PDA

View Full Version : Domestic pets shouldn't be held responsible




Marty
08-10-2006, 10:28 PM
Richmond,IN -- My name is Jacob Rigsby. I lived in Richmond for 22 years prior to joining the U.S. Navy. I wanted to comment on the proposed banning of pit bulls in Richmond.

I do not understand how any form of government can hold an animal responsible for what it does. A wild animal I can see holding responsible for its actions (i.e. bear attacks and shark attacks), but not a domestic pet. The individuals who, neglect, mistreat or just flat out don't take care of their dogs are responsible for the slew of recent attacks on people.

I also pose these questions to the Palladium-Item and to the Richmond Police Department: what provoked the dogs? Was there a triggering incident? Was the dog mistreated by its owners? Because one thing that cannot be denied is that both of the pit bulls that attacked were provoked in some manner -- whether they were afraid, taunted or disrespected. Another question I have: has anyone thought about any of these questions I've asked? Maybe, just maybe we shouldn't let the government just ban a creature that has no voice. Ban the people that abuse these animals and make them violent.

Now I'm willing to admit that there are some dogs that are ill-tempered, but a complete ban of a breed is ridiculous. Would the local government ban Jack Russells or Chihuahuas? I don't think so; I think they would say, "Those little guy's couldn't hurt anyone." A bite is still a bite. The ill-tempered dogs should be dealt with, either by rehabilitation or re-location.

I was stationed in Washington, D.C., for three years and the government banned the pit bull. Did that actually help the problem? I venture to say no. The humane societies and the animal shelters are overloaded with pit bulls, and they are probably being euthanized by the dozens in the district. Then you still have countless people who own them in the district and the strays running the streets. Does that sound like their ban worked? Nope, I didn't think so. The same will be the case for Richmond. The problem will not go away with a ban or a new proposal.

The city, the citizens, the law enforcement and the government need to take action and help these animals who cannot help themselves. Otherwise how can you blame them for using what God gave them -- animal instincts?

Jacob Rigsby,

Bremerton, Wash.



http://www.pal-item.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060809/NEWS03/608090324/1003




laurajean
08-10-2006, 10:50 PM
Wow! A thoughtful, reasonable letter. Another issue with breed banning is that people will not vacinnate their dogs. (Not that irresponsible people do, anyway) Lack of rabies vaccinations is what led the Chinese to slaughter 50,000 dogs in the past week.
Ah, someone else from this forum wrote a letter about not having vacinnated dogs in the population which was a really good point.
Thanks to Jacob Rigsby for having a brain and using it and thanks Marty for posting the evidence.

miakoda
08-11-2006, 12:35 AM
A bite is still a bite.
Amen. No matter the breed or bree combo, a bite is a bite is a bite & that should be 1 dead doggy.

MercedesMama
08-11-2006, 12:41 AM
Nice to see some intelligence somewhere.

ghost 1
08-11-2006, 12:57 AM
let me gather up all my chickens and gieneas if thats how you all feel,,,,,,,,,lmao

Attila
08-11-2006, 01:00 AM
Nice. I think that was a nice letter. Very good. Just the fact that he can spell Chihuahuas is great. I have to look that one up and usually pick something easier to spell lol. I think if they started banning them some ears would perk up and some action would be taken to control the idiots then. They are mean little dogs.