News 3 Now ·  Desktop WX ·  Contact ·  Site Map
Home  ·   News  ·   Weather  ·   Sports  ·   Features  ·   Business  ·   Morning Show  ·   The Buzz  ·   Eye on You (Your Photos & Videos)  ·   KBTX Cares
At the Movies · Eat.Stay.Play. · Contest · Calendar · Lottery · Blogs · Inside KBTX · Job Search · Obituaries · CW Texas · CBS · Digital TV · Gas Prices
SpeakOut Poll
There are currently no active polls at this time.
Click here to view other polls on our site and past poll results.
Community Links
Experts Question Pit Bull Ban's Legality Save Email Print
Posted: 9:51 PM Feb 18, 2008
Last Updated: 10:17 AM Feb 19, 2008
Reporter: Steve Fullhart
Email Address: fullhart@kbtx.com

A | A | A

Is the new ordinance in Madisonville banning pit bulls illegal? Some legal experts say yes.

In the days following KBTX's report on the ordinance's passing last week, hundreds of comments have come to KBTX.com from across the country and around the world, many of them claiming the ordinance is illegal.

According to Chapter 822.047 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, additional rules regarding dangerous dogs can be enacted by counties or cities if those requirements or restrictions "are not specific to one breed or several breeds of dogs."

Section 2 of the Madisonville ordinance enacted last week states, "it shall be unlawful to keep, harbor, own, or in any way possess a pit bull dog within the corporate limits of Madisonville."

Click on the link below this story to read the Madisonville ordinance in its entirety, along with the Texas Health and Safety Code.

"I have not seen, in Texas, anybody outright ban a breed, like pit bulls, because there's a state law against it, so this is probably marking new territory," said Shane Phelps, who serves as Brazos Animal Shelter president, and has been involved with numerous legal cases involving animals as a prosecutor.

"It's the same as you can't do a class of people," added Jay Sabatucci, the director of the Texas office for the Humane Society of the United States. "You can't do a class of breed. There's going to be too many exceptions to the rule. They're basically throwing out the baby with the bathwater."

The city attorney for Madisonville, John Bankhead, declined an on-camera opportunity to discuss the ordinance, though he did note that it is two-fold. Article 1 of the document concerns pit bulls. Article 2 regulates dangerous dogs.

Bankhead said they are fully aware of the health and safety code, and that it's time for change to it.


Related Links
More Stories
Suspended Bryan Police Officer Will Not Face Charges

Crime Stoppers Seeks Pair of Fugitives

Two Women Charged in Magnolia Drug Bust

Katy Man Pleads Not Guilty to Killing Two Burleson County Men

Noey Turns Himself In, Charged with Providing Alcohol to Minors

Prairie View A&M Professor Comments on "Noose" Debate

Parents Weigh in on Bryan Truancy Pilot Program

Accident Slows Traffic on Highway 6 at OSR

Post Your Comments
First Name:
Location:
Enter Comments: characters left
Email (optional):
Email will not be displayed on site. For station contact purpose only.
Read Comments
Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: Taylor Location: San Marcos on Aug 27, 2008 at 02:24 PM
So I want to know of all theservice dogs last year, what were the number of pit bulls that were in the "top 25". What was the first service dog? What dogs were bred NOT to be human aggressive? The data out there for dog bites and attacks is, in scientific terms, a horribly skewed and woefully small. There have been good studies on bite pressure and power, and pit bulls are low on that list. So lets combine some facts; pit bulls do NOT have the strongest bite, and pit bulls were bred NOT to be human aggressive. To summerize, we learned that the majority of the top service dogs in the US are pit bulls. We learned that pit bulls do NOT have the strongest bite. And finally we learned that human aggressive pit bulls were culled to create a human docile breed.

