H.B. 189 proposes to stop pit bulls from being automatically defined as vicious dogs under Ohio law. Instead, the law includes a dog trained or used for dog fighting under the definition of a vicious dog. The bill also provides a procedure where owners can contest a dog's designation as "dangerous" or "vicious". This change is in response to State v. Cowan (2004), 103 Ohio St.3d 144, which held that ORC 955.22 is unconstitutional because it fails to provide a mechanism for challenging the dog warden's determination that a dog is vicious. An owner can be charged criminally for failure to properly confine a vicious dog on their premises, or failure to properly restrain off premises. If convicted, the owner may be required to surrender their dogs. Additionally, owners of vicious dogs are required to obtain additional insurance, and are subject to other requirements. See Ohio Tries to Plug Hole in Vicious Dog Law by Jim Provance, The Toledo Blade, December 5, 2005.