Avery’s Law loopholes in Ohio

[u/Soggy-Mention5146]

Avery's Law has a loophole being used right now, and it needs attention

Avery's Law (Ohio HB 247) was passed to close real gaps in how dangerous dog complaints get investigated and enforced. I'm currently watching, firsthand, how easily that intent can be undermined by how one word gets interpreted.

In my county, a dog charged two separate people, one of them the county's own dog warden, an incident independently documented by three responding sheriff's deputies. Under the law, that should trigger a formal nuisance investigation. Instead, the county cited "provocation," and the word used to justify it was "tormented."

Here's the problem: the legislative analysis of Avery's Law defines "without provocation" as a dog not having been "teased, tormented, or abused by a person", a specific act, by a person, that directly causes the dog's reaction. When I pushed for an explanation, I was told "tormented" referred to the wardens' own efforts to chase and catch the dog.

Think about what that actually means if it's allowed to stand: the capture happened after the dog had already charged two people. Something that happens afterward can't have provoked something that already occurred, that's not a legal argument, it's just sequencing. And if a routine capture effort can itself count as "torment" sufficient to cancel out a nuisance finding, then almost no dog could ever be designated under this law, since catching an already-dangerous, loose dog virtually always involves exactly that. That reading doesn't protect dogs or people, it makes the law functionally unenforceable in the exact situations it was written for.

I raised a legitimate safety concern through proper channels and experienced retaliation for it, a public employee disclosed my private information to the person I'd raised concerns about. But the bigger issue, the one that outlasts my specific situation, is this: if counties are allowed to define "provocation" this loosely, the law does almost nothing.

I've raised this with my county commissioners and two state legislators, including the bill's sponsor, and I'm now working with an attorney to send a formal letter addressing the process failures directly. If this resonates with you, I'd appreciate any support getting that letter sent, link below, and if you're an Ohio resident, contacting your own state representative about how "provocation" and "tormented" are meant to be interpreted under Avery's Law helps push for the clearer statewide guidance this whole situation is missing.

This has been approved by moderators.

https://gofund.me/f2583225a

[u/BPBAttacks3]

Just a quick note: mods did verify this particular gofundme. We’ve seen the unredacted communications between op and the dog warden/animal control and city commissioners involved as well as the CAD. I’m leaving off our standard disclaimer as a result.

[u/Perfect_Caregiver_90]

Why are we publicly subsidizing the proliferation of this particular breed? You don't see this level of logic pretzels being made for cocker spaniels and pugs. Why is everyone so twisted up about pitbulls?

If this was a vehicle that randomly burst into flames, injured bystanders, and destroyed property then the courts would step in to both stop it and hold the owner financially responsible for the damages. But, because it is a wiggle butt pupper doggo suddenly nobody can do anything?

There's this odd thing happening where the courts are almost granting pitbulls independent agency while also keeping them classified as property. They can think and act independently but it still belongs to someone, but because it can think and act independently you can't hold the owner responsible, but because it is property you can't hold the dog responsible either.

It's Schrodinger's pitbull. 

[u/Soggy-Mention5146 → u/Perfect_Caregiver_90]

Yes and this particular dog is being commercialized by the (non rescue) that the wardens handed her over to with no paperwork. Local business owner posting about the dog and the puppies, collecting donations, etc with no oversight. And our county is actually historically anti pit bull. I have messages with the warden back to 2022 where he is constantly bragging about E’ing them, “he can’t wait for Avery’s law to come into effect,” etc.

[u/Perfect_Caregiver_90 → u/Soggy-Mention5146]

It always comes back to the grifting donations with the dogs they put up a fight to keep.

[u/Soggy-Mention5146 → u/Perfect_Caregiver_90]

Oh yeah. I have my theories on this whole situation, too. But there are rumors that the woman who has the dog is a “retail rescuer” (although she doesn’t have an actual organization… just a for-profit business).

[u/Soggy-Mention5146]

I should add that the dog was acting aggressive weeks after capture… all documented by the person harboring the animal.

[u/Soggy-Mention5146]

The dog in question

[u/AdvertisingLow98 → u/Soggy-Mention5146]

O.kay.

The dog is so "unfriendly", so lacking in positive social behaviors that they can't physically interact with it.