Posted by: kelly Location: gladewater texas on Jul 6, 2008 at 11:26 PM
Kim from Austin that is just stupid I have pitbulls and i am a proud owner of the breed and my pitbulls are not aggresive and they do not try to fight other animals i also have smaller dogs that sleep in the same bed with my pits and they do not fight they even share food bowls i also have a 6 yr old son around them and they have never tried to hurt him so before you open your mouth again to bad mouth the breed you might want to own one cause no matter what a so called expert says you will not know unless you own one oh by the way not only do i own the breed i was also attacked by one when i was young but i will tell you the only reason the dog attacked was because how he was raised so once again it was stupid viscious humans not dogs as for my fellow pitbull supporters if you want to know more about me you can e-mail me @ Redbonesbaby2008@aol.com we need to find a way to save this breed and any other dogs from the stupidity of humans

Posted by: TJ Location: Texas on Jun 29, 2008 at 02:34 AM
Another example of how the media has blown something else out of proportion. I grew up with the breed and currently have a pit bull. I also have a 9 year old and 13 month old and my pit adores them. For all those that want the breed banned do your research. Did you know that most of the alleged "pit bull" attacks weren't pit bulls at all? I'm tired of all the ignorant people that think banning this breed or any breed for that matter is the best solution. Punish the low life's that have attributed to the undeserved reputation, not the breed itself. I'm glad my state is smart enough to have have the breed specific legislations.

Posted by: Victoria Location: Dallas on May 15, 2008 at 07:29 PM
I used to feel the same way about Pitt Bulls. The media had me convinced that they were vicious baby killing dogs. Then our friends who rescue pits convinced us to meet one they had available. We have since adopted her and she is the sweetest, most loving dog I have ever seen. She just wants to cuddle and lick you. She is a better dog in obeying and much sweeter even than my golden. You have to admit that most of the places you see these attacks seem to be low income or questionable owners or chained in the yard for most of their lives. Do people forget that these are “animals”? If you do not domesticate them they are not going to know that a child is not a toy or food. I truly feel that as long as the dog is socialized, trained and supervised, you will have no problems. I would not let my hyper 1 year old golden anywhere near a young child for fear he would trample her with excitement. What do they think is going to happen if they let two unsocialized pits around a two year old?!

Posted by: emily Location: england on Apr 5, 2008 at 07:54 PM
They should be banned horrible dog, nearly killed my dog. HORRIBLE DOGS

Posted by: lisa Location: oregon on Mar 28, 2008 at 10:42 AM
I have a pit that is a big baby banning any breed is just wrong its the owners not the breed treat any animal mean and they will become mean,i think part of it is the medias fault,they seem to only publish pit bull attacks,what about all the other breed that attack,should we ban those too?

Posted by: Sarah Kelley Location: cheecktowaga, NY on Mar 26, 2008 at 12:06 PM
If you have never owned a Pit Bull you have no right to say anything.My Pit Bull is big baby. He is very playfull with children and a very loyal compaion. So before you go on thinking that Pit Bulls are own one before you open your mouth again and speak bad of them.

Posted by: Anita Location: Marina del Rey, CA on Mar 14, 2008 at 02:36 AM
My heart is broken, as my on-leash 8 year old Yorkshire Terrier was just killed by an off-leash Pit Bull at Mothers Beach on 02/25/08.

Posted by: Brent Location: College Station, TX on Feb 25, 2008 at 06:42 PM
My family has raised pitbulls for almost 30 years; they are like any other breed of dog in that they require RESPONSIBLE ownership. I seriously believe that the 'city' of Madisonville did this for publicity and it will not last. First and foremost it is unconstitutional (and therfore illegal) at both state and national levels. Secondly, in reading the stipulations of the so called ordinance it seems cruel to subject those dogs allowed to be kept by permit to the confinement of a kennel/pen or restraints at all times. Can you say PETA? Their reason for this is that the tenacity of pitbulls incline them to chase running children, fight to the death, and attack unprovoked without warning. 1) All dogs chase running things until TAUGHT not to do so. 2) The temperment of a fighting dog is to respect the hand that manages it-- human and animal aggression are often not closely associated and again are TAUGHT. 3) Bull terriers and Amstaffs, and staff bullies are not fighters, but hunters.

