Loyal, loving animals

Orlando, FL -- I understand why people have strong emotional reactions to tragic events like the recent death of the young boy killed by mistreated pit bull dogs. However, as a pit-bull owner and admirer, I ask people to step back for a moment and apply some analytical skills to an assessment of the situation.

Mike Thomas, in his column about "killer canines" in the Dec. 28 edition of the Sentinel, pointed out examples of injuries or deaths caused by pits and extrapolated that all pits are bad. No one could get away with that kind of conclusory analysis if applied to race, nor should they. Because some blacks are drug dealers, are we to assume that all blacks are drug dealers? Because some whites are ignorant, vicious racists, can we conclude that all whites are racists?

Thomas identifies another part of the problem that "the wrong kinds of people" own pits. Certainly there are gang members and drug dealers who own, mistreat and improperly train pits. There are people who breed, train and sell pits for fighting. In fact, through the diligent efforts of law enforcement, one of the premier dog-fighting "entrepreneurs" in the South was recently apprehended and sentenced to 30 years in prison. Did Thomas fail to locate that story in his "research" on pits?

There are also lawyers, such as myself, and veterinary technicians, such as my daughter, who own, love and properly train and care for pits. Many responsible owners love and work with this breed with no problems. If a ban were enacted, which owners do you think would obey the law?

Only responsible owners should own any animal. I recommend Adam's Task: Calling Animals by Name, a book by Vicki Hearne. She presents the case that as all domesticated animals were originally wild, and were domesticated for the use and pleasure of humans, we have a practical, moral and spiritual obligation to provide appropriate care and training for these creatures.

This obviously includes appropriate supervision and housing. No dog should be unsupervised. I don't care how gentle or loving you think your Labrador, or any breed, may be, any unsupervised dog can get into a situation that is dangerous for the dog and/or dangerous for people. So can children. A 4-year-old should never be left alone outside, with or without dogs in the yard. How many children die each year because parents leave them unsupervised around pools? Yet we are not seeking to ban pools!

Pits are loyal and loving animals. They were known historically as "nursery dogs" because they were used to guard and protect children. Pits are smart and fast; they do well in agility and obedience. They are strong, and compete in "pull" contests, where they can pull thousands of pounds. Properly trained dogs with adequate exercise, companionship, love and "a job" do not generally get into trouble.

If we're going to discuss this issue, and it needs to be discussed, let's present a balanced picture, and apply logic to solving the problem. Florida Statute 767 prohibits breed-specific legislation or bans. It sets forth a comprehensive regulatory structure for dangerous dogs, provides for criminal penalties against irresponsible owners, and allows local ordinances that may be more restrictive, but may not be breed specific.

A more effective approach would be to require dog owners to participate with their dogs in training classes. As a pit lover, an opponent of breed-specific bans and a supporter of the Chapter 767 approach, I hate to see inflammatory material that serves no purpose other than to frighten or anger people.

 

Good post - That has alot of good points!

 

Yes very good post in deed..........

gyrl

 

It would be nice if everyone thought like this guy.