Ignorance is not a dirty word
from
monthly column in the Arab Tribune, Arab Alabama, Oct. 200
by Fred Lanting
Politicians: are most of
them stupid? Or are they just lazy? Quite often there are grounds for
making generalizations. I’ve already voiced my opinion on the
addle-brained “rulers of other people’s homes” who are denying property
rights by hiding behind specious arguments that your neighbor’s hobby
(collecting spare parts, etc.) is some kind of threat to the general
welfare and health of the unincorporated parts of the county. One of the
next planned moves of county government against personal liberty will
involve your pet.
The misnamed “Home Rule”
ordinance is not the only vehicle by which ignorant politicos will
deprive citizens of their rights and pleasures of pet ownership and
companionship. There are also a spate of racist (let’s call a spade a
spade, and I’ll explain that shortly) local laws being drafted and
enforced across the country, in spite of State laws that already cover
the needs they supposedly address. These penalize owners of specific
breeds of dogs.
While I was in Europe
last month, an Arab, Alabama resident complained in a Sept. 12 letter to
an editor about “pit bull dogs”, and proposed that owners of breeds he
described as “pit bulls” be forced to have their pets “fixed at birth,
making the breed extinct”. Now, I’m using an acceptable definition of the
word “ignorant” in describing that writer, which is simply a person who
does not know. I don’t use it in a pejorative or denigrating sense; I’m
just saying that this person doesn’t know what he’s talking about — you
cannot find the reproductive organs in a dog that young.
Claiming that certain
breeds are inherently, genetically “killer animals” because certain
individual members of such breeds have been the canine equivalent of
criminals, is unfounded, and the person making such claims is as ignorant
of that branch of philosophy known as logic, as he is of canine
psychology and anatomy.
Now, as to my use of the
term “racist”: it is literally accurate. Most violent-crime prison
inmates are blacks. Does this mean that all black people are necessarily
“killer animals”? Tell that to Clarence Thomas, Barack Obama, Alan Keyes,
Condoleeza Rice, George Foreman, and Bill Cosby, to name a few. If you
say yes, you are unarguably a racist, so it is not a great stretch of the
imagination to say a person is also a type of racist if he automatically
classifies all members of a specific canine breed (race) as “killers” or
“dangerous”.
If you want to disagree,
do so on the basis of fact and experience. If you want to call me
ignorant in this subject, investigate (or try to match) my credentials
first. I have been a dog owner since 1937, a breeder since 1945, a
trainer and handler since 1966 (having put numerous titles on my own and
others’ dogs), and a dog show judge since 1979. I have written a number
of books on dogs, have judged and lectured in about 30 countries, and
have received the praise of many leading authorities in the veterinary
and dog-sport worlds. I am listed as “expert witness” by a couple of
attorney clearing houses (on call for litigation concerning dogs).
I am not only a judge of
“pit bulls” for the United Kennel Club, but also an inspector for the
National APBT Association (the initials stand for the accurate name,
American Pit Bull Terrier). I judge and otherwise evaluate many hundreds
of these every year, and have yet to encounter a vicious one. I know some
exist, owned by irresponsible people like Michael Vick and ghetto
gangsters, but these are the product of bad people doing bad training,
not the result of genes. It’s the owner and the training, not the breed!
A child could see that. But most politicians, it seems, cannot.
I’m more than willing to
assume that people who stick labels on breeds of dogs or categories of
people, are doing so out of ignorance instead of malice. There are many
areas in which I am ignorant, but the subject of dogs is not one of them.
People do not spend the kind of money they do in order to fly me to all
those countries (to judge and teach) unless they are in agreement with
the rest of the dog world that I know more about the subject than most
people do. So, who are you going to believe, a person who talks about
“animals that are bred to become trained killers”, or one whose specialty
involves canine psychology, behavior, training, anatomy, and health?
The key (overlooked)
word in the letter was “trained”. Just as with human juvenile
delinquents, if you allow them to run in packs without supervision and
careful training, you are “training” criminal activity. If you show them
how to do bad things and create a psychological and physical environment
where they have to become vicious in order to survive, that’s training,
not a matter of race (breed) or innate character.
I’d like to
mention a good example of a journalist realizing that he (and many
politicians who pass laws about pets) may be quite ignorant of the
subject. Michael Jiggins, on the Staff
of the Brockville (Ontario,
Canada) Recorder & Times, writes
in the Thursday, September 27, 2007 edition,
“An executive member of the Dog Legislation Council of Canada (a canine
advocacy group) says Brockville is barking up the wrong tree by
appointing a council committee to hear appeals on dangerous dog
designations.” He then quotes Cathy Prothro as saying, “I think you need
some canine experts.” Right on!
I am not quoting the whole news item, but
using this excerpt to explain that while everyone has the right of free
speech, it might be wise to bridle one’s tongue (and pen) when the
subject is best handled by someone with a bit less ignorance in that area
than we might have ourselves. And perhaps politicians who wander outside
their fields of expertise should use the wisdom and experience of experts
rather than be lazy and remain ignorant of the subject at hand.
You might also want to look
up
Breed
Specific Legislation leads to unspeakable cruelty
on the Internet.
