Greetings everyone!
You may have noticed that the very first post I put up on this blog was an open letter to Mayor Stephen Mandel concerning Edmonton's breed specific legislation. To the uninitiated, breed specific legislation seems like a good idea: Certain breeds of dogs are bred to be more aggressive than other breeds, therefore making those breeds illegal must reduce the number of bites and fatalities, right?
Well, okay. Let's follow through on that logic. What are some breeds of dogs that are bred to be more aggressive? Let's start with the most obvious: Hunting dogs.
Hunting dogs include any hound breeds, such as bloodhounds, coon hounds, and beagles. But wait! Beagles aren't particularly vicious, even though they're bred for hunting rabbits and foxes! Granted, you don't want to be on the other end of the leash if a bloodhound or beagle catches a scent trail, and heaven forbid you be near a coon hound when it's run a raccoon up a tree. But they have no more aggression towards humans than any other animal. Mind you, the animals they hunt aren't particularly known for fighting back, so we'll give them a pass.
Well, what hounds are meant for hunting vicious animals? Something like a badger? Well, that would be the dachshund, otherwise known as a weiner dog. They're bred to dig into badger holes and fight badgers. And dachshunds actually are known to bite a little more often than other dogs, because people often buy dachshunds without fully understanding that the animal they just purchased to be a beloved pet is, in fact, a rather stubborn hunting dog.
What about guard dog breeds? Bull mastiffs are huge dogs, but they aren't particularly violent, despite being bred to be guard dogs. Indeed, they're so big so that they can knock intruders over and sit on their stomachs (the traditional way to train a bull mastiff to guard) until help comes by. But unless you've specifically trained them, bull mastiffs aren't particularly vicious animals.
I've met many small dogs that have a vicious streak a mile wide, and many big bully breed dogs that are incredibly personable and the friendliest beasts you'll ever meet. In short, banning breeds won't keep bad owners from creating bad dogs. Only a education can do that.
What sort of a message are we sending young children when we tell them that certain breeds of dogs are evil just because of what they are? We're telling them that birth can determine if you're going to be good, or going to be bad. That simply isn't true.
As Christians, we have a duty in this world to watch over the animals and creatures God has put on this earth with the same mercy and justice that he watches over us with. God doesn't discriminate between black, brown or white. He doesn't care if you're tall and broad shoulders, or small and slight of frame. He loves us regardless of how we look on the outside. Indeed, He sent His one and only Son to die on the cross so that our sins might be forgiven. Isn't that a much better message to send our children?
If we begin to discriminate against dogs based on breed, it's a short road before we cause a dreadful tragedy when a beloved family dog is put down simply because of how it looks, like Lennox in Belfast. That sets a dark precedent for breed specific legislation. What sort of message are the kids who hear about Lennox going to take away from that? Is it one of love and understanding? Or is it one of ruthlessness and hate?
No comments:
Post a Comment