Posted by: Laura Location: Bryan on Feb 23, 2008 at 11:58 AM
How does the city of Madisonville expect its citizens to follow this ridiculous ordinance when it doesn't even follow state law? I don't have much respect for people who have the "do as I say, not as I do" philosophy. I don't understand how the citizens can put up with that! If I lived there and thank God I don't, I wouldn't abide by the ordinance. I think To Kim from Austin:Did you check out the entire website of realpitbull.com? You forgot to mention that the site owner is a LOVER & PROPONENT of the pitbull and is NOT FOR BSL! She says it doesn't work. I believe Mary Harwelik, the site owner is a credible expert since she has worked with them for so long.

Posted by: Amber Location: Eldridge on Feb 20, 2008 at 03:33 PM
I am a proud pitbull owner, and I always thought it was illegal to ban any breed of dog in texas... If they want to ban dogs, why not ban people?? I for one am not at all fond of Aggies, but thats another story... I have 3 and they are nice and seeet as can be, and for all that are smart, you know that it is how the OWNER raises their dog, not in how the dog was taught... The OWNER is responsible for how their dogs are, and I just dont think it is right to take someones right to own a pit way from them, based on peoples stupid opinions of pits...

Posted by: Anonymous on Feb 20, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Bob said:"sorry that you dont live in madisonville or know the full story on the ordinace not law the council passed. it is out of the texas heath and safty code subchapter d.dangerous dogs sec.822.041. you can own a pitt bull you have to register it and keep confined. the word banned was never used."...Talk about Clintonizing. You're right that the WORD ban was never used; Section 2 of the ordinance only states, "it shall be unlawful to keep, harbor, own, or in any way possess a pit bull dog within the corporate limits of Madisonville." while those who ALREADY own them today can keep them (but not their puppies) if they "register it and keep it confined." Now if the City council wants to make this legal, all they have to do is replace "Pit Bull" with "dog over 40 lbs" and it would be fair and reasonable...assuming that they survived the recall election that the pet owners affected would immediatly mount.

Posted by: william Location: huntsville texas on Feb 20, 2008 at 12:26 PM
should we chain the pit bull with its owner???

Posted by: jeff Location: houston on Feb 20, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Bob , Because it doesn't say "ban " it is not legal . Read 822.047 again and tell us what part of that is consusing Kim , I have links saved to every "pit bull" site on the web . ..but thanks anyway . BTW , we are on the same side I believe , so what's the problem ? There is no sugar coating . These are DOGS . PERIOD .They are no more "game " than a Jack Russell or Scottish Terrier , only bigger . BTW , I saw one comment where there have been no incidents even reported in Madisonville . True ? I watch news reports from all over the US everyday for any story mentioning "dog bites " and have seen nothing about Madisonville that I recall .

Posted by: Laura Location: N. Texas on Feb 20, 2008 at 10:30 AM
How does passing a law that is obviously -against- state law encourage people to obey the law? And yes, the Madisonville ordinance -is- illegal because state law covers "requirements and restrictions" as well as outright bans. Other cities in Texas have discussed restrictions based on breed or even size, and decided against it because of the state law. They decided, wisely, to go after irresponsible owners instead. The breed-specific portion of the law doesn't do anything to stop other breeds from getting out of their yards and biting people. It does not pay for one low-cost spay or neuter surgery. It doesn't pay for one man-hour of animal control officer time or training. This does not just affect "Pit Bull" owners. Your breed could be next. All dogs over, for instance, 40 lbs. may be next. Do you want the government micromanaging like this or do you want them to enforce reasonable and effective laws?

Posted by: Gaye Location: Austin on Feb 20, 2008 at 09:35 AM
How about better law enforcement on the THUGS who fight this wonderfully loyal and loving breed. My Pit has been attacked 4 different times twice by Labs and twice by Healers. I guess those are not vicious breeds because they ripped my Pit Bull a new one??? I have had 3 Pits in mine dog caring lifetime and all have been the most loving, to everyone, bed hogging, loyal, and affectionate dogs I have ever had. If it weren't for the greedy inhumane people who train them for fighting we wouldn't be having this issue. How about going after them and help save this breed. Step up!

