I don’t really have an opinion on this dog tie-up rule. I have heard people make good arguments for both sides, and since I don’t have a dog myself, this isn’t something I really have any experience with or personal investment in. In general, my inclination is that we should have fewer laws, not more, especially when we’re talking about something that will not be applied practically. But I really just don’t know enough about it to take a position one way or the other.
Councilmembers, on the other hand, have to take a position on everything. You’d think that, over time, this would result in the articulation of some sort of clearly discernible legislative philosophy. Wrong! District 2 Councilwoman Pat Kernighan opposes the 15 minute dog tie up rule, in part because:
The (current city) ordinance already prohibits allowing dogs to cause any sort of nuisance on public property…Animal control has a hard time of keeping up with just the normal course of duties — removing dead animals from the streets, taking care of vicious animals, that sort of thing.
Um…okay. I’m sure that animal control does have a lot of demands on their time, but I have to say that I find it stunning to see those words coming from a woman who voted less than two weeks ago to waste police resources ticketing people for smoking at bus stops.