Marty
07-07-2005, 07:58 PM
Denver ,CO -- Aurora leaders took their first step toward making their city the second-largest in the metro area to ban pit bulls within its borders.
The city council's subcommittee on code enforcement directed staff members Wednesday to begin drafting a ban that it will review on Aug. 9.
At that time, the subcommittee - made up of three council members - will decide whether they should suggest banning the breed to the council.
The development comes two months after Denver began enforcing its ban after a yearlong battle with the state over a law that prevented municipalities from outlawing pit bulls.
It also comes amid a rise in the number of pit bulls at the city's animal shelter - a possible result of owners moving their pets from Denver to Aurora to avoid Denver's death penalty.
Between March and May, the number of pit bulls at the shelter grew more than threefold, increasing from 21 to 73, statistics show.
Subcommittee members Councilman Bob Fitzgerald and Councilwoman Nadine Caldwell support proposing a ban to the council as a matter of safety.
"This dog is like an Uzi . . . and I think we need to get rid of them in Aurora," said Fitzgerald, who has received phone calls from several concerned constituents about the dogs.
During the meeting, subcommittee members showed a graphic, 15-minute news documentary about pit bulls that made most of the two dozen people in attendance squirm.
The documentary showed the dog as caring in the right hands, but as dangerous when in the hands of people who use them for ill will, such as dogfights.
A year ago, Caldwell didn't know much about the breed - until a neighbor brought a pit bull home and put it in his backyard.
Each time Caldwell would go to her own backyard, the dog would ram itself against the six-foot-tall wooden fence that divides the properties.
"I have a total different outlook on pit bulls," said Caldwell, who also said she now crosses the street when she sees a pit bull approaching.
The city currently enforces a nearly year-old vicious animal law by doling out fines of at least $150 to owners of pets that may be dangerous, including those that bite, lunge or snap at others.
Under the law, the animals also must get a microchip inserted beneath their skin for monitoring purposes.
Fitzgerald, however, doesn't believe the law is enough when it comes to keeping the city's residents safe from the the breed.
Still, people such as Sonya Dias, a pit bull owner who is fighting Denver's ban, argue that the breed isn't inherently dangerous.
"People make pit bulls dangerous," said Dias, who attended the discussion on Wednesday and plans to return next month to talk against the proposed ban.
The city council's subcommittee on code enforcement directed staff members Wednesday to begin drafting a ban that it will review on Aug. 9.
At that time, the subcommittee - made up of three council members - will decide whether they should suggest banning the breed to the council.
The development comes two months after Denver began enforcing its ban after a yearlong battle with the state over a law that prevented municipalities from outlawing pit bulls.
It also comes amid a rise in the number of pit bulls at the city's animal shelter - a possible result of owners moving their pets from Denver to Aurora to avoid Denver's death penalty.
Between March and May, the number of pit bulls at the shelter grew more than threefold, increasing from 21 to 73, statistics show.
Subcommittee members Councilman Bob Fitzgerald and Councilwoman Nadine Caldwell support proposing a ban to the council as a matter of safety.
"This dog is like an Uzi . . . and I think we need to get rid of them in Aurora," said Fitzgerald, who has received phone calls from several concerned constituents about the dogs.
During the meeting, subcommittee members showed a graphic, 15-minute news documentary about pit bulls that made most of the two dozen people in attendance squirm.
The documentary showed the dog as caring in the right hands, but as dangerous when in the hands of people who use them for ill will, such as dogfights.
A year ago, Caldwell didn't know much about the breed - until a neighbor brought a pit bull home and put it in his backyard.
Each time Caldwell would go to her own backyard, the dog would ram itself against the six-foot-tall wooden fence that divides the properties.
"I have a total different outlook on pit bulls," said Caldwell, who also said she now crosses the street when she sees a pit bull approaching.
The city currently enforces a nearly year-old vicious animal law by doling out fines of at least $150 to owners of pets that may be dangerous, including those that bite, lunge or snap at others.
Under the law, the animals also must get a microchip inserted beneath their skin for monitoring purposes.
Fitzgerald, however, doesn't believe the law is enough when it comes to keeping the city's residents safe from the the breed.
Still, people such as Sonya Dias, a pit bull owner who is fighting Denver's ban, argue that the breed isn't inherently dangerous.
"People make pit bulls dangerous," said Dias, who attended the discussion on Wednesday and plans to return next month to talk against the proposed ban.