The Tennessee House of Representatives wrote its own version of the new prohibition against dogs running at large, and wrote an entirely new dog bite statute that actually preserves the ancient English one-bite rule. These amendments are unworthy of the people of Tennessee, and should not be passed by the conference committee. For details, read the full story by clicking "Read More," below.

I will be on KNX-FM, Los Angeles, on Thursday, April 27th, at 10 AM, for one hour. The show will focus on dangerous dogs, dog owner liabilities, and what communities can do to be safe.

This month, one American has been killed by dogs. In Charleston, South Carolina, 2-year-old Brian Palmer was mauled to death by the family pit bull. The boy had been left alone in the house with the dog and the boy's brothers, the oldest of whom was 16.

Four dog bite law bills are pending before House committees. All four bills need to be passed in order to protect Tennessee children and seniors from dangerous dogs and their equally dangerous owners. If you are a resident, your lawmaker needs to hear from you right away. Follow the three easy steps on the Tennessee page of Dog Bite Law. You will breathe easier after you do, because these bills will be passed with your help.

Click on Read More, below, for details about the progress of the bills.

The pet food recall has made people aware of a great injustice in the law of most states: when a pet is injured or killed, the owner can make a claim for compensation, but the amount of compensation cannot exceed the replacement cost or market value of the pet. In other words, a dog or a cat is "worth" just the price of, well, a used dog, or a used cat. In other words, practically nothing.

I have suggested that dog owners fight this in small claims court, and have provided them with ways to do so in my book, What To Do If Your Dog Is Injured Or Killed.

Some people, intending to help the situation, are potentially making it worse. They are asking us to support a change in the law that would change and probably eliminate many of the rights of pet owners. They are saying that pets should not be considered "property," but something else.

Changing the legal status of pet owners is not the answer. What we need to do is change the way the law measures the worth of a pet. A pet owner needs to receive the full measure of a pet's worth, not a half measure or less, which is now the case in most states. To accomplish this, we need to increase the rights of pet owners, not take away their status as owners. For more about this interesting issue, click on Read More, below.

On April 7, 2007, I appeared on MS NBC News at 11 and 1 PM because Minneapolis lawmakers are thinking of amending the city's "dangerous dog law." I believe that the existing Minneapolis laws are sufficient. What is missing is the will, the officers and the budget for enforcement.

The dog bite epidemic flourishes because of not only irresponsible dog owners, but also underenforcement and ineffective dog laws. The pending legislation in Tennessee, for example, is necessary because the state's dog laws are a hundred years old, are patterned after English law of the 1600s, and have been criticized by the state's own appellate courts. (See Tennessee on Dog Bite Law for further reading and to help pass the four bills.) Minneapolis has the right laws, but ineffective enforcement of them.

Compare the Minneapolis law with the South St. Paul law. As you will see, the former is detailed and inclusive, while the latter is rather basic and restrictive. In other words, the Minneapolis law is sufficiently nuanced to be fair to all interests, and yet broad enough to catch the bad dogs and their bad owners. But this takes animal control officers, budget, and the resolve to strictly enforce the law.