Why Animal Civil Disobedience Now ?

“When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for people… to…assume…the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature…entitle them…[and] requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” The words of our country’s founding.

On Sunday, I posted a message concerning the civil rights of dog owners, and the legal steps they may feel compelled to take. As of last count, 98% of the respondents either “liked” or “loved” the post. There is a reason for this. It was not a mistake. I would suggest those who are quick to condemn this potential course of action, give some thought as to why so many people believe legally securing their beloved dog’s freedom, versus the dog potentially being held in a pound for years while they appeal the dog’s disposal order, is the better course of action to ultimately save their dog’s life.

Could these dog owners believe the law will not fairly resolve their situation? Have they heard of travesties occurring with dogs in other towns? Do they not trust a person with no required training in dog behavior or dog bite psychology, to accurately predict whether and under what circumstances their dog may bite again, and to a degree that the dog should now be destroyed?

Have they factored in that human doctors, with years of training, formal education and experience, can’t accurately predict future human behavior, certainly not to the degree which would justify killing the human subject? Do they question how such a person would somehow be able to predict a dog’s future behavior with any certainty sufficient to currently call for its death?

After all, issuing a kill order, which is done almost exclusively by Animal Control Officers (ACO) pursuant to Connecticut law, is a public safety decision based on the conclusion the dog will, or is likely to, severely bite again in the future. It is not punishment for the bite, but a precautionary decision based on an ACO’s conclusion the dog’s likely future behavior would be a danger to the public. Is this 98% group questioning how these decisions are made, especially because they can be legally done without any input from trained and educated dog behavior professionals?

Who would want the judgment on their dog’s future behavior (and therefore whether to currently kill the dog or not) to be made based on what essentially is no more than one person’s uneducated and untrained guess? Even done by a well-meaning person?

ACOs in Connecticut are well aware of the law, but have remained publicly silent on the issues I raise here, of training requirements and their authority under the law to simply do “what is necessary” (CGS 22-358). In fact, the law allows them to take courses in establishing FEMA emergency shelters in lieu of courses on dog behavior, even though their interactions with dogs year in and year out far outnumber when FEMA emergency shelters ever need be built. That is a problem with the law, not with the ACOs.

There are no standards, rules, regulations or guidelines for ACOs to follow when determining the “necessity” to issue a kill order. The CT Commissioner of Agriculture has said under oath that it is merely a question of each ACO’s “common sense” on when to order the death of a dog. This is the current, and frankly deplorable and unconstitutionally infirm, state of animal law in Connecticut. My partner and I have deposed, under oath, many ACOs on these topics, in our challenges to the constitutionality of these outdated and antiquated laws. This too, is a problem with the law, not with those (ACOs) charged with enforcing it.

Why do 98% of the respondents to my post apparently agree that sometimes, the law will not protect them and their animals? What do they know, suspect or understand, that others apparently do not?

What is the meaning and implication of this 98% approval response? Those who might not understand that civil disobedience is a right under the law, must still respect the right of the people “to petition the government for a redress of their grievances” and to protest and question their government’s decisions.

A protest is certainly occurring here, and it is as time-honored as the history of our country, and the principles to which we hold dear, including the right of everyone to be secure in their possessions, including their beloved animals.

I hope we all take heed of this message. People are seeking to be heard, and seeking an end to the senseless deaths of these animals. Thank you.