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

12 thoughts on “New Nebraska State Law Focuses on Repeat Owners of Dangerous Dogs

Please review our comment policy.

  1. This “baby steps” bill (more like insect steps) is also contingent on convictions of prior offenses. These convictions are not so simple to gain. Many dog attacks are only witnessed by the victim and the dog. How then can one prove that the attack was unprovoked (which is mandatory to gain a conviction)? This situation is worse when it involves a child victim (as it often does), who is nearly always blamed as a provoker. The first tier penalties for this new state law are definitely too low. State law, however, is often “base law,” in that counties and cities can add more requirements/penalties to it. Hopefully this is the case, and hopefully, Nebraska cities will do so.

  2. In the case of pit bulls, this bill is too reactive and not proactive enough. There’s no room for a first event where pit bulls are concerned. Action after the fact is not prevention. We remove drunk drivers from the road, not just drunk drivers who have crashed.

    Pit bull ownership is the drunk driving of pet ownership, and that’s what needs to stop. Something is better than nothing, but an outright ban is what needs to happen.

  3. In years past, these hindsight provisions may have worked. Unfortunately, with todays Pit Bulls, the “first bite” is likely to be six figure mauling.

    Wolf hybrid regulations work great!

    Prevent the Deed, Regulate the Breed.

  4. Third incident?!!!!! More coddling of aggressive dog owners…Great Law!

  5. Prevention is the key. With these maulers, the first bite could mean death for the victim! Or years of reconstructive surgery and pt. My sister lives in Omaha, and her next door neighbors had two pits. They barked liked crazy everytime someone went out the backdoor. They had a four foot chain link fence. These dogs were not abused, and the neighbors were not drug dealers. But I was still scared of those beasts, and am glad those people moved!

  6. In the first reading of the bill, it was only “two” victims prior to receiving a Class IV felony. You can see how the influential aggressive dog lobby works — NOT to sufficiently punish dog owners — NOT to “punish the deed.”

    “Sec. 6. Any owner whose dangerous dog inflicts on a human being an injury which includes mutilation or the loss of a body part is guilty of a Class IV felony.”

  7. Good eye Trigger. It was Senator John Wightman (District 36) that amended the original bill to ensure that THREE victims suffered serious injury prior to a dog owner receiving a Class VI felony instead of TWO victims.

    Introduced by Wightman, 36.

    1. On page 5, line 4, strike “Class IV felony” and insert “Class I misdemeanor for the first offense and a Class IV felony for a second or subsequent offense, whether or not the same dangerous dog is involved”.

  8. Just like White Wash Jimmy down in Bay County FL…Under his new law a dog gets three kills of domestic animals before being euthanized. A law only a Pit Bull lover could support!

    Punish the Deed my azz!

  9. Holly Stump, a pit bull breeder in Ipswich Ma (member of NAIA) tried this stunt with her Rep, Brad Hill. Where the dog would have multiple bit oks, get its record wiped clean after a short period, and if it got some kind of worthless training certificate it would get wiped clean

    It got shot down

    The dog breeders try to get gutted, worthless bills in place with their pocket legislators to protect them and their aggressive dogs

  10. It’s almost like we need a “human rights watch group” to look into this matter…

Comments are closed.