BRATTLEBORO — Phil Innes raises some important questions regarding pit bulls and the responsibility and role of their human's caretakers in dog related problems in society [“The pit bull quandary,” Viewpoint, June 13].
But I question his negation of the public outcry over the shooting of a sick abandoned dog, one that happened to be a pit bull, as “a big fuss.”
Did he forget that the Windham County Humane Society also questioned the facts surrounding the killing of this dog, or that “the big fuss” also involved the fact that the shooting occurred in an open public park and elementary school playground where parents and children witnessed it?
His message seemed confused by his opinion that pit bulls are “universally detested.” The fact is, they are not. The vast majority of pit bulls don't bite.
And can we simply blame a specific dog breed (as we have done with Dobermans, German Shepherds, and Rottweilers in past decades), rather than the address the irresponsible and entitled behaviors of the humans responsible for the dogs?
We also might examine social attitudes and the lack of more effective social policies that are the sources of many of the problems.
One example: A recent AP story in the Reformer told of a 9-year-old being mauled by three pit bulls in Pittsfield, Mass. The story identified the breed and reported the horrific and grotesque injuries that resulted.
However, there was no question or discussion of how or why these dogs were unleashed and roaming the neighborhood. Nor did the article identify the owners of the dogs.
The story ended by noting that the dogs' owners “could be fined.”