Contact Us

Home to Phoenix

Views and News

MM-0009

Educate - not Legislate: Ownership vs Guardianship

By Jan Cooper

"It is time we demand an end to the misguided and abusive concept of animal ownership. The first step on the long, but just, road would be ending the concept of pet ownership."~ Elliot Katz, President, In Defense of Animals, In Defense of Animals, Spring 1997.

Well, now that you have read what this organizational goal is, and, by the way all of the other animal rights organizations have this very same agenda on their list of goals, how do you think they are planning on accomplishing this? You say I am just causing undue alarm we don't have to worry, that will never happen here?

Well folks, they have already begun their long arduous trip and the frightening part of that trip is many are helping and supporting them, maybe even some of you are among the supporters.

Nonsense, no one is going to take my dogs away! You say.

We all care about the welfare of animals, particularly our dogs, be they top show, working or the finest of couch potatoes. But, my friends, because of our caring for our canine friends and families many of us have been duped into helping to take that first step into losing our right, yes, our very right to own any dog.

Ever hear the term guardianship in conjunction with owning a dog? Are you aware that two areas in this land of the free have interchanged the term guardianship with ownership.

So, whats the big deal? You ask. Our dogs need to be loved and protected and if an owner is found abusing or mistreating a dog, the appropriate agency should be able to step in and confiscate the dog. This is only a way to assure that folks care properly for their dog.

Well, That all sounds good, but you are 100% wrong! The sole purpose and ultimate goal of this legislation is to deny our right to own a dog. Sounds rather far-fetched, but true. This is the first vessel to carry out the above stated plan.

"Guardianship legislation violates the United States Constitution, in Sentell v New Orleans & Carrollton R.R., 166 U.S. 698 (1897) its ruled that dogs are private property. Guardianship legislation is supported by In Defense of Animals (IDA) and other animal rights organizations. IDAs intent is to end the concept of pet ownership and the guardianship legislation is the first step, it clearly infringes on the right of US citizens and someday soon this type of legislation will be constitutionally challenged. Its clear from the text of the guardian legislation that it takes away ownership rights and any legislative body responsible for passing this type of law is responsible for the beginning to the end of domestic pet ownership."~ American Canine Foundation, May 2003

Our forefathers have given us specific rights via the U.S. Constitution. We and our personal properties have protection and we are afforded due process before any confiscation can be enforced against us.

The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution limits the power of legislatures to regulate certain private property. The Fourteenth Amendment provides that no state shall deprive any person of property without due process of law, or deny any person the equal protection of the law, or deny any person the equal protection from the law. If an ordinance encourages arbitrary and erratic law enforcement, or if it places unlimited discretion in the hands of police, the law will unconstitutionally violate due process.

It is this same equal protection clause of the United States constitution that is being violated by all breed specific legislation in the country, but that is another article.

Once the term guardian or guardianship replaces the term owner or ownership of our dogs, we lose our Constitutional rights. It is as simple as that. We will have no legal recourse under the law to protect our dogs from being confiscated based on the possible whim of another.

"Let us allow the dog to disappear from our brick and concrete jungles from our firesides, from the leather nooses and chains by which we enslave it."~ John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of a Changing Ethic, PETA, 1982, p.15.

We have permitted our right to be legislated away in San Francisco, California and Long Island, New York, under the guise of caring about the welfare of dogs. The legislation has been sugar-coated by long-visioned radicals and we have been short-sited into going along with it.

What would you do if you lived in either of the above areas and a well-meaning neighbor convinces the authorities at large that because you crated your dog during the day you were being cruel? Well, dear friends, good luck in court because you are merely the guardian of that dog and therefore you may not be afforded due process under the law governing private property as stated in the United States Constitution. The courts may make a decision that the dog would be better off in another home because you were not a good guardian. This is the ultimate goal of the idiots that think every animal should be free and we should all live in a great big symbiotic society.

"The bottom line is that people dont have he right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats. If people want toys they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship they should seek it with their own kind."~ Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, Animals, May/June 1993

The Bible states that we shall have dominion over all animals. The dictionary defines dominion as ruling power, authority, or control. We as owners should maintain our dominion and ownership over our dogs. There are laws/ordinances in existence across the country that protect dogs and pets so we should insist that they are enforced rather than be titillated into accepting the hidden agenda of the animal rightists.

The United States Constitution offers protection to guardians BUT it relates to guardians of people ONLY! There are NO protective measures in place for us once we are deemed mere guardians over our dogs.

It is time to wake up and smell the coffee people, it is time to start paying attention to these unfortunately welcomed subtle changes to any ordinance or statute where you live, your dogs life may depend on it.

(note: San Francisco and Long Island have completed the first step by interchanging the terms guardian, guardianship with owner and ownership, the next step is to remove the words owner and ownership.)