I've never really understood the concept of "fearing God". Why would one FEAR the benevolent force of all that is good in the universe? Was all of this Biblical fear mongering a way to get people join the church, and make sure that GOD sees us paying tithes and making a joyful noise in his praise from his throne in the sky, or he will send the unrepentant to that fiery place for all eternity ? Or, for Hindus....make you an ant for your next incarnation... I don't know. It seems to me, the churches who incite this kind of message that "the end is near" are well attended.
As far as this concept of "fear mongering" goes, the finger has been pointed at the pro-BSL camp, most of us having had one of those near meeting to GOD face to face moments ourselves, or have a loved one or a pet that was attacked, maimed, or killed. Wanting a change in policy for inherently dangerous dogs has made us into fear mongers according to the pit bull apologia.
They also claim the media is responsible for inciting fear and prejudice of their beloved fighting dogs, for reporting the news. Do people tune in to TV and Radio news , buy newspapers JUST to hear about yet another pit bull attack? Maybe I do, because as I have admitted in a prior post, I'm a zealot for the cause. Most people, unless you are one of those people in the pro-BSL camp, are not. The media also reports other kinds of bites, ranging from crazy soccer players, boxers, sharks, and even caterpillars.
The media just as often covers "good" stories about pit bulls. Huffington Post, just last week, devoted an entire week of fluff pieces, even resurrecting myths that pit bull advocates have debunked as misleading and dangerous. As it is, pit bull attacks, certainly of of other animals, are so commonplace, it's not really news unless there are some phenomenal circumstances about the attack. The kind of attack ended by a gunshot, by civilian or police, is a daily event. Most fatal human attacks by pit bulls only make local news, as compared to the coverage of shark attacks. In contrast, the summer prior to September 11, a single non-fatal shark attack was to inspire near tabloid coverage which is now referred to as the Summer of the Shark. Sharks kill and injure far less often than do the land sharks. We do not know if coverage of shark attacks actually creates more shark attacks, as many pit bull advocates claim, that media hype creates more pit bull attacks. We also don't know if discussing the inherent danger of sharks hurts their feelings as it does pit bulls. Again, I am missing the logic of the pit bull advocacy.
|Survivor Zainabou Drame will likely make the local news tonight in Ohio.|
I'm not sure how media coverage of an animal attack, be it by shark, wolf, coyote, Africanized bees, or more commonly, by a pit bulls, is fear mongering. I do witness, however, just as much use of the "fear mongering" tactic by the pit bull advocacy, with three of their most oft quoted verses.
|Taken from THIS anti-bsl opinnion piece.|
There is truth to this. I myself was attacked by a Chihuahua. It didn't even leave a scratch. There are media reports of other breeds causing serious injury and even fatalities. These are more rare. For some reason the pit bull advocates can't figure out, why their dogs bite more and why there is more damage and fatalities when they do bite. They don't seem to notice, that their breed seems to be the most likely to bite their owner or their family. They are the leading biters in many municipalities, outbiting the most popular breed, the Labrador. Maybe they say this as self reassurance, a defense mechanism to the truth that shouts to them when there is another incident reported...deep down, they know they have made a the riskiest choice in a canine companion. This is why they vehemently defend their choice. They may tell you with a straight face (or red with anger) how actually your Pomeranian or your Cocker Spaniel is actually responsible for more bites and even fatalities than the "nanny dog". Blah blah, so there.
"ANY DOG CAN BE TAUGHT TO BE AGGRESSIVE"
Why don't they seem to notice, with all of their empathy, awareness, and sensitivity, that the majority of these attacks are done by family pets, not by dogs who somehow escaped a fighting ring? Why don't dog fighters use more intelligent breeds of dogs, like Border Collies, German Shepherds, or Poodles for fighting dogs?
"YOUR BREED OF DOG COULD BE NEXT"
This one is to get all dog lovers to oppose BSL policy. It's often accompanied with the "first it was the German Shepherds, then it was the Doberman, then it was the Rottweiler, then it was the pit bull...." blah blah blah. Some of us have had our German Shepherds, Dobermans, and Rottweilers attacked by pit bulls, we don't buy it. I challenge any pit bull advocate to find some media reports of attempts to ban any other breed by the great big mean THEY in the sky and post the links and proof on this blog entry. I double dog dare you.
Here's something for them to fear, the people who likely are not active on the pro-BSL scene, but who are given the opportunity to vote on local policy. Sometimes they listen to the voice of wisdom, and reason, and they look at the numbers and the lives changed and lost...and decide to place more value on public safety than they do on an individual's choice of owning a fighting dog breed.
Psalm 111:10 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; all who follow his precepts have good understanding.
I think I get that one. I hope there is a real end of days to tuning in at ten, and there is yet another report of a pit bull attacking. Soon, please.