed memory from your mind and envision instead your neighbor. Any neighbor. Because today there is a $5000 reward for dog fighter information. ANY information, true or not. Any person who owns "pit bulls" and has angered a neighbor or acted "odd" can fall victim. You may be thinking that there is no way an innocent person would be raided for dog fighting. But you have been proven wrong by numerous cases recently.

Where dog fighting is concerned it is a huge cash cow to donations for groups like the HSUS. Many times warrants are given for people who have never broken the law, simply on "suspicion" of dog fighting thanks to helpful tips the HSUS supplies to local law enforcement agencies. This is thanks to a little something called the "patriot act" which basically allows warrants to be written entirely from spectulation. Fourth amendment anyone?

Many times dog fighting trials also violate the 6th amendment as well. As in the case of Floyd and Guy Boudreaux who were acquitted after THREE YEARS of stalling from the prosecution. Turns out they were stalling because they had taken 50 dogs in violation of the 4th and 5th amendments, killed them within a few days time and had no evidence to tie the Boudreaux's to ANY illegal activity.

Another recent example of this blatant violation of the Bill of Rights is the case of Pat Patrick and Emily Dennis. Not only were all of their dogs seized and killed before trial and without evidence to back up the warrant written for them, the prosecution was also pushing for forfeiture of their home in order to pay civil penalties for "cruelty." After the prosecution presented the pathetic "evidence" collected against the couple it was obvious to the judge that this case was also a witch hunt without the broomsticks and the couple was acquitted. Of course, their dogs are still dead.

Don't think it stops with pit bull owners either in Arizona recently Wanda and Bill Jones were indicted for what the HSUS describes as "Hoarding" small dogs and birds. Although the animals were well taken care of and not confined to small cages as some reports have said the HSUS and other Animal Rights Extremist groups want this couple punished for what amounts to a love of animals. The couple had a lot of dogs and birds, that is true, but even video released by the Humane Society of Southern Arizona does not show one SINGLE dog in a cage or looking unhealthy/abused.

Before the HSUS got involved the couple had been visited by Animal control without incident. Now, they are facing criminal charges. That can be called an interesting turn of events for sure.

What this all amounts to is a clear problem in America. Dog owner's are being criminalized, violated and ignored on a daily basis. Meanwhile, "Humane organizations" are overstepping their bounds (legally speaking) and supplying bogus information to law enforcements agencies in exchange for media coverage which results in donations. Directly resulting from these acts of pure greed are the deaths of innocent animals, the ruined lives of innocent dog lovers and the wasted taxpayer money which is used to arrest these people, harass these people and then lose in court to these people.

Perhaps the citizens of the United States should stand up for their rights under the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments and ask that laws to "protect" the public be fair and without breed stereotypes, that police actually have evidence before storming homes, killing dogs and wasting taxpayer dollars and that some "humane organizations" are held accountable for the lies they feed the public and the cops in the name of fund raising.

Guardianship: A Stepping Stone in the Wrong Direction

Lately, I have been hearing many organizations using the term "guardianship" instead of "ownership" when referring to the human-dog relationship. While I love to be treated like a member of the family and respected as thus, this term has me worried.

Many people may say why? And here it is. . .

I, being a dog, like to feel secure in my living situation. Ownership tells me that my person "owns" me and by law, under the constitution, has rights to me. This means that no government has legal right to take me away, upsetting my living arrangement without proof that my owner has broken a law.

That being said, many times BSL does take us dogs from our owners. But, this is illegal and violates our human's rights under the 4th, 5th and 14th amendments of the United States Constitution. In particular, the 14th Amendment states that the government shall not deprive citizens of property without due process. So, when BSL is enacted, it is in violation of these amendments and can be challenged in court. Often times it is challenged, and although cities and states have more money and time to fight in court, occasionally humans win. When they do win it is by proving that Breed Specific Legislation has violated "due process" by resulting in "grievous harm to property and liberty."

This is why the term guardianship has been concocted. Animals, including dogs, are currently considered PROPERTY by law in the United States. However, Under the Constitution of the United States a guardian does not hold property rights over it's "ward." In fact, making dog owners into dog "guardians" would not only erase the legal premise by which BSL can be fought and won, it may also place undue strain on the dog-human relationship. For example, a guardian of a child is bound by law to put the interest of the child before themselves. This means if the child needs a million dollar operation the guardian must undergo the financial hardship of doing such operation and if the guardian refuses the state can actually file suit against said guardian on behalf of the ward. In such cases with dogs, a veterinarian or other official could decide that the food or medical treatment a guardian has chosen for it's ward is insufficient and they could file suit on the ward's behalf.

This would make dog guardianship much more complicated and expensive than is dog ownership, perhaps even reducing the number of available good homes in America for dogs like myself.

Additionally, human guardians are tracked by the state in the case of having human wards. Human-dog guardians would probably be the same way, adding another undue strain on the individuals involved and the regulatory system created around this ideal.

You may be thinking, who is suggesting "dog guardianship" anyway?

Many of the Animal Rights organizations you may have thought were warm and fuzzy actually support the elimination of pet owner rights and even BSL.

ASPCA Position On Ownership vs. Guardianship

“By viewing animals as more than mere property, the focus shifts from the ownership interest in the animal to what is in the best interest of that individual animal. This altered view of animals necessarily requires that we treat them with greater respect and compassion and a higher level of care. In turn, our relationship with the animal becomes one of a “caretaker,” whose sole responsibility is to protect and nurture the animal, rather than an “owner,” who has title to and dominion over the animal for the owner’s enjoyment and benefit as he/she sees fit.”

“To fully recognize this new relationship between humans and animals, laws must change accordingly. Converting “owner” to “guardian,” however, is more than semantics. It raises many important questions regarding society’s duty of care toward and use of animals. For example, can we continue to use animals in medical research and for human consumption and still consider ourselves their guardians? These practices certainly are not in the animals’ best interests, nor do they respect them as separate and unique entities capable of experiencing pain, fear and suffering. What, then, is our duty of care toward animals whom we exploit for human interests?”

Read the bold above, as a dog, the idea that the ASPCA wants to make cows illegal to eat makes me afraid for my life. Although humans can live as healthy vegans, we dogs are carnivores.

ASPCA Position
While the legal status of animals remains to be resolved, the ASPCA recognizes that the cultural and social relationship that humans have with animals clearly transcends that of property, and is better reflected by the term “guardian” than by the term “owner.” The ASPCA therefore advocates the use of the term “guardian.”

The ASPCA is an organization which most people think of as a very mainstream animal protection agency. But, with is current adoption of guardianship language we dogs are seeing that it is really just a PETA or HSUS in friendlier clothes.

I for one, feel much safer knowing that if BSL passes where I live, my humans will have a constitutional basis to fight for my life!