Posted by: bob Location: madisonville tx on Feb 20, 2008 at 07:23 AM
sorry that you dont live in madisonville or know the full story on the ordinace not law the council passed. it is out of the texas heath and safty code subchapter d.dangerous dogs sec.822.041. you can own a pitt bull you have to register it and keep confined. the word banned was never used.

Posted by: John Location: College Station on Feb 20, 2008 at 05:40 AM
"Don't sugar coat the breed." And don't demonize it by implying that the breed is somehow unique. All dogs will kill prey and spare their packmates. The training is what teaches them who or what to regard as either. The PB-Lab cross I had for several years was hell on chickens (which was why he lived with me rather than on my sister's farm), but on cold mornings we frequently found the neighbor's cat sleeping on top of him in his doghouse. One was prey, the other a member of his pack.

Posted by: cedrick Location: normangee on Feb 19, 2008 at 09:42 PM
i live a few miles from this town and own serveral pitbulls and have family and friends in madisonville that own pitbulls. they want to ban a breed that has no reported attacks on animals or people. ive lived here all my life and never heard of one attack that is credited to a pitbull or really any dog. look at all the info provide in this case have they said anything about any attacks no. not only is it illegal its stupid. requiring someone to have a 100,000 dollars insurance because of a dog when there have been no attacks is crazy i would like to see what attacks that are on record in this town that warrants this course to ban pitbulls. the news covered this story but can we get a report of the dangerous and vicous attacks and dog fights in madisonville. there are none, ive had pitbulls for a least ten years and never had a problem. i dont know of anyone in madisonville that had any problems. if u care for your dog and its breed speak up not just pitbull owners anyone.

Posted by: Dale Location: Texas on Feb 19, 2008 at 08:08 PM
Way to go Kim. Finally, someone with the facts and not just the emotion.

Posted by: Cynthia Location: Bryan on Feb 19, 2008 at 08:07 PM
Kim from Austin: Thank you!!

Posted by: Kim Location: Austin on Feb 19, 2008 at 05:43 PM
Jeff, you should take note of the source of the quote I provided, realpitbull.com and while you are at it check out workingpitbull.com Unlike you, these sites are written by pit bull experts. Don't sugar coat the breed.

Posted by: Nikki Location: Bryan on Feb 19, 2008 at 02:56 PM
I am a Pit Bull lover and former owner of one. I do NOT support the City of Madisonville's "solution" to their problem. The Pit Bull is one of the most loyal breeds I have ever encountered. That is also it's downfall. There are too many of the wrong people with these dogs. They ARE a product of their environment. They do anything they can to please their owner and when their owner is a low-life, you know what happens. I wouldn't be against some kind of license to be a Pit Bull owner - to prove you are responsible. It would probably be the only way to clean up the Pit Bulls bad image.

Posted by: Michelle Location: College Station on Feb 19, 2008 at 02:36 PM
I agree that it is ignorance that lets a law such as this get passed. Chows are more aggressive dogs than pitbuills for gosh sakes. Its not fair to make these dogs suffer due to the irresponsibilty of their owners. My pit thinks she is a 10lb yorkie, I would die if someone said that just because of her breed she cannot be mine. I cannot wait to see the out come of this ridiculousness.

Posted by: Kristi Location: Bryan, TX on Feb 19, 2008 at 02:10 PM
This "pit bull" ban is obviously illegal. I am the owner of a 2 yr. old pit bull. I have raised him since he was a puppy, he's been raised around my children and other dogs and never has he acted out in anger. Instead of trying to "kill" this beautiful breed of dog they need to find the owners who are fighting these beautiful animals and punish them. I refuse to allow anyone to come into my home and take my dog. He is a part of our family, like one of my kids and I will stand up and fight for him just as I would for them!!! For those of us who own these incredible creatures its time now to fight back against these horrible rumors, against these people who are trying to take them from us and against any law that says we have to give up a part of our family!!!

