District Court In Kentucky Rules That Dogs Are Personal Property

So what exactly does this mean? It means that before animal control officers can seize dogs from a property, they must first have a warrant signed by a judge. So why are animals being seized without warrants and what can people who have had their animals seized do about it? Seizing animals without warrants is unjust and should not be allowed to continue, therefore, current cases and past cases where animal control officers seized animals without the consent of a judge via a warrant should be thrown out, or at least re-opened for appeal. For far too long, animal control officers have been acting as the judge and jury. The government was structured to be free of factions with checks and balances in place, so why is this behavior allowed to slip by. I do not believe for a second that these actions have gone unnoticed. They are allowed to continue because there is not enough attention on the acts. Here is the article that was emailed to me regarding the District Courts decision, I urge every individual that has been treated unjustly to immediately file their appeals after all, it is actions such as these that has brought Riverside County their very own U.S Attorneys Office.

http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/6503560/1187908967/name/Order%20and%20Memorandum%20and%20Opinion.pdf%3E

Here are the main points highlighted in the the email:
1. Pets are personal property, under the Constitution. Due process, search
and seizure, etc.. (all protections provided by Constitution) apply to pets.
You are the OWNER of your pets (not the "guardian.")

2. Requirements for housing, treatment, etc.. cannot be mandated by
legislation to be different for intact dogs (vs. altered dogs.)

3. Seizure bond is FLAT-OUT illegal and unconstitutional. This practice
constitutes unlawful taking of personal property. If, after search warrant
is obtained, a person is arrested and their dogs are seized, their dogs
must be held AS IS (cannot be sterilized while held,cannot be sold,
"transferred" or euthanized) unless the owner is found guilty after trial.
Meantime, owner DOES NOT have to pay a dime for their care,until/unless
they are found guilty of the charges.