Sometimes, one can be right about one thing, and still be WAY out in left field. You might be saying something that, while technically correct, does not resonate with anyone. This is often due to hypocrisy, lack of reasoning skills, zero self awareness, ignorance of the domain, or all of the above.
A commenter on one of my YT videos came up with the "ADEP" acronym. This means "All Dogs Except Pits". In other words, an ADEP is a dog lover firmly committed to the principles of dog culture who simultaneously wants to ban Pit Bulls, or perhaps some other dog breed they don't like. They are correct that the nasty murder-beasts have no place in human communities, but they get just about everything else wrong. Before anyone jumps out of their skin, consider that to be an ADEP you must meet BOTH of the following criteria: 1) Dog cultist, 2) Want to ban pit bulls.
I have written about this many times in the past. This type of double-standard reasoning has made a complete mess of the situation, and I really wish all of these people would go away.
Now, all dog owners who want to get rid of pit bulls are not necessarily ADEPs. If you are a sane, meticulous, dog owner who respects the facts that pet ownership is a privilege dependent on keeping the animal in a humane and socially acceptable way, you respect the "golden rule" and various other social contracts, then you can make a solid and honest case for some breed restrictions.
However when you move out on the crazy scale, when you start to idolize dogs and dog ownership, the case for BSL will become very weak. It is a stretch to, on one hand insist that Dogs are Man's Best Friend! Everyone has to love dogs! Only Dogs give unconditional love! Dogs and Man have a SPECIAL GENETIC CONNECTION! And, then on the other hand, say We must banish a dog breed from the face of the earth! I am not arguing with their last premise, just all of the previous premises. While we have not crossed the boundary to a total double standard, the case for a breed ban is now very weak. It is weak because people are going to apply those pro-dog values to dog breeds that some people don't like.
The above under consideration, realize that the crazy train has not yet left the station. If your narrative is Dogs are better than people! Don't trust anyone who doesn't love dogs! Fido is a perfect judge of human character! Dogs never attack without good reason! If that is your narrative, congratulations! There is NO case to be made for breed restrictions in that framework.
It also appears that it is particularly hypocritical to glorify, advocate for, hype and promote large dogs and their ownership while simultaneously advocating to get rid of 1 or 2 breeds of them. Large dogs of other breeds badly injure people and create other problems all the time and not a peep out of you. I have yet to hear a good reason for the presence of ANY large dog in a human city that does not involve some mindless emotional appeal, canine supremacy or some other major logical fail.
Quite frankly, it is sanctimonious crap to advocate for these large breeds knowing the problems they cause. Again, yes, I and everyone else understands that pit bulls can and do inflict MORE damage during an attack, but so what? ADEPs essentially argue that any attack that doesn't result in a total dismemberment is somehow totally acceptable. Given B is less bad than A doesn't mean that B is totally acceptable. Someone deliberately spreading Smallpox makes a bad case for eliminating Ebola. Again, total fail.
We have zoned out just about every other large animal from human communities (don't make a fool of yourself and tell me about your cow.... you don't have a fucking cow in your 400 square foot downtown apartment, do you?). ALL large dogs should be zoned out of cities and suburbs: Doing so takes care of the pit bull problem by default, and solves a bunch of other problems at the same time.
I discuss this in the following video:
Have a great evening, and as always... People First.
Post a Comment