If you have walked around Hillcrest and Mission Hills over the last few weeks, you probably know (by the posters) that a woman named “Kim” had her 4-month-old Yorkshire terrier puppy stolen from her car while she was parked in the Uptown Shopping Center.

San Diego police reported that a 73-year-old woman and her Yorkshire terrier were attacked by a would-be dog-napper in Hillcrest one month ago. The dog-napper was riding a bike. The woman was able to knock him off the bike and kick him in the groin. She grabbed her dog and got away.

A dog-napping ring operated last year in North County. They stole dogs out of cars. They waited for the “lost” signs to go up, and then they called to claim a reward.

But most dog-nappings involve the resale of stolen dogs. Certain breeds command thousands of dollars when they have papers. Without papers, they are still valuable. They are advertised on the Internet.

According to a survey by the Humane Society, 73 percent of U.S. households own dogs or cats.

The Gay and Lesbian Consumer Online Census says that nearly four out of five gay and lesbian respondents own a pet. Lesbians were more likely than gay men to have a pet (87 percent vs. 71 percent); gay men were slightly more likely to own dogs than cats (41 percent vs. 38 percent) and lesbians were more likely to own cats than dogs (60 percent vs. 53 percent).

It should not come as a shock, then, that the city of West Hollywood has been at the forefront in pushing for dogs’ rights. For example, in West Hollywood dogs no longer have “masters” or “owners,” they have “guardians.” The city has banned plastic surgery for dogs and cats (no declawing of cats and no ear jobs for dogs).

The city of San Francisco recently passed a law that will require the owners of breeds deemed dangerous (pit bulls) to be spayed and neutered. The city of Denver has banned pit bulls from the city.

So what happens when a dog is stolen? Not much. Under the California Penal Code, stealing a dog (which has a market value of $50) is considered “grand theft,” which is a felony. But the police treat a missing dog like a missing iPod. Even a service dog, which can be vital to its client, doesn’t get any more legal protection than a flower pot.

Comparing dogs to other types of “personal property” is absurd today. Medical studies show conclusively that dogs and cats reduce blood pressure, stress and depression. So, at the very least, the Legislature should make dog-napping a felony, punishable by a mandatory minimum sentence of at least one year. That would give police the incentive to pursue those that steal animals.

Making dog-napping difficult is also something that needs to be addressed. Two problems exist for dog guardians. First, dog guardians face a dilemma when they take their dogs out and want to enter a business. Guardians can leave a dog in a car, but dogs can suffer from heat exhaustion. Or, worse, they can be subject to a dog-napping (as Kim experienced). Even if windows are closed, there have been “smash and takes” of dogs.

If the guardian leaves a dog outside the business, chained up, there’s a risk of a dog-napping, or that a stray pit bull will attack the defenseless dog.

Some businesses don’t allow dogs inside because of liability purposes. Yet case law holds that the owner of the dog, not the business, has liability for the dog. The dog’s guardian, just like a child’s parent, has the duty to control the dog.

The only businesses that cannot allow animals are those that sell or serve food. This is because the County Department of Health prohibits dogs in these places. However, exceptions are made for “service animals.”

California law requires that the County Department of Animal Services must certify a dog as a “service animal” if the applicant has a medical condition or disability and the dog assists the person. In the emerging area of “dog law,” you will find that persons with such conditions as HIV, anxiety and depression can qualify their animal as a service animal if the animal assists the person in some way (e.g., relieving depression).

But the county should exempt all dogs that meet certain guidelines, such as those that are licensed and certified by the Department of Animal Services as “vaccinated, non-biters and perhaps smaller than 20 pounds.” The Legislature should follow with a state law prohibiting businesses from denying access to dogs. Additionally, the county and city should, at the very least, follow San Francisco and require spaying and neutering of breeds that can be trained to kill and maim people and other animals.