New law in NYC?? Pet "OWNER" Insurance

[Layla's Mom]

I saw a sad story on our local news today about a little girl who was attacked by a dog(didn't catch what breed) who's family did not have medical insurance or money to pay her medical bills. This prompted talk about passing a bill for pet owners in NYC to take out pet "owner" insurance just in case their dog attacked anyone and this would cover medical expenses.

You could imagine the responses...non-dog owners thought is was a "good idea" while many dog owners felt that they should not have to share the burden because of irresponsible dog owners. I just felt that it was sad that this was even being discussed. Then I thought, "Would this help weed out the irresponsible dog owners out there?"

What do you guys think?

Taryn and Layla

 

[megan313]

wow....would your dog have to carry a little insurance card or what?
i do think it would weed out the irrisponsible ones, but then again, only the responsible ones would actually follow procedure... overall, i think it would be a waste of time, considering the dog probably wasn't on a leash, and im sure there are leash laws... the people who NEED to follow the rules, usually dont. SAD!

 

[TyBeam]

When I first heard about it, I was upset and thought it was unfair for those of us that have dogs. Then after thinking longer on it, I decided it just might be a good idea. This just might be what we need.

The article that I read, said that when you take out the policy, you will be issued an orange tag that the dog has to wear, if its caught with out the tag, they take the dog and you have ten days to get the policy or they find the dog a new home or the dog could be euthanized.

Yes I think alot of "dog owners" will be upset. Oh well.

"Dog lovers", will get the policy.

My opinion, they should add a clause on to the policy. In order to get the policy, your dog needs to be updated with shots, and spayed/neutered (unless you can prove your a "quailfied breeder", not running a puppy mill). Force these people to become more responsible. There are way to many animals out there that are being abused, neglected and abandoned.

My sister just took in a full grown akita/rottie mix that was not neutered, that just showed up at her door and never left. She posted signs all around town for two weeks. When she didn't get any calls, she legally adopted the dog. Got his shots and had him fixed. Shortly after, she found out it whose dog it was, (the orignal owners "grandfather" told my sister it was his granddaughters dog.) Too bad for her! She lives about ten houses down the street, did she even call the dog home once or come looking????
Luckily, he's got a good home now and being taken care of. The sad thing now is, the "granddaughter" has a new boxer puppy, who looks like he could be the sister to my baby. I wonder what her fate is?

Bet this one never see's a vet either. But what the hell, she's a dog owner.

 

[Andi20]

I think it’s sad that such a developed country could still allow children to have no medical insurance.
In Ontario, we have OHIP (Ontario Health Insurance Plan), which covers everyone for anything; so things like that never come up here. (Has anyone ever seen the Simpsons episode where Homer gets off the bus in Toronto, gets hit by a car and yells, “Woohoo! I’m rich!”?)
I’m not sure the tag thing will work as well as in theory because dog laws (like many laws) are rarely enforced. It’s like car insurance, no one cares until you get in an accident… I’ve known people who drive cars for years without insurance and haven’t been caught.
Because I know politicians don’t care about dogs or children (if they did, they’d already have insurance), I know this is just an idea to make money and not benefit kids or dogs.

Andi

 

[VTbxrFan]

I personally would hate to see "dog insurance" as a legal requirement. I do believe, however, that people should accept responsibility for themselves, their children, and their pet. The owners of the dog that bit the girl should absolutely be responsible for her medical costs, but is should be their choice how they handle that. I am a responsible person and I have chosen to address the potential situation by making sure my homeowner's insurance policy includes liability coverage if my dog bites someone (and my renter's insurance did the same thing before I was a homeowner). If there comes a time in a my life when I have a huge sum of cash readily available, perhaps I'll decide that I don't need to continue paying for liability insurance. (I don't think I'd ever make that choice - but it should still be my choice to make.)

Quite frankly I think addressing the issue of this little girl not having medical insurance is a whole lot more important than requiring that the owner of the dog have insurance. And quite frankly, whether the dog owner has insurance or not, he can still be held responsible for her medical bills.

 

[shaun64]

In one town near me they are trying to pass a law that would make any dog over 30lbs. considered dangerous and the owners would need to a $250,000 insurance policy.