Thursday, October 16, 2008

Donate to
Please donate to support our work is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »

posted by   |  permalink  |  7 comments  | email  |icon blog rss  |icon comment rss 


Anonymous Anonymous  |  10/16/2008 3:55 PM  |  Flag  
Huh...$100K coverage for my two little fluffers is free on my homeowners insurance. Of course they have to be properly declared...unlike this Pit nutter had neglected to do.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  10/17/2008 2:59 AM  |  Flag  
Responsible dog ownership should include insuring them...This goes for all breeds.

Even a nervous little fluffer can cause high medical bills with a "golden BB" bite to the face of a kid.

To own a large aggressive breed without insurance is crazy.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  10/17/2008 9:16 AM  |  Flag  
The taxpayer is picking up the tab for some of these dog bite injuries, so it is in the interest of states to require solid liability insurance for these problem breeds.

These injuries also add to increases in the cost of health insurance.

For too long these pit people have been getting other people to pay the bills for them.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  10/17/2008 1:52 PM  |  Flag  
This STUPID, stupid pit bull owner in the article had NO CLUE that her if her cute, face licking pit bull had torn the face off of her niece that her insurance would have been CANCELED immediately and her niece would have NO route to recourse. It is for the purposes of these VERY STUPID, stupid pit bull owners that the Omaha law of mandatory liability insurance is needed. At the VERY LEAST, it teaches these very STUPID (and so called "responsible") pit bull owners that it ain't PEANUTS to insure these dogs and in fact, MOST companies will not insure at all.

How many STUPID and "RESPONSIBLE" pit bull owners have home owners insurance and HAVE NOT TOLD their insurance company that they own a pit bull? By not declaring this information they have committed fraud and SCREWED a future victim. Thankfully, because of the new Omaha law, this stupid, STUPID pit bull owner in the article now has and INKLING of an understanding AND has legal coverage in case her cute, face licking pit bull goes BALLISTIC on someone's face.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  10/18/2008 3:02 AM  |  Flag  
It's ridiculous how the nutters claim that Pit Bull regulations are expensive and impossible to enforce. The medical costs of the Blevins mauling would pay for several animal control officers...not to mention the costs of clogging of the shelters and having law enforcement shoot them by the truckload.

Anonymous bluesmom  |  10/18/2008 4:14 PM  |  Flag  
I am amazed that pit bull owners have the audacity to complain about the high cost of insuring their dogs. When the cost of the attack falls upon the victim they have no statement. I paid a VERY high price for the privilege of being attacked, the owner had no insurance in a state that requires it. Responsible pit bull owner? She thought so.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  10/17/2009 12:08 PM  |  Flag  
You buy a car, you get car insurance. Easy to understand. Why don't states mandate dog insurance the same way? You buy a car, and you get insurance BEFORE you dare blast off from the dealer's lot. It should be the same with dogs. You go to a pet store, and you fill out the insurance paperwork BEFORE you leave the premises, just like buying a car.

All dogs (and cats) should be "fixed" and chipped BEFORE they leave the puppy (or kitten) mill. And you should have to register it like a car with the chip's "VIN" number.

Post a Comment »