An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in riot, disorderly conduct and related offenses, providing for the offense of transporting dogs in external s . . .ection of vehicle; and imposing penalties.
HB376 would create a new summary offense in Pennsylvania for transporting a dog on the hood, roof, truck bed, or any other external section of a vehicle on a public road. The bill is aimed at preventing unsafe transport of dogs exposed to weather and the risk of falling, jumping, or being thrown from a vehicle.
The offense would be added to Title 18, which covers crimes and offenses, specifically within the chapter on riot, disorderly conduct, and related offenses. A person could be fined $50 to $150 for a first violation, $150 to $300 for a second violation, and $300 to $500 or up to 90 days in jail, or both, for a third or subsequent violation. The bill includes an exception for dogs transported in a secured insulated cage or container designed to keep the animal safe and protected from outside conditions.
HB376 would amend Pennsylvania’s criminal code by adding a new section to Title 18 and creating a new enforceable animal-transport safety offense. It would give law enforcement and courts authority to issue summary citations and impose escalating penalties for repeated violations, while carving out a narrow exception for properly secured, insulated transport containers. The bill would affect dog owners, vehicle operators, and potentially animal welfare enforcement practices on public roads in the Commonwealth.
The available record shows no committee transcript, vote tally, or formal opposition, so there is no documented debate to indicate broad support or resistance. Based on the bill’s straightforward public-safety and animal-welfare purpose, the measure appears to be framed in a protective, noncontroversial way. However, the absence of recorded discussion means the level of support or concern among legislators cannot be determined from the provided materials.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided context. Potential areas of debate, if raised, could include whether the criminal penalty is proportionate, how officers would enforce the rule, and whether the exception for secured containers is sufficiently clear. The bill text itself does not identify any sponsors, opponents, or stakeholder concerns.