Posted by: Mary Location: Texas on Feb 19, 2008 at 01:46 PM
"Article 1 of the document concerns pit bulls. Article 2 regulates dangerous dogs." The next rational question to ask here is If they are classing "Pit Bulls" as dangerous and dangerous dogs are addressed in Article 2 why would you Need Article 1? Seems to me they could stop a lot of legal hassles & confusion by just enacting & enforcing a Dangerous Dog law which included leash laws, along with proper containment and care guidelines. Time to make all animal owners Responsible owners.

Posted by: john Location: College Station on Feb 19, 2008 at 01:44 PM
"Environmental factors can contribute to a dog's aggression towards other animals: for instance lack of socialization and training, placing the dog in situations in which he is allowed to fight or engage in aggressive behavior towards other dogs, and so on. However, the actual willingness and ability to fight is genetic, and is not "trained" into the animal." A half truth; ALL breeds of dog from rat terrier to great dane have an instinct to attack and kill prey, which must be socialized out of them before they are acceptable companions, but they also have an instinct to "pack" with others of their own kind to become more efficient hunters, and fighting dogs (of any breed) must be trained to overcome this instinct before they will kill other similar sized dogs rather than quit when the other surrenders.

Posted by: jeff Location: Houston on Feb 19, 2008 at 01:06 PM
Kim , There is no "fighting gene" any more than there is a" mean gene ". "Pit bull" temperament is no different than any other terrier . Dogs , strange dogs , any dog ,especially those put in a "pit" to face another strange dog FIGHT .BTW , do you really believe all the garbage on websites ?

Posted by: Mark Location: GladNotInMadisonVille, USA on Feb 19, 2008 at 01:00 PM
The lawyer for this town is trying to make a buck. He makes more cash if the city gets sued. If I were a citizen of Madisonville I would be up in arms that this terrible man is using the city to enrich himself. He could have had a law that applies to all dogs that was effective. Instead he created one he admits freely was illegal, just so he could cash in defending it in court.

Posted by: Jackie Location: San Marcos on Feb 19, 2008 at 11:28 AM
Instead of saying no one in town can have a pit bull because one owned by an irresponsible person might attack why doesn't someone try holding the owners accountable for their dog's behavior.

Posted by: Dawn Location: TX on Feb 19, 2008 at 11:28 AM
What other breed with break stick instructions? As a matter of fact, those same instructions say never to use a break stick on a non-fighting breed.

Posted by: jeff Location: houston on Feb 19, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Hey , city officials . Have you read the news lately ? See what the mayor in Lubbock is doing about roaming dogs that bite . First , he admits breed specific laws are illegal . Secondly , he notes (he apparently uses his head for something besides a hat rack) that it's not about any type of dog , but IRRESPONSIBLE OWNERS . Third , they are implementing measures to ensure people are accountable for making sure all their pets are on their own property , hence , no more problem . Hm? Maybe Mayor Miller can move to Madisonville and seek election there .....

Posted by: Kim Location: Austin on Feb 19, 2008 at 11:06 AM
http://www.realpitbull.com/fight.html Myth: Pit Bulls only fight because they have been trained to do so. Fact: Pit Bulls are genetically predisposed to aggression towards other animals. The Pit Bull has been breed over the course of many generations of selective breeding for heightened fight and prey drives. This means they are born with the aggression necessary for fighting in the pit, and they fight because of a genetic impusle to do so, not because they have been "trained" to be aggressive. Tradtionally, the only "training" a Pit Bull goes through in preperation for the pit has to do with physical conditionting, namely running. Environmental factors can contribute to a dog's aggression towards other animals: for instance lack of socialization and training, placing the dog in situations in which he is allowed to fight or engage in aggressive behavior towards other dogs, and so on. However, the actual willingness and ability to fight is genetic, and is not "trained" into the animal.

Posted by: dave Location: college station on Feb 19, 2008 at 10:54 AM
if we can ban dangerous dogs, why not ban "breeds" of "dangerous people"? Yes...this is a stupid idea backed by ignorance and superstition on the part of Madisonville.

