Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter
Blog Posted in avatar   Ernest Dempsey's Blog

In defense of pit bull terriers

By Ernest Dempsey
Posted Oct 3, 2011 in World
Hey ya all, dog trashers, I’m here and am all ready to defend the doggie boggie boys. Here we go:
First of all, this story is far from complete. No autopsy report so far, and the dogs are already euthanized. What a mockery of reason and justice! Troy Davis’s trial continued for 2 decades before he was executed. But suspected dogs were put down even before the autopsy report arrived. I simply don’t know how to put this in words—the least I can say is that justice was put down before it could go to court. But I can understand why and I’ll conclude with it after I answer the assumptions and accusations here.
I am surprised how the people here went on blaming the dogs, supporting each other’s hollow assumptions, and taking comfort in not mentioning the responsibility of the humans. But this is all quite understandable. To cover the criminal negligence of the parents and the aunt and any others involved, it was thrown on the dogs. The child HAD to be left alone; the dogs HAD to be freed when a stranger child was visiting; all caregivers HAD to be absent for long enough to let the incident happen; and yet, only the dogs are responsible for loss of life. Since the lazy law enforcing authorities always need a ‘criminal’ ready to sacrifice for any terrible incident, dogs in this case were the ready objects of aggression. Whether or not the dogs in this case were aggressive is yet to be determined (the contradiction in the statements of the aunt and the neighbors is not to be ignored), but those euthanizing the dogs were markedly aggressive, and frustratingly so.
This also gives rise to another question: if the neighbors considered the dogs aggressive, did they ever complain to the authorities? If they did, why were the dogs still there? They should have been removed before any tragedy like Nevaeh’s could take place. So apparently, as far as these media reports are concerned, the dogs were not aggressive. If they were, the owner and, to some extent, the neighbors are responsible for not having them removed.
From a dog’s eyes, any stranger, child or adult, could be seen as a potential threat and transgressor on private property. When I took my young niece to my aunt’s house, where we have a dog that will attack any stranger, I didn’t let my niece walk near the dog alone. I slowly got the dog acquainted to my niece. Today, we leave my niece alone with the dog and they are friends. But if I had let the child alone with the dog without having made them friends, the dog could have hurt here for being a transgressor (remember dogs are defenders of the land; most of them don’t tolerate strangers on their master’s property). And who would be responsible for it, the dog or me? Certainly, I. And yes, a tip to make a child and a dog friends is to give the child some food and ask it to throw it to the dog while they are placed at a safe distance in your presence. When a dog is fed a few times by a person, it marks the person as a friend.
To the assumption “A human life is more important than dog”, I say no, it’s wrong to think so. In certain situations, you may say so, but even the reverse can be true in other situations. Terrorists are humans. Are their lives more important than the friendly family dogs. I say “NO, dogs are more important than terrorists and hardened criminals.” Hardly any need to illustrate this further.
To Cynthia Trowbridge’s claim that dogs can be jealous of kids: well, I heard it before and I disagree. How many studies actually verify this observation? I have mostly seen dogs that are fond of kids. Mostly, human kids are jealous of each other and are mean to each other. But even if a dog is jealous of a kid, it doesn’t mean it would kill the child by planning like a human where to get the kid alone and maul it. This is anthropomorphizing a dog’s mind.
For all parents who bring children and then keep trying to get rid of them in such irresponsible ways, I have but one request: “please don’t bring them if you don’t want them and don’t have time to care for them.” Leaving a child under 2 years alone for hours in an unfamiliar place itself is the ultimate killing recipe. And how many bans will you ask for in order to save your face? Let the dogs be banned. Fine! Will you ban knives in all states for all accidents that involve young children left alone with knives? Will you ban floors or water for all accidents where children become disabled when they fall down and knock their heads on slippery floors? What about electricity? It’s quite dangerous and has claimed young lives. And of course, the billion dollar question: will you not ask for banning humans who are a far greater threat to kids, as well as grown-ups and al life forms, than any other animal? If you can’t, then don’t pose to be caring and concerned by throwing it on dogs.
What happened to Nevaeh Bryant is very sad. But what is really deplorable is that people have closed their eyes to reason and absolved the really irresponsible caregivers of all blame. Aggressive dogs can’t hurt you or your kid… nothing can… unless you make it possible for them. I really doubt whether the authorities will make an unbiased investagion of the case. I suspect they will just gear in the direction of blaming the dogs for the killing. But let the reports come and see who has done what.
And finally, labeling an entire breed dangerous, LOLS! Thanks for giving me the hint for another satirical piece on attitudes!

Latest News
Top News