This story is about dogs poisoned in a Portland park after recent leash issues were raised. I like dogs, I think dogs should run around unleashed as often as possible in areas set up as no leash zones. People who let their dogs run unleashed in leash zones should be ticketed. Apparently this wasn’t happening, so someone took matters into his own hands. The results: “the few dog owners who do show up keep their tethers tight.” OK, that was probably the desired result.
The debate: who’s to blame for this? Obviously the dog poisoner. IMO, those offices sworn to uphold the law that turned around and ignored an issue that was important to many are equally to blame. If cops enforced leash laws, those dogs would still be alive. There’s a reason for leash laws and they should be enforced. On the issue of terrorism, because that’s what I think this is, here’s an example of one where it actually is doing something that leash advocates would think is constructive…it’s making people keep their dogs on the leash, or stay out of the park altogether. So I don’t think it’s analogous to something like saying that the US is to blame for 9/11, since 9/11 did not fix any of the things the perpetrators might have been pissed about.
Well I guess it’s lucky no kid has put any in it’s mouth yet. Then you might find a new spin on the story. Since I’m not a psycho jerkwad I probably would have opted for some kind of “skunk trap”. Poison sausage is cheaper and easier obviously.
I’m not sure this is something most leash advocates would want…people afraid to go to the park with their dogs. I wouldn’t go there even with my dog on a short leash, he can snap stuff off the ground pretty quick.
I guess I could have him muzzled, on a 1 foot leash with a choke collar. I have a feeling that might not be enough for this particular “leash advocate”.
When I was in high school, about a decade ago, my neighborhood was practically overrun by unleashed dogs, many of whom had gone stray and become feral (the vast majority of which were actually coming from an ajoining(SIC?) neighborhood which was and is signifgantly lower income.) To make a long story short, city law enforcement and animal control had one officer who did his best, but his best wasn’t enough. Unfortunately, one of the neighborhood kids was attacked by one of these unleashed dogs and was terribly hurt (he survived, but lost the use of three fingers and has to walk with a cane. He’s now in high school.) When the city refused to ‘up the ante’ in solving the stray problem, our neighborhood council started setting ‘coon traps,’ chickenwire and steel boxes with a door that goes one way and not the other. After some 50 to 60 deliveries to the SPCA (the majority of those animals were fed and had up-to-date vaccination(SIC?) tags,) they stopped taking our ‘strays’ and we began to set out toxic foods. Even that didn’t do much to stem the tide of wandering mongrels in our streets. Finally (about a year after the attack on Kaleb) the neighborhood began using firearms on any dog that was seen to be hostile or threatening to the neighborhood (eg, animals who barked, snapped, or acted agressively against any individual in the neighborhood), as well as those traveling in packs. After some 90 were killed (with an identical number of police calls for firearms activity,) the city added two officers to the animal control team and began fining those who were allowing their animals to roam free.
It is unfortunate that such actions were required, but free roaming animals such as these (cats too, but they’re less likely to attack a kid) must be contained. True, the leash advocate in the OP did harm to animals who wern’t endangering persons, but if it takes something of this magnitude to force the hand of local law inforcement, I’m forced to agree with the vigilante.
zwaldd, I disagree with your analogy that this is terrorism, because terrorism is, by definition, a planned and orchestrated use of attacks which instill fear into their targets and potential targets in an effort to change governemtnal policy or to force action. Now, if he was shooting owners of unleashed dogs, yea that’s terrorism (minor terrorism, not on the scale of what’s going on in Israel, or 9/11 or whatnot.) I merely thing that this is unlawful vigalante activity.