Posted by: BN Location: Bryan on Feb 19, 2008 at 10:35 AM
If you think that pits are any more dangerous than any other large dog, then you need to speak to the lady in France who had the first face transplant because her lab ripped off her face or speak to the family members of a lady in Friendswood who was killed by a black mouth cur. Any dog can be made dangerous but pits have been sensationalized in the news. To think otherwise is like sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the truth of the matter. Breed bans do not work and will not work.

Posted by: Jason Location: Bryan on Feb 19, 2008 at 10:33 AM
Any breed could be dangerous in the wrong hands. These dogs are stout, strong dogs and that makes them attractive to cowards who like to fight them. If german sheppards, dob pinchers, collies, or any other breed was a physically gifted as the pit bull, people would use them to fight too. My brother has a pit and so does another friend of mine, those dogs are the biggest crybabys I have ever seen. It all depends on who handles and cares for the dog. Any dog would be dangerous if it is constantly beaten, starved and mistreated by humans. Get a grip on reality and focus on the problems with the people in the world before we worry about trivial issues like dog breeds. How about the people starving to death or all the people without health care with termilal illnesses. America is sliding futher and futher downhill everytime we waste resources on pointless biased opinion-based laws or ordinances.

Posted by: Barbara Location: Bryan on Feb 19, 2008 at 10:08 AM
THIS IS LUDICROUS!!!!! DOGS ACT HOW YOU TEACH THEM-MADISONVILLE IS CRAZY- I WOULD NOT GO FOR THAT- THERE IS NO WAY I WOULD GET RID OF MY DOG OR PAY THE CITY TO KEEP IT WHEN OTHER DOGS DONT ABIDE BY THE SAME PRINCIPLES!!!!

Posted by: jc Location: PA on Feb 19, 2008 at 09:57 AM
It is absolutely rediculous to target a single breed of dog. Dogs are trainable and their disposition reflects their treatment and training. You can make any dog mean and if you eliminate one breed, the irresponsible dog owners will do the same thing with another breed.

Posted by: jeff Location: houston on Feb 19, 2008 at 09:56 AM
If Mr. Bankhead is who the city is relying on for legal advice ....good luck . Because part of the ordinance addresses dangerous dogs and another addresses a "breed " , doesn't mean the later is any less illegal . As soon as anyone contacts a lawyer and challenges this statute , it will be stricken under state law . Good , that day can't come soon enough ....

Posted by: john Location: College Station on Feb 19, 2008 at 09:45 AM
Jane: Do you really believe that PBs are more dangerous than Dobes or Rotts or Heelers? Banning the BREED does no good; the morons who train these dogs as JYDs just sell of them to other morons out of town and pick out some other breed to terrorize the neighorhood with, while a lot of really good companion animals get "euthanized" for no reason because their owners wont consider doing the same. Make the owners of ALL dogs responsible for any attacks and you might do some good.

Posted by: Carrie Location: raleigh, nc on Feb 19, 2008 at 09:36 AM
I think banning pit bull dogs will only make the problem worse. It's crazy. Here's something not everyone knows: Pit Bull's rank among the highest on the American Temperment Tests. They rate higher than Australian Shepards! Imagine that! I have two beautiful Pit Bulls and out of all the dogs I have owned they are the most loyal and loving. Say no to BSL! Punish the deed, not the breed!

Posted by: Jane Location: Bryan on Feb 19, 2008 at 08:21 AM
Kudos to Madisonville, I wish Bryan would follow suit. Afer someone is killed or hurt by these dangerous dogs, no one is punished for this crime. The only outcome is that the dog is euthanize and this is done in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy. What about the victim.

Posted by: Paul Location: Bryan on Feb 19, 2008 at 01:06 AM
Pit bulls dangerous? Uh, not really: there's one asleep at the foot of my bed right now. Dogs and people aren't born mean. Somebody has to make them that way.

KBTX.com Video Player
AP Video
Digital TV