SCHENECTADY Dog owner insurance idea rebuffed BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter Reach Gazette reporter Kathleen Moore at 395-3120 or moore@dailygazette.com.
Deputy City Clerk Chuck Thorne has been pushing for strict rules about dogs after last year’s vicious dog attacks, but his efforts to get some medical coverage for the victims appear to be going nowhere. Thorne has pushed for a law requiring every dog owner to obtain liability insurance. At a public hearing Tuesday, only one person spoke against the idea, saying that it wouldn’t stop dogs from attacking people. But Thorne was motivated by the victims, one of whom was badly injured and has staggering medical bills. She won a lawsuit against the dog’s owner, but the owner never paid. Other victims are facing the same problem as they sue dog owners who appear to have little money and few assets. Thorne figured insurance could pay medical bills if owners were required to get it. Corporation Counsel John Polster agreed, called companies and found that renter’s insurance would cover dog attacks. The typical policy would cost $150 to $250 a year. Homeowner’s policies also cover dog attacks, he said. “This proposal is in response to a number of very horrific injuries,” he said. But on Friday, City Council President Denise Brucker took the item off the council’s agenda for next week, when the council would have decided whether to vote on it. “If I’m somebody with limited resources, I don’t think it’s realistic,” she said. “I think [it is] placing a burden on renters who can barely cover their own rent.” And, she said, insurance companies may refuse to cover certain breeds. She wants the city to work with pet agencies to teach owners instead of trying to enforce an insurance law. “I think it’s more cost-effective. I think it makes more sense,” she said. She envisions clinics on dog training, pamphlets on the value of licensing a dog — the money helps care for strays, for example — and a push to convince owners to spay or neuter their dogs. “It’s more about community education,” she said. As for writing laws that require insurance, she said it’s not worth it. “I just don’t know how you can legislate responsibility,” she said. Democrat Robert Sanders, who is running a primary challenge against City Councilwoman Marion Porterfield, urged the council Tuesday not to require insurance. He said the real issue is properly training and caring for the dog. “I’ve owned dogs. They don’t go around biting people,” he said. “Just passing another regulation isn’t going to work.” ...........................>>>>.............................>>>>.......................................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r01001&AppName=1
It was a STUPID idea from the STUPID dems. Now the STUPID dems have to abandon the idea anyway!
.
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
It was a STUPID idea from the STUPID dems. Now the STUPID dems have to abandon the idea anyway!.
But the brain dead Gazetto editorial bored is still pushing this dead dog! Read today's Tuesday 6/5 editorial! It had to be dropped for lack of support by the DEM morons but the Gazetto is still pushing it. They can't afford the DEM confiscatory taxes but they have extra money for dog insurance? Jeesh...If you wonder how a liberal "thinks" this is required reading. Hire more animal control officers and get to cutting City Hall lobs/DEM family and and fiend vehicle/cell phone plans.
Everything McCheese and his DEM morons do goes nowhere. Instead of focusing on the budget, laying off City Hall lobs, ending the DEM friends and family free car/cell plans, these DEM idiots waste time on mandatory dog liability insurance. Every dog owner in the City should demand mass resignations. Hire more animal control officers and raise fines for loose dogs. End of problem. The DEMS are paralyzed by indecision and led by fiscal incompetents.
SCHENECTADY — The city has backed off the idea of making all dog owners carry insurance, instead requiring such coverage for people who have received tickets for loose or dangerous dogs.
The City Council originally proposed that every dog owner would have to have $50,000 of liability insurance, coverage that's already provided under homeowners insurance but that would cost a renter $150 to $250 a year. Such insurance could help compensate dog attack victims like Hamilton Hill resident Shirleen Lucas, whose ears and scalp were ripped away during an attack by three pit bulls in August 2011. The dog's owner, Jasmine Tirado, was prosecuted in City Court and received 30 days in jail. But there was no money available to compensate Lucas for pain and suffering.
But now, according to information that will be provided to City Council Monday, Schenectady will greatly tone down the legislation, requiring that only owners of problem pets get insurance. People who are determined by a city judge to have a dangerous dog, or receive two violations in one year for loose dogs, would be required to have liability insurance for each dog in their possession. The proposal says only "possession" of a dog would need to be proved. Many residents try to wiggle out of prosecution by saying they don't technically own the animal, assistant city attorney Carl Falotico says in the written proposal. If the person is ticketed for a problem dog again and doesn't have insurance, punishment would range from 15 days to one year in Schenectady County Jail.
City tones down dog law Schenectady instead to require liability insurance for those ticketed before By Lauren Stanforth Published 09:48 p.m., Sunday, June 17, 2012
SCHENECTADY — The city has backed off the idea of making all dog owners carry insurance, instead requiring such coverage for people who have received tickets for loose or dangerous dogs.
