By: Mare

Mare — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:28:22 +0000

My comments probably won’t be looked upon very favourably but I feel that Gus’ owner must share at least SOME of the responsibility for what happened to poor Gus. This incident raises several issues, the least of which is the issue of respect for private property. I don’t mean to defend the actions of the perpetrator, not in the least, I absolutely abhor what he/she did and it is inexcusable, for any reason! I realize that Gus lives in the country and that most country dogs still run loose and unsupervised according to past habits of country living. But, simply because something was done a certain way for a long period of time, doesn’t make that thing right (otherwise slavery would never have been abolished!).
I was raised in the city in the late 50s/early 60s and a lot of dogs ran loose here too back then but they don’t anymore due to city by-laws, and rightly so. No one needs other folks’ dogs and cats digging up their gardens, getting into garbage, or having to clean up after anothers’ pet’s do-do on one’s own property, especially when one doesn’t even have a pet oneself! Farmers would not consider letting other animals in their possession run loose about the countryside, eating other peoples’ crops, digging up property, getting into others’ garbage bins or causing a hazard on the roads…why then should dogs and cats be allowed the same?
I may have been city bred and raised but I also spent every summer whilst
growing up living and working on the farms of my relatives, whose dogs also ran loose – and I saw far too many of them I killed on the country roads. These weren’t highways or even secondary highways either…these were just your basic gravel country roads.
Furthermore, the world is not as friendly a place now and living in the country is not all that much different anymore than city living in many ways today. Used to be that one could leave one’s door unlocked living in the country, we did in the city too back then, but again, not anymore. We live in a different world.
I agree that punishment with regards to mistreatment/cruelty of animals is sadly lacking and certainly not even close in equal measure to the crime. This still does not belay the fact that it is the individual pet owners’ ultimate responsibility to keep pets safe, not society at large. If he/she truly cares about Gus’ welfare, they will learn a valuable but hard-learned lesson from this incident and end Gus’ roaming days as someone in the area clearly resents Gus’ intrusion on their private property and worse, feels absolutely no remorse in killing/maiming in order to prevent Gus from continuing to do so. While the best answer is of course the finding of and then administering punishment in a manner suitable to the crime, to the person who did this, that is not reality – the perp is most often never found in these and similar cases such as poisonings. Of course it is possible (anything is possible!) but very unlikely that Gus would have been shot had he been confined to his own yard. I know that this still does happen as there are some truly sick individuals about but still, had Gus not given this person the impetus to act in this manner, chances are greater that it would not have happened at all.
We may not be able to change other people, but we certainly can change ourselves and hence the actions of our pets with respect to preventing them from trespassing upon another’s property and raising their ire.

Comments on: Follow-up: What happened to this Dog?

By: Mare