State lawmakers want to hold owners more accountable when their dogs attack people, but the most likely legislation might not make a confusing law any clearer.
The confusion comes from the definition of, and how to prove, whether a dog is dangerous or vicious. They are not the same. State law defines a dangerous dog as one that has previously bitten a person. A vicious dog is one that has been menacing, but the owner must be aware of the threat.
Those definitions remain in House Bill 685 because they help highlight the difference between unprovoked attacks and when pets are simply protecting their owners, said state Rep. Gene Maddox, a retired veterinarian who is sponsoring the new bill. Trying to refine that language will be the focus of a House committee holding its second hearing on Maddox’s proposal on Wednesday.
“You want to give law enforcement a tool to deal with people whose animals are obviously a threat, but it’s also important we protect working and hunting dogs for doing their job,” said Maddox, R-Cairo.
Maddox's bill would make owners civilly liable for injuries and damages in dog attacks, allow courts to order a dog that has repeatedly attacked be euthanized, and establish requirements for registration as a condition of owning a vicious dog.
It doesn’t address criminal punishment, but a possible companion bill also being heard Wednesday by the House Judiciary Noncivil Committee does.
House Bill 717 adds just one paragraph to state law, making it a felony when owners’ dogs cause severe injury or death. Sponsor Penny Houston, R-Nashville, said she wants to simplify what has become a complicated process of identifying problem dogs.
That would give Tommie Ingram something he wants most. Ingram, whose 10-year-old daughter Erin lost part of her arm in a mauling two years ago in DeKalb County, thinks the punishment, now just a misdemeanor, should be severe enough to capture owner attention.
“If you know you could get some serious time for what your dog does, maybe you’ll treat them better,” he said. “It’s not the dogs. It’s the owners.”
Responsible owners and dog advocates have long played a key role in earning the exemptions for their pets, Maddox said. Hunters, for instance, want their dogs not to be held accountable for a bite that happens during a chase.
Gail LaBerge, president of the Georgia Canine Coalition, supports the exemptions. A one-size-fits-all law could result in owners being punished, or dogs put down, when the pet bites only when it feels the owner is in trouble, she said.
“I am certainly for making people responsible, but I am concerned about unintended consequences,” said LaBerge, who raises and trains corgis and dachshunds at her Buford home. “We need a way to go after people who are not being responsible owners while making sure the person who has always taken care with their animal isn’t on the same hook as someone who is negligent.”
Proving that negligence can be difficult for prosecutors, who like jurors and victims find the existing law a challenge. DeKalb Solicitor-General Sherry Boston successfully prosecuted the owner of the two pit bulls that mauled Erin Ingram by bringing in several neighbors who testified that the dogs had been a repeated threat.
Prosecutors were unable to find any evidence that two pit bulls who attacked 7-year-old Javon Roberson last summer in a Savannah park had been involved in fighting or had aggressive or abusive pasts. No charges were ever filed in the attack that left Javon, now 8, with significant facial and body scarring.
“The law lets these animals attack once when it should say the very first time your dogs get out and hurt someone, the owners should be charged to whatever degree the state decides to prosecute,” said Cheryl LaBon, the head of a Savannah nonprofit who has acted as an advocate for Javon and his family.
Maddox said he will make changes to his proposal, and he aims to make it easier to eliminate the “one free bite” mentality of current law. He also is open to increasing penalties or other changes.
The main goal, he said, is to make sure all pet owners know they must be responsible for their pets.
“You’re going to have to use some common sense. We can’t legislate that,” Maddox said.
About the Author