The City Council originally proposed that every dog owner would have to have $50,000 of liability insurance, coverage that's already provided under homeowners insurance but that would cost a renter $150 to $250 a year. Such insurance could help compensate dog attack victims like Hamilton Hill resident Shirleen Lucas, whose ears and scalp were ripped away during an attack by three pit bulls in August 2011. The dog's owner, Jasmine Tirado, was prosecuted in City Court and received 30 days in jail. But there was no money available to compensate Lucas for pain and suffering.
But now, according to information that will be provided to City Council Monday, Schenectady will greatly tone down the legislation, requiring that only owners of problem pets get insurance. People who are determined by a city judge to have a dangerous dog, or receive two violations in one year for loose dogs, would be required to have liability insurance for each dog in their possession. The proposal says only "possession" of a dog would need to be proved. Many residents try to wiggle out of prosecution by saying they don't technically own the animal, assistant city attorney Carl Falotico says in the written proposal. If the person is ticketed for a problem dog again and doesn't have insurance, punishment would range from 15 days to one year in Schenectady County Jail...........................>>>>.......................>>>>.................Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/City-tones-down-dog-law-3640748.php#ixzz1y8ga0Ahg
1. police paid to check for seat belts 2. police paid to check for cell phones 3. police paid to check for insurance on dogs 4. police paid to check for DD
WOW!! DOGS MADE THE LIST? REALLY? HONESTLY?
JUST SHOOT THE DAMN DOGS ON SITE.....STOP WASTING COURT TIME/POLICE TIME/NEIGHBORS TIME........
loose dog = dead dog
very simple equation....PAY FOR DOG INSURANCE? TRY GETTING BLOOD FROM A STONE.....WOW!!! HOW STUPIDLY CIVIL WE HAVE BECOME....
SHOOT PEOPLE BUT DON'T SHOOT THE POOR POOR DOGS......slowly loosing a notch in the food chain in painful....especially in city limits.......
DUMB-A$$ES
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
NO INSURANCE COMPANY will cover a person for a dog if there is a previous history of biting!!!!! Even IF a landlord and/or tenant has a policy, the dog will be excluded.
It will never happen. This is so stupid that the Mayor didn't have the sense to call 1-800-State Farm or any other insurance company before proposing such idiotic nonsense.
"While Foreign Terrorists were plotting to murder and maim using homemade bombs in Boston, Democrap officials in Washington DC, Albany and here were busy watching ME and other law abiding American Citizens who are gun owners and taxpayers, in an effort to blame the nation's lack of security on US so that they could have a political scapegoat."
McCarthy needs to get a reality check....NO INSURANCE COMPANY will cover a person for a dog if there is a previous history of biting!!!!! Even IF a landlord and/or tenant has a policy, the dog will be excluded.
It will never happen. This is so stupid that the Mayor didn't have the sense to call 1-800-State Farm or any other insurance company before proposing such idiotic nonsense. Dolt!!!!!!!!!
The City politards voted for DEM implosion when they supposedly elected McCheese. No recount-no machine check-no problemo. Hire more City animal control officers and throw the City Jerks new law in the DEM pooper scooper bag together with the DEM State Senate candidate- lol.
NO INSURANCE COMPANY will cover a person for a dog if there is a previous history of biting!!!!! Even IF a landlord and/or tenant has a policy, the dog will be excluded.
It will never happen. This is so stupid that the Mayor didn't have the sense to call 1-800-State Farm or any other insurance company before proposing such idiotic nonsense.
Dolt!!!!!!!!!
You are quite right Rachel. I used to work for an ins. Co and if an applicant had a dog on the "dangerous breed" list, we would turn down the business. There may be some who will take it, I don't know. The company I worked for was very conservative and just didn't want the risk.
Did they even consider this? That someone may not even be accepted for coverage? Hello? I think that this might be somewhat common knowledge.
Somehow this does need addressing for the victim's sake. Guess they could probably go after the landlord and hopefully they would be insured but I'm not a lawyer so I don't know for sure, it seems like it would be doable.
NO INSURANCE COMPANY will cover a person for a dog if there is a previous history of biting!!!!! Even IF a landlord and/or tenant has a policy, the dog will be excluded.
However - then the city would have cause to remove the dog...
SHOOT THE DOGS.....irresponsible owner deserves the pain.....they don't care about the $$ because they know they have nothing to lose and everything to gain when standing in line for the benefits....
NO LEVERAGE......I REPEAT.....NO LEVERAGE
unless of course we're all in favor of incarcerating the 'poor' for stupid choices with stupid outcomes and consequences......
WE ARE AT THE TOP OF THE FOOD CHAIN AND WITH LOGIC AND REASON WE CAN STAY THERE....maybe
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Logged
But the brain dead Gazetto editorial bored is still pushing this dead dog! Read today's Tuesday 6/5 editorial! It had to be dropped for lack of support by the DEM morons but the Gazetto is still pushing it. They can't afford the DEM confiscatory taxes but they have extra money for dog insurance? Jeesh...If you wonder how a liberal "thinks" this is required reading. Hire more animal control officers and get to cutting City Hall lobs/DEM family and and fiend vehicle/cell phone plans. 
