A Wisconsin lawmaker is circulating a bill among legislators that would prohibit people convicted of drug-related or violent felonies from owning a dog deemed vicious by police officers.

According to the bill authored by Sen. Dave Hansen, D-Green Bay, officers would determine the viciousness of a dog based on whether that dog has attacked a person without justification, caused injury to a cat or another dog, or behaved in a threatening manner.

Under the law, felons caught with a vicious dog could serve up to nine months in prison and receive a fine of up to $10,000. However, the felon could face a six-year sentence if they knowingly let the dog loose and the dog attacked another person.

The bill would also prohibit felons from owning vicious dogs until ten years after incarceration, unless they need the dog to earn a living.

The bill before the Senate came as part of the work of Hansen’s constituent Sharon Hensen, the animal control officer for the Green Bay Police Department, who sent copies of a similar law to state lawmakers.

The City of Green Bay passed a law similar to the one currently being circulated, and police have already confiscated more than 20 dogs, Hensen said.

“Felons are not allowed to own guns, and they should not be able to own any dangerous weapon,” Hensen said.

She added the problem is not unique to Green Bay, but is statewide and therefore requires statewide legislation.

However, Executive Director of the American Dog Owners Association Maureen Hauch disagreed with aspects of the legislation.

“I do not see a problem with allowing felons who have already paid their debt to society living with dogs,” Hauch said.

Hauch also pointed out difficulties in enforcing the legislation, such as how an officer would decide whether the actions of a dog posed a significant threat of physical injury.

Still, lawmakers in Minnesota and other states have already passed similar legislation, Hensen said.

“This bill is going nationwide,” Hensen said. “[It] takes the next step to not only protect police officers, but also the general public.”