Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Four. "Pit Bulls," "Doberman Pincers," and numerous other dog "breeds" have been selectively bred for fighting or attack. Many, if not most people who own the "aggressive" breeds, own them for protection. This may be well advised (ask any K-9 officer or soldier if they would trust their "aggressive" pets with their children) or not (consider any criminal who commonly knows little about dog training, or insecure "bad-guy or -gal" who owns animals to impress others). Well-trained police or military dogs cost several thousand dollars each.— January 4, 2015 5:44 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Don, it is with great regret that I get the impression that you may be marshaling a number of straw-man fallacies to counter-attack. I know you well enough to know that you do not need to mischaracterize another's statements to make a point. "If we tarred every person and every animal for a misdeed of one, we would all be misanthropes or worse." Did I suggest any such extreme? "If this be racial profiling, so be it." Did I accuse you of "profiling?" "The more you generalize about a population, the less you know about any individual in that population." --Henry Geiger If I were to generalize about you from your considerable body of work, I would have to conclude that you are faster than a speeding bullet, stronger than a locomotive, and can leap tall buildings in a single bound. Even so, I still doubt that you can walk on water. "The suspension of judgment is the highest exercise in intellectual discipline." --R. M. Gilmore In similar vein, am I to conclude that all German Shepherds, Belgian Malanois, and Chihuahuas, all of which have been bred or led or let to be aggressive, also should be banned? Fallacious, right? In a more reasoned vein, am I to conclude that you do not believe that any animal that fits the folkloric definition of "pit bull" can be a "safe" dog--as safe as any other breed, even if we acknowledge that such dogs have been bred for aggression? Are you familiar with the fox-breeding study out of Russia that demonstrated that a random population contained relatively docile animals and relatively aggressive ones? The docile ones were artificially selected/bred, so does this prove that there were no "docile" genes in a population that contained "aggressive" ones? Also, am I to conclude that you agree with everything I have taken the time to write except those statements with which you disagree? By the way, when my brother-in-law was a little boy, he was bitten in the face by the family Cocker Spaniel. Best, Twister— January 4, 2015 5:30 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Don, with greatest respect, I get the impression that you do not wish to discuss the public health and safety responsibilities of the relevant public authorities. If true, that is regrettable to me, but I will accept it if you are immovably intransigent on the subject.— January 4, 2015 3:47 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Unless others have additional points to make on this question, this is one more that we can set aside.— January 4, 2015 3:44 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
One of the great talents dogs have is escape. The "average person," whatever that is, is seldom qualified to know what it takes to keep a dangerous dog "confined." Confinement, I suggest, is never the solution to the prevention of death and injury by clearly dangerous dogs.— January 4, 2015 3:33 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Again, my purpose here is to illustrate areas of agreement, and to stick to one point at a time to avoid confusion and maximize clarity, while minimizing the emotional fog that can sometimes cloud the issue. Of course this perhaps goes without saying, but it is useful to restate the component issues under discussion, so they can be firmly established as non-issues.— January 4, 2015 3:29 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
My objective in suggesting that the correspondents engage in a summary of the relevant points made here is to provide an opportunity for reconsideration and reconciliation of the "sides." In other words, to try to find a mid-point of reason between extremes, especially those based on emotion and misunderstanding, not to "win" or defend a "position," by definition an immovable condition.— January 4, 2015 3:10 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Every law is a signpost of a case of failure of social mores. That the court and our government don't recognize the connection between saving lives and misery by anticipating such events with the evidence right in front of them, makes them, in my view, just as innocent or guilty of failing to control known dangerous animals as the owners. If they fail to perceive the situation, how can they expect the dog owner to do so? In other words, the government and the courts are responsible for public health and safety. How is it that they get off the hook but throw the book at some "lesser" citizen who may have been more ignorant than they? This is not about "second-guessing," it's about responsibility for prevention of injury and death, not just punishing the "guilty." This case appears to be replete with failures to act by the authorities as well as the dog owners, who are, by definition, in an inferior position to know what to do, such as insist that their dogs be evaluated by professionals within a designated department of government and take appropriate action. The authorities do not, of course, ever have to share in the blame in such cases, but it defies logic to conclude that they had no responsibility at all. Whoever has standing in the case (e.g., the deceased woman's family) should file a claim against the government, and we taxpayers should, regrettably, have to pay restitution. Ambulance-chasers, attack!— January 3, 2015 6:24 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Three. The owner should bear some responsibility. We do not know enough about the case to come to any reasonable conclusion about what specific responsibilities the owner should voluntarily cover, or what specific responsibilities should be imposed by law. I invite others to submit summary comments for further discussion.— January 3, 2015 4:36 p.m.
Appellate court weighs grisly pit bull death scene
Two. The dogs had to be killed, primarily because they were most likely beyond rehabilitation.— January 3, 2015 4:30 p.m.