The suffering often visited upon these hapless creatures of the animal world by their owners and the public at large makes one wonder at the irony at branding one ‘dumb’ and one ‘human.’
Several cases have come to light over the years of dogs mauling persons, sometimes to death.  The pit bull has been one of the worst offenders, and the cry for their destruction has been loud and strident.
But has anyone ever wondered why the dogs should be punished in preference to the owners?
There are instances where traffic offenders are sanctioned by the law and denied licences to drive on the public highways for varying periods, depending on the severity of the charges and the individual magistrate or judge.
So why, if a person dies, or is seriously injured because of the neglect of a dog-owner to safely secure their animals, the owner is not penalized by being denied the right to the ownership and/or care of dogs within a specified duration?
Some dogs are trained to attack persons who venture into designated areas, but how could a dog recognize a friend from an enemy?  And how can a dog recognise a demarcated line if a fence is breached?  Who is the culprit if a dog, trained to attack, assumes this mode, having been left untended and free to roam the public thoroughfares?
The laws of a country are structured to protect the citizens of the land, but what laws protect the ‘dumb’ animals, which cannot argue a case in their defence?
Many advocates for human rights have forgotten that there is a greater calling, and that is the rights of all living creatures, living in captivity, to care and protect.
One aspect of protection that should be afforded dogs is that owners should have them spayed or neutered, but most people neglect to do this, which leads to many additional problems, from which either the dogs or their progeny suffers.
Until a society recognizes protecting dogs as an imperative, then we will forever have recalcitrant dog owners leaving their animals free to pose a danger both to themselves and victims made vulnerable and subject to attacks by animals which cannot differentiate between a criminal and someone in pursuit of their lawful business.
In a subsequent editorial we will explore in greater detail the inhumane practices, in general, visited upon helpless creatures, which have no means of defence after they have only acted in ways peculiar to their instincts, by owners who use, misuse, and often abuse animals, supposedly under their care and protection, and members of the general public.
Until legislation is enacted to bring these culprits to justice animals will continue to be blamed and mistreated by the society for crimes of which the human specie is culpable.
In many countries of the world cruelty to animals is treated as a serious crime. According to the American Humane Association the US Tracking Animal Cruelty Crimes Act of 2007 would require the FBI to add animal cruelty as a separate category in its crime data reporting system.
The link between animal cruelty and other forms of societal violence is a national concern. The practice of dog fighting perfectly illustrates this connection, as it is almost always linked to illegal drug and weapons violations, gambling, aggravated assault and gang violence.
When local and state police agencies report animal cruelty incidents to the FBI, they are labeled “other offenses.” This makes it nearly impossible to access and respond to even the most basic information about animal cruelty crimes and their perpetrators.
U.S. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) introduced the Tracking Animal Cruelty Crimes Act of 2007, which requires the FBI to add animal cruelty as a separate category in its National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).