Ernestine Haselden spoke Thursday on behalf of a group of Scranton residents who have said they worry a group of dogs in the neighborhood will get loose and hurt someone.
Have they gotten loose before? Have they bitten anyone? I don’t see any mention of that. Maybe Ms. Haselden would like to ban some guy’s ax, locked away in a tool shed, because who knows, maybe one day someone will break into that shed and take the ax on a killing rampage. It could happen. People have used axes as weapons in the past. Do we just have to sit around and wait for the next Lizzie Borden massacre before we take action? Ban baby, Ban!
Oh and while we’re busy butting in to our neighbors’ business:
Haselden also presented a model of an animal control law that would also cover incessant barking, waste and odor, licensing, and a requirement for owners of dangerous animals to hold a $100,000 insurance policy.
What is this – a cranky “There outta be a law!” free-for-all?
Ruh-roh, Common Sense Alert:
A group of Southside Middle School students made a rebuttal to Haselden’s presentation. Teacher Brian Harvey, who owns two pit bulls as pets, said the request for a ban on the dogs is the result of a “severe generalization” and that pit bulls are used for search-and-rescue operations and as therapy dogs at hospitals.
The students proposed implementing canine safety education programs in schools, offering responsible canine ownership classes to pet owners, and adopting stronger laws on the city and county levels.
“Pit bulls are no more inherently dangerous to people than any other breed of dog,” student Emily Nance told council.
While the article doesn’t state clearly what the council’s decision or next step may be, the owner of the “pitbull type dogs” seems upbeat:
Gordon Williams, Haselden’s neighbor who owns the dogs in question, said he was pleased with the “good outcome” following all the presentations.
“(The dogs are) like my children,” he said.
I hear ya.