Pennsylvania must follow other states: Ban chaining dogs outside

[njriverman]

Pa. must follow other states: Ban chaining dogs outside

By CECILIA SACCO FUSCO
February 08, 2008
The latest newsletter I received stated that the case I wrote about in my last column in last Friday's Community News issue involving an abused dog and Blair County's Tammy Grimes, founder of "Dogs Deserve Better," did not go to trial when they thought it would. Instead, they spent last Oct. 29 in court with "motion hearings."



The results of Judge Elizabeth Doyle's rulings on the motion to bar most of the evidence as to why Grimes rescued "Doogie" is a mixed bag. She ruled that Grimes could not use the justification defense, which basically states that she took Doogie to avoid greater harm to another. According to the judge, dogs are considered personal property and therefore not subject to "being another," which, according to this judge, is solely reserved for humans.

I'd like to analyze a play on words here. The definition of "being" is the state or quality of existing — any existing thing — so my definition of a dog is "being" a human animal; so much for the judge's opinion that dogs are not considered "human" or "another." As for the idea of "property," that is considered any object a person can lawfully acquire. Dogs are not property.

When I spoke to Tammy Grimes on Jan. 26, she informed me that she was found guilty in December and awaits sentencing on Feb. 22. For openers, District Attorney Richard Consiglio has prosecuted this case with a zealous, relentless obsession that appears nothing short of a witch hunt. No doubt he and Judge Doyle want to make an example of Miss Grimes when she rescued Doogie from a life of suffering.

However, the fact remains that they have sent a loud message to all dog owners who have their pets chained can abuse their animals without consequence since the Arnold's, who are Doogie's owners, have not been made accountable for their "crime."

When Miss Grimes was arrested, the charge should have been handled with intelligent dignity, recognizing immediately that her actions were that of passion, her benevolent concern for dogs to enjoy quality of life and that her compassion was so intense her mind had to have been void of any intentional breaking of the law and stealing "personal property" in her rescue of the dog.

If the DA and Judge Doyle handled this situation with spiritual integrity, they would have had a private meeting in the judge's chambers and warned Miss Grimes that if she ever steals a dog again, they would press charges against her.

That should have been the end of it, instead of a vendetta that's been doing on for nearly a year in kangaroo court with hearings and motions that are costing those residents tax dollars. I hope dog lovers are hearing what's going on and put into motion their support for Grimes to further her quest to have a law passed to ban chaining and penning. This case is a perfect example of the eyes of justice wearing blindfolds.

The case of Tammy Grimes is definitely a grey area of the law. My question to Consiglio and Doyle is if a dog had saved their lives, what would their opinion be about chained dogs. Those dogs cannot save anyone's life.

A dear friend posed a statement, saying, "I'm sure if Miss Grimes was married to a lawyer, this would never have been a case at all or if she was a lawyer's sister or niece. It's not what we know but who we know." So true. And when it comes to the law as I've witnessed many times, who we know and how wealthy we are regarding breaking the law becomes a gray area in the law by the "powers that be."

As for our beloved dogs, the newsletter stated under the caption, "There Are Laws" that more communities each year are changing the law for dogs — a man's best friend — to give them the quality of life they deserve.

Since 2003, three states have enacted protection for dogs living chained or penned: California, Connecticut and Texas. More are trying to get protection for dogs every year. More than 100 countries and American cities have banned or limited tethering and are enjoying stricter laws for what is acceptable treatment for dogs. Entire countries in Europe ban chaining. I was unaware of this information which upset me because I thought it should have been the U.S., the Free World (which rescues countries in Europe from tyranny) that should be the first to ban chaining. How could these European countries have implemented that "spiritual" law while, aside from the three states, this country has not? It's not only spiritually but politically incorrect as passing these laws involves apolitical process.

Now let's examine the damage Consiglio and Doyle have heaped upon Grimes. Does she deserve having her character compromised when she fills an employment application, having to check "yes" that she has been arrested and accused of a crime? Convicted murders under age 16 have their records sealed and so should records of this "crime" be thrown in File 13 where they belong.

In East Stroudsburg, a handsome German shepherd named "Rommel" is exiled from human contact except for food and water placed in his dirty bowl. He is tied to a tree on a leash perhaps 12 feet, just long enough for him to wander on some huge ragged rocks. Fleas keep him company in the summer and his water is half-frozen in the cold weather.

