DENVER - Two measures designed to make it easier for
victims of dog attacks to get civil and maybe even criminal penalties against
dog owners cleared the Colorado Legislature on Friday.
The Senate approved a measure that allows civil courts
to impose strict liability when the
dog owners knew or reasonably should have known their pets were
dangerous.
The House, meanwhile, gave final approval to a bill
that would place computer chips in dogs
deemed vicious, allowing animal control officers to more easily learn of
their legal history.
House Bill 1279, introduced by Rep. Debbie Stafford,
R-Aurora, makes it easier to prove in a civil case that a pet owner whose dog bites
someone should have known of the animal's potential danger to others.
It doesn't skirt the state's first-bite rule, which
protects dog owners from criminal penalties when their pets have never bitten
anyone before.
Still, it establishes that negligence, rather than an
actual attack, is the legal threshold to meet in winning a civil case.
Just before approving the measure, however, the Senate
reinstated a provision that would negate any local laws banning certain breeds.
Some cities, Durango not among them, have passed laws banning pit bulls.
But opponents to those bans said it's unfair to
characterize all dogs of a specific breed because of the actions of a few.
"Don't penalize a puppy for having the wrong
parents," said Sen. Ken Chlouber, R-Leadville. "I'm sure if that pit bull puppy could
choose, he'd rather be a golden retriever."
Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, opposed eliminating
breed-specific bans, saying communities
should have local control.
Durango has no ban on specific animals, expect those
listed on the national threatened and
endangered species lists and certain "exotic animals," such as
monkeys, skunks, panthers, cheetahs and lions.
In the House, lawmakers there gave final approval to
House Bill 1261, which would place a computer chip in pets that have been
judged vicious by any court in the state. The measure allows
animal-control
officers elsewhere to check a state database to see if a dog has
attacked before.
In 2003, there were several highly publicized
incidents of dog attacks, including last year's mauling of now 10-year-old Garrett Carothers in Pagosa
Springs.
In that case, prosecutors couldn't prove that the dogs
that attacked him had ever attacked anyone else before. As a result, the dogs' owner
was protected from prosecution under the first-bite rule.
Earlier in the session, lawmakers killed a measure introduced by Rep. Mark Larson, R-Cortez, that would have rid the state of the first-bite rule.