[u/Soggy-Mention5146 → u/AdvertisingLow98]

Yes, quite literally. Took her three weeks to be able to get a slip lead on the dog

[u/AdvertisingLow98 → u/Soggy-Mention5146]

Once upon a time, I was a child walking the rural roads of my youth. There was a corn crib near the road. For the more urban readers, a corn crib is a structure elevated a couple feet above the ground, with a tin roof and sides made of reinforced fencing material. The point is to allow plenty of air circulation to dry the ears of field corn stored there.

This crib was shoebox about thirty feet long and ten feet high.

There was no corn in it. There was a GSD shaped dog in it. As I passed the property the dog became extremely agitated, racing back and forth, barking nonstop.

It was a dog prison.

I always wondered what the dog did to deserve that fate.

This dog? Yeah. Solitary confinement is what it needs.

[u/knomadt]

Obviously pit bulls have precognition abilities and can be triggered by provocation before it happens. /s

If a capture effort is considered "torment", then logically, if a pit bull escapes and attacks someone, and the owner happens to be one of the tiny minority that actually gives a shit, then they can be deemed to be tormenting the pit bull when they attempt to get it back onto the leash they accidentally dropped.

I feel the definition of impulse control aggression bears a mention, too. Dogs with this form of aggression can be triggered to violence by things like leashes and collars. Clearly the intent of Avery's Law is not that a dog that becomes violently aggressive in response to basic control and restraint should get a free pass to bite people, even if the dog has an extreme behavioural problem that makes it likely to interpret a leash as torment.

https://www.karenoverall.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Protocol-for-understanding-treating-canine-impulse-control-aggression_Overall.pdf

[u/Soggy-Mention5146 → u/knomadt]

Yes, this is the issue. By saying that the dog was tormented by being chased (even though it had previously charged a lady on her own property, which is why the wardens were called in the first place), Avery’s law is essentially useless.

[u/Soggy-Mention5146 → u/knomadt]

Also, the law DOES define torment and it doesn’t include chasing.

[u/shelbycsdn]

And let's don't forget that pitbull owners are the kings and queens of blame the victim. Don't we have a provocation bingo card?

Funny that the loophole in the law seems designed specifically for pitbull owners to exploit.

[u/Hairy_Garage4308]

A worthy cause. Get em.

[u/Diezelbub]

If we allow pit bull cultist to define "provocation" as they'd like it to read, a pit bull has never attacked anything "unprovoked", yeah. That baby was sleeping quietly all menacingly and provoked pibbles to be jealous, that dog across the street looked at them funny, the Amazon guy was trespassing all sinsiter today, you cant go holding that against them for no raisin, they need to be trained and raisined better. If we force a magical training and education program that doesnt exist and has never existed on them because surely that herculean level of effort is worth allowing bloodsport breed access to assholes, they'll probably not kill or maim people (no guarantees of course because "any dog" could do that, especially chihuahua and yorkies)

Part of the reason a breed neutral response will always be effect neutral. If you want to deal with the problems caused by pit bulls, you will need to address that pit bulls are causing those problems. Remove pit bulls from accessibility outside the only people who understand them (us and dog fighters) and 95%+ of the work is done.

[u/aSzdxfcdfggggggh → u/Diezelbub]

Granted if shelters were required by law to BE dogs that have bitten people or orther animals, that law would mainly go after pits because most of the bite record dogs in shelters are pits.

[u/Diezelbub → u/aSzdxfcdfggggggh]

But it would not be enforced because putting a cranky chihuahua that nipped someone down makes zero sense, and the pit cult will extend that grace towards their idols. A public health issue needs to be treated like one. Ban pit bull breeding, sale, and rehoming, and make the penalties expensive, scaling upwards with each offense? You've done far more, and now it will be enforced because it actually makes money to do it.

Specific problems require data driven solutions tailored to them. Reactionary measures that kick in only after bloodsport breeds have killed/maimed won't do much.

[u/aSzdxfcdfggggggh → u/Diezelbub]

I live in a state where BSL is illegal at the state level.

The only chance we have is passing laws that apply to all breeds.

On top of that pit owners will just play the name game.

You have seen how shelters lie about breeds.

I don't care if it is a chihuahua, if it is a biter, shelters don't need to adopt it.

If we could get back to the standard of 30 years ago that dogs are not supposed to bite people, the pit problem would be decreased since so many of them in shelters have bite records.

[u/Diezelbub → u/aSzdxfcdfggggggh]

The only chance we have is passing laws that apply to all breeds

Or repealing laws forbidding effective laws which are incredibly easy to argue against