The dog's owner was told by his wife that she wants nothing to do with his dog, but neither does he or he wouldn't have it tied to a tree. The teller of this story, who is close to me, is anonymous and called the Pennsylvania SPCA four years ago to report this abuse but was told that as long as the dog had a bowl for food and water and a dog house, that was sufficient. I am appalled at this response.

What purpose does it serve dog owners to peek out their windows at their dogs tied to trees? It is cruel and inhuman and I appeal to dog-lovers to contact Gov. Ed Rendell at PO Box 8807 in Harrisburg, 17105-8807. I am sending him these two columns and ask him to intercede for Grimes to dismiss her case and dispose of the records.

As for Rommel, who was shown love by my close friend, he still is tied to a tree. Who will free him and our chained dogs? That's my question to Gov. Rendell. I hope Pennsylvania will join the other three states and countries in Europe and ban the chaining of dogs.

Bushkill resident Cecilia Sacco Fusco is author of "Just Tip Me, Mister," an autobiographical novel of vital interest to all waitresses, waiters, bartenders, barmaids, employees and John Q. Public.


--------------------

I had a neighbor in Penns Grove who left their dog chained in a small area 365 days 24/7.

SAD and ANNOYING.

[PennJersey]

Every state should at least limit how long a dog can be chained outside. It is a shame how some people leave them out all the time with no human interaction.

Henry

[bad1500]

i say to hell with anyone who harms a puppy and to hell with puppy farms these people should jump off a bridge

[voiceoreason]

I have often heard that we need a certificate when we're born and a certificate when we die, we need a license to drive a car, and a passport to go abroad, but we don't need a license or certifcate to have a baby! Nor apparantly own a dog.

The worst part of the problem is that many people don't realize what they are doing, and they learn the behavior of tying a dog to a tree 24/7 from others, usually parents or other family members, who have been doing it for years.

At least you need a license to own a dog.

As far as tying it up, that is reasonable for short periods of time, especially if you live along a busy road or highway. The problem is how do you police the long term offenders?

[Pineygirl]

The only time I would tie up a dog is if we were in a city and I had to tie him up while I went into a store.
Other than that, if he needed to be tied up to prevent him from escaping my property, I wouldn't get a dog until I could afford a proper fence.
To me, any pet is a lifetime adoption and should be taken almost as seriously. They depend on us for everything, so anything that happens to them is our fault.

[wickedstorm]

What is the point of having a dog if all you are going to do it chain it up outside? Maybe these people that do this should be chained to a tree for a week, and let them see how it feels. Their food should be given to them the same way - in a dirty bowl, so what if bugs are crawling all over the food?

[voiceoreason]

Originally Posted by Pineygirl

The only time I would tie up a dog is if we were in a city and I had to tie him up while I went into a store.
Other than that, if he needed to be tied up to prevent him from escaping my property, I wouldn't get a dog until I could afford a proper fence.
To me, any pet is a lifetime adoption and should be taken almost as seriously. They depend on us for everything, so anything that happens to them is our fault.

I think the issue is more along having a fence and having a dog that digs and can get under the fence. I agree that chaining a dog is inhumane, but I can see times when it is in everyone's best interest. How about the poor dogs that are chained outside in cold, windy weather? I agree it is horrible for them to remain outside.

[Pineygirl]

The owners need to ask around and find out how to stop the digging. It can be stopped. Usually, the dog outgrows it.

I never understood dogs that are kept outside all day and all night, anyway. They're pets. I always thought they were family members, as our dogs have always been. To leave them outside is unthinkable to me, but what do I know?

[wickedstorm]

Originally Posted by voiceoreason

I agree that chaining a dog is inhumane, but I can see times when it is in everyone's best interest.

How, exactly, is it "in everyone's best interest" to keep a dog outside 24/7? It is definitely not in the best interst of the animal, and if the people in the house do not want an animal around, why did they get one? These people need to be chained outside, then let's see if they still think there is nothing inhumane about it.

[PennJersey]

Originally Posted by wickedstorm

It is definitely not in the best interst of the animal, and if the people in the house do not want an animal around, why did they get one?

They probably got if for the kids who forgot about it in a week.

Henry