July 27th, 2010 by Editor
The following excerpted opinion piece from the Halifax-Plympton Reporter, “Pit Bulls should be registered weapons,” was written by Massachusetts Republican State Committeeman Richard Greeley. (Sections of his article appear in block quotes, and my comments follow.) You know, we expect the nanny-staters to push overly bureaucratic, bloated government-type legislation like breed bans and mandatory registrations of guns, dogs, and the like. We do not expect a Republican State Committeeman to claim that a breed of dog (an animal) should be registered like a weapon. As a Republican, shouldn’t he know that breed-specific legislation doesn’t work just like gun control doesn’t work? Shouldn’t he also know that breed-specific legislation has been repeatedly ruled unconstitutional? Well, his whole article is devoid of proper research, so perhaps we shouldn’t expect him to know anything about the breed-specific legislation issue, which is why his uneducated opinion should be dismissed. And while his reply to my letter was respectful, I don’t think he bothered to read any of the research or supporting evidence I included before dismissing them. As Mr. Greeley himself pointed out to me, his piece is an opinion piece, and certainly he is entitled to his opinion. But when politicos foster uneducated and wildly ignorant opinions about “pit bulls,” a lot of innocent dead dogs is often the result.
He begins by name-calling saying,
…It has been said that figures don’t lie, but liars figure. And regarding temperament and dog bite statistics with respect to pit bulls, liars on the wrong side of this issue clamp their jaws down on certain figures and shake furiously.
Pit bulls, i.e. the American Staffordshire terrier, the Pit Bull Terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier and the American Bulldog, have been subjects of constant debate in this country. Given the plurality and severity of pit bull attacks on people recently, the debate is heating up again.
Did he just allude to that long-debunked urban mythology about “pit bulls’” having locking jaws? If he isn’t embarrassed yet, he should be because ironically that myth is told by the very “S.O.B.s” he claims own “pit bulls” as status symbols. And he insinuates that breed fanciers lie and manipulate statistics??? Oh that’s rich considering that he defines “pit bull” as four different breeds and then refers to them as if they were one! Hmm…wonder if that might massively skew statistics, lumping a handful of breeds, their mixes, and their lookalikes together? I think that’s what’s called “fuzzy math.” Read the rest of this entry »