Animal Law, Volume 12 Number Two 2005-2006 |
|
Introduction |
|
ANIMAL LAW IN ACTION: THE LAW, PUBLIC PERCEPTION, AND THE LIMITS OF ANIMAL RIGHTS THEORY AS A BASIS FOR LEGAL REFORM |
133
|
Articles |
|
THINK OR BE DAMNED: THE PROBLEMATIC CASE OF HIGHER COGNITION IN ANIMALS AND LEGISLATION FOR ANIMAL WELFARE
|
151 |
JUST SAY NEIGH: A CALL FOR FEDERAL REGULATION OF BYPRODUCT DISPOSAL BY THE EQUINE INDUSTRY
|
193 |
DOG-FOCUSED LAW’S IMPACT ON DISABILITY RIGHTS: ONTARIO’S PIT BULL LEGISLATION AS A CASE IN POINT Legislation that affects dogs also affects persons with disabilities to some extent. This link shows up in statutory definitions, is justified by social construction theory, and has been reified in case law. Thus, it is important to examine statutes like Ontario’s pit bull legislation (OPBL) in terms of their potential impact on persons with disabilities. Upon close examination, it appears that the legislation suffers from vague definitions, conflicting onus of proof, absence of fair process, and severe penalties, including imprisonment. Further, it contains no reference to dogs used by persons with disabilities. This means that there is potential for persons with disabilities to suffer negative consequences and a need to consider disability rights in dog-focused legislation. |
217
|
Comments |
|
EVERY DOG CAN HAVE ITS DAY: EXTENDING LIABILITY BEYOND THE SELLER BY DEFINING PETS AS “PRODUCTS” UNDER PRODUCTS LIABILITY THEORY
|
241 |
2006 Legislative Review |
|
2005-2006 LEGISLATIVE REVIEW |
277 |