Dear Editors at AZCentral.com,
You could not be farther away from the truth! The aim of the page is to save Mickey from being put down and NOT to start a battle between child versus dog; that is what you are doing. You are asking people to choose, whereas the people trying to save Mickey are sympathetic to both – the child and the dog.
Your article says, “Mickey must be euthanized. That should be automatic when any dog attacks and mauls a human. It can no longer live.” What happens when a person is murdered? What happens when a young girl is raped? What happens when a person is attacked by another person? What happens when a human being commits a crime? Must he not be euthanized as well for his brutalities? Let us also keep in mind that while in most cases the human is fully aware of the damage he will cause, an animal is not.
Every individual, no matter how serious the crime, does indeed get a fair trial. So why then must a dog be deprived of one? Is it because he is “just a dog”? If that is the case then this is what I would like to share with you:
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
And why must the people who fight on Mickey’s behalf be portrayed as heartless and uncaring? I believe we all feel empathetic towards Kevin. It is truly a tragedy and yes he must be supported. But will you show your support for Kevin by asking for a dog to be put down? What good is it going to do to Kevin?
Human beings are entitled to a second chance when they (knowingly) commit a crime. If animals are governed by the laws humans make, why then must this inequality prevail? In regard to motives; unlike the average human being charged with assault, the dog does not hold a personal grudge against the child, nor was this a pre-mediated incident. The dog (not well taken care of) saw his food being taken away from him and reacted exactly how a hungry dog (or any animal including uncivilized humans) would. Must he be put down then for being a dog?
Mike Tyson once bit his opponent during a boxing tournament. He also said, “I would do it again if provoked. I would do it again under the same circumstances.” (BBC, 1999) What kind of punishment do you think he deserved?
It saddens me that your article portrays animal recues to be a simple matter and insignificant. It also shows your shallow understanding about a rescue operation – its struggles and hardships. If future generations continue to have a mentality like this, we will end up destroying our entire earth. It is not enough to practice equality only among human beings; equality must be practiced among all living beings that we share this planet with.
I personally do believe that Mickey must be given a second chance. He must be given the opportunity to reform just as a human would have been given a chance through parole or probation. In doing so, Mickey would be treated justly.
To all you non-supporters, I genuinely do respect your viewpoint. But take a moment to understand that as supporters of Mickey, we are not against Kevin, neither are we trying to compete by any means, we only want Mickey to have a second chance.
To the 38,000 people and counting who want to save Mickey, thank you for taking the trouble to understand the situation as a whole.
Yes! God bless animal activists… For they do know what they are doing!