View Single Post
  #6  
Old July 6th, 2006, 09:37 AM
Luvmypit Luvmypit is offline
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Scarborough
Posts: 1,448
Here are the leters in regards to yesterdays articles.
Good ones!! The Editor probably got tons of letters.
http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Le...6/1670529.html

Any breed can attack

Re "Pitbull attacks columnist's dog" (Peter Worthington, July 5): Opponents of breed bans have never said that pit bull-type dogs have never attacked people or pets. There isn't a dog breed or dog breed mix on the planet that hasn't attacked at some point in time, and the victims of those attacks, understandably, probably won't like that type of dog in the future.

But public policy shouldn't be determined by anecdotal evidence or isolated incidents. We don't ban cars because sometimes people are killed by them, nor do we ban contact sports because a student once had his back broken playing football.

It's terrible that Worthington's dog was attacked. Opponents of breed bans wholeheartedly support holding dog owners responsible for the actions of their dogs. What we reject, however, is the specious assumption that aggressiveness or a propensity to attack can be determined by a dog's appearance or (often incorrect) breed designation.

Worthington would also do well to remember that people across this province have had their pets attacked by dogs of all breeds, but only some dog owners are being penalized by ill-conceived provincial legislation, and only some dog breeds are chosen to be exploited by lurid newspaper headlines.


Eric Sparling

Waterdown

(We feel for Peter and his dog and hope the attacker's owners are severely punished, but we're against the breed ban, for all the reasons you mention)

AND THE NEXT ONE:

Dogs are individuals too

Re "Pit bull attacks colomnist's dog" (Peter Worthington, July 5): My "pit bull-type" dog has been attacked twice by Jack Russell Terriers. My dog has not even seen her second birthday, but two different Jack Russells have let loose on her, without provocation. If it was so simple to blame the breed for these instances, I would be pretty wary of Jack Russells. I would assume that they were all "programmed" to attack pit bulls. It is not that simple, Mr. Worthington. I look at the dogs as individuals, with individual sets of circumstances that led to the attacks. In both cases my dog did not retaliate in any way, although injured. I would assume that if all pit bulls were "hardwired" to attack small dogs as Worthington says, this would have been the perfect scenario.

Susan Macleod

(That's what's wrong with breed bans)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like no one is buying this crap. I mean you can read the article where he says he has done his research. When did one personal incident become research. Really and I hope most people see the correlation between his article and the fact that it almost proves we are correct in saying it the owners. He probably thought he was so slick sending that article for print when in actual reality the more crap he talks the more likely people are to see it for what it is.... may I say it again........ crap!

But I am happy in terms of these supportive letters. And the fact that the paper is pretty much taking a position on BSL... and its our side... yeah !
__________________
The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. --Gandhi
www.dogster.com/?123931
Reply With Quote