LETTER: Dog debate is not rational

The Editor,

Re: Adrian MacNair’s "Sympathy for the dog killer Paulsen"

This is a highly emotionally charged topic. Rational debate is next to impossible. I believe Adrian McNair got it essentially right. He has the experience of owning a dog, I had one for 15 years. He is not talking theory. He has discussed so many pertinent facets – some we may not want to think about or find unpalatable. Views about pet ownership are not homogenous, given the varied in- migration. But we must respect the wishes of those who consider dogs to be part of the family.

However, the debate is not rational. Local electronic media has taken to reporting pet stories among the headlines. Just the other day an emaciated dog roaming in Maple Ridge made one of the top stories. The media seem to be championing the under dog (pardon the pun) on the basis they can defend them selves. Tell me what is different about a person with mental issues?

There is no question Ms. Paulsen made a terrible mistake and covering it compounded it. This is same irrational fear at play as in hit and runs.  I believe the sentence is out of proportion. Some times they give 6 months for killing a person with a car. Some may not like what I have written. All I can say is read Mr. McNair’s column in its entirety.

Thanks.

Dave Bains

Surrey.