Huh.

[draggonlaady]

I am... shocked. I saw this headline, and went to the article expecting it to be yet another breed-specific ban proposal somewhere. In case you don't recall, I am flatly opposed to breed-specific dog bans. If you want reasoning behind that, feel free to ask. Instead, the ban is actually aimed at sexually intact dogs, and felon owners. Shockingly enough, in a recent study in Oregon of dog bite risk factors, the single strongest association with bite risk was being sexually intact--breed type didn't even make the list until number 4 or 5. Second on the list after sexual status? Average income of the neighborhood; the lower the income, the higher the bite risk. I'm a bit uncertain on the 20# limit--I'd as soon there was no weight limit and it applied to all dogs of all breeds, since in my experience I'm much more likely to be bitten by a Chihuahua than a Great Pyrenees, but I can see the point in different damage potentials.

Watsonville City Council put more teeth in vicious dog ordinance
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/localnews/ci_14879792

Also, what color crack do you suppose this gent is smoking? What does this even MEAN?

"We have a tendency to overreact," (Councilman Greg) Caput said. "I do want to do something. ... A Christmas turkey can weigh 20 pounds or more so I have a problem with that."