Ralph wrote: > > Did you ever think about your inner city residents that abuse these dogs > should possibly be banned?
Chris responds: Having read the replies to my original post on banning pit bulls, I'd like to respond by saying though it is clear there are a number of strong animal sympathizers here, I believe their sympathies concerning pit bulls are utterly misplaced and, frankly, as the above indicates, somewhat out of touch with the practical realities of the issue. First, let's blow a fallacy out of the water: There seems to be an unspoken, rather naive faith in the syllogism that because dogs make good pets and pit bulls are dogs, pit bulls therefore make good pets. Nonsense. I have no idea why defenders continue to believe they can peddle the twaddle that pit bulls are merely the victims of bad P.R, bad owners and bad treatment. In short, that these are good pets whom we have obviously failed when they turn vicious. Whether the failure is natureor nurture, I'll leave that indecisive, indulgent debate to the dog pound Hamlets; it's a moot concern compared with the issue of a badly mauled child. So, to the defenders: spare us the violins for these "misunderstood" dogs because you're playing for the wrong victim. Ultimately, I don't give a damn why a particular pit bull attacks a kid; I care about the kid. And there is no satisfactory post facto explanation that rationalizes why any kid (or anyone) should get ripped apart by a dog on a city street. None. Nada. Get it? The story about the dog doesn't matter. Concerning the claim that if we banned pitbulls, we should in turn ban dobermans, rottweilers, etc, or God help us, that we can't ban pits bulls because we don't even really know what a pit bull is - this is nothing but a silly rhetorical shell game. The CDC seems to have no trouble telling us which breed leads statistically in the number of attacks on human beings. (No guesses there!) So, given the odds, anybody care to wager the house payment on what kind of dog will be cited next time there's a local report about a canine attack? If the issue had money riding on it, no doubt our dog pound Hamlets would come to their common senses quickly enough. But the point is, we already are gambling. And I sure as hell don't like the odds when it comes to pit bulls. Particularly when there's an incentive to exploit them in the underground economy. Until we live in the perfect world where animals (and people) are treated humanely, we will continue to see pit bull attacks. That's a fact. Just hope it isn't your kid confronting an enraged pit while on their way to school some morning. The people of this city shouldn't have to worry just because some idiot forgot to latch the dog gate or briefly left their back door open. And local politicians better be willing to do alot more than than merely pronounce the result "tragic" and "unfortunate," which does nothing and assures no one of anything except to expect another "tragic" and "unfortunate" incident. Regarding pit bull attacks, it's no longer an "if" question, but a "who," "when" and "where" question. I think a strong case can be made that the "where" should not be here. Chris Beckwith Ward 6 _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
