Dogs, dangerous; judicial discretion. (HB655)
Introduced By
Del. Morgan Griffith (R-Salem)
Progress
✓ |
Introduced |
✓ |
Passed Committee |
✓ |
Passed House |
✓ |
Passed Senate |
✓ |
Signed by Governor |
☐ |
Became Law |
Description
Dangerous dogs; judicial discretion. Provides a court with the authority not to declare a dog to be a dangerous dog for good cause, based on the evidence before it. Currently, a court is required to declare a dog dangerous if there is any bite, attack, or injury to a person, even if the bite, attack, or injury is accidental or negligible. Read the Bill »
Outcome
Bill Has Passed
History
| Date | Action |
|---|---|
| 01/08/2008 | Committee |
| 01/08/2008 | Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/09/08 083235520 |
| 01/08/2008 | Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources |
| 01/16/2008 | Reported from Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural Resources (21-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
| 01/17/2008 | Read first time |
| 01/18/2008 | Read second time and engrossed |
| 01/21/2008 | Read third time and passed House BLOCK VOTE (96-Y 0-N) |
| 01/21/2008 | VOTE: BLOCK VOTE PASSAGE (96-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
| 01/21/2008 | Communicated to Senate |
| 01/22/2008 | Constitutional reading dispensed |
| 01/22/2008 | Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources |
| 01/23/2008 | Constitutional reading dispensed |
| 01/23/2008 | Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources |
| 02/18/2008 | Reported from Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources with amendments (15-Y 0-N) |
| 02/19/2008 | Constitutional reading dispensed (39-Y 0-N) (see vote tally) |
| 02/20/2008 | Read third time |
| 02/20/2008 | Reading of amendments waived |
| 02/20/2008 | Committee amendments agreed to |
| 02/20/2008 | Engrossed by Senate as amended |
| 02/20/2008 | Passed Senate with amendments (40-Y 0-N) |
| 02/21/2008 | Placed on Calendar |
| 02/22/2008 | Passed by for the day |
| 02/25/2008 | Senate amendments agreed to by House (95-Y 0-N) |
| 02/25/2008 | VOTE: --- ADOPTION (95-Y 0-N) |
| 02/27/2008 | Enrolled |
| 02/27/2008 | Bill text as passed House and Senate (HB655ER) |
| 02/27/2008 | Signed by Speaker |
| 02/28/2008 | Signed by President |
| 03/05/2008 | G Approved by Governor-Chapter 360 (effective 7/1/08) |
| 03/11/2008 | G Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0360) |
Comments
No dog that has bitten, attacked, or inflicted injury on a person shall be found to be a dangerous dog if the court determines, based on the evidence before it, that the dog is not otherwise dangerous or a threat to the community.
Hello, in the addition to this bill it states "No dog that has bitten, attacked, or inflicted injury on a person" is he trying to say it is ok for a dog to attack a person but not a person attack a person? I know one thing for sure, if a dog bites once he will bite again. Are we willing to give an animal a second chance to commit a violent crime? I really don't understand the justification of this bill to be honest. If my either one of my dogs bites someone or causes harm to them I expect for them to be delt with and not gave another chance to hurt any human what so ever! This bill seems to be putting the value of an animal life over the value of a human life. Would we give a human a second chance?
@Cross Creek: I think it depends on the circumstances. You're right that most dog bites are from vicious dogs, but if a person is harassing the dog, of *course* it's going to bite. That's why a judgment call is required. Self-defense is as valid for dogs as it is for people. :-P
Agreed, Tim. I think this is a fair law. Currently, we penalize dogs for being (shock!) dogs when taunted or provoked.
Paves the way to use common sense
We must use logic and common sense here. If someone comes on my property and harasses me in a way that my dog feels a need to protect me, the dog (nor I) should be punished.
This law is not just about dogs biting people!!! My dog is now deemed dangerous because she & 3 other dogs killed a cat in our neighborhood. In Franklin County there are no leash laws, so dogs can run free. This would never have happened if she had not been with the other dogs, there are cats that live next door to me she doesn't bother, and she would NEVER harm a person. She might try to lick you! I feel horrible that she killed a neighbor's cat, but the punishment is outrageous. We had to get $100,000 insurance, build a pen, post the property, microchip her, take "MUG" shots, & send $100 to Richmond to have her registered as a dangerous dog. It is not even an option to tie her up, if she is out of the pen or house she is suppose to be muzzled!! The judge DOES need to have the option to decide if the dog is a threat to the community. All the judge needed to do in this case is to say to not let the dogs run loose, so they can be part of a "pack". This law DOES need to be changed and I'm fighting to see that it happens.