Playing God

This is a rant. Just to pre-warn you.

I was infuriarated after reading this article. I totally agreed with PATCHES's contribution in the Opinion pages. It is indeed authorities' biased cruelty to dogs. Council 'president' Abdul Halim Abdul Latif says the situation only became chaotic when the dog owner turned aggressive.

Uh-huh.

So poor Eng Her Sun was going to sit back and watch the dog shooters just kill his dogs? I treated my dogs as my family and totally empathise with Mr Eng - I would go mental if anyone hurt my dogs much less even try to kill them. Council 'president' says they had 'no choice' because of mounting complaints from neighbours of the noise etc. Agree that perhaps Mr Eng should have been more considerate. Think about moving the dogs to other areas. But just to kill them on the basis they didn't have a choice? Time to stop using their brains to think about how best to get bribes and what excuse to give the caller on the phone about their poor service. I have been amazed at the creativeness these people have when it comes to inventing excuses for their sloppiness and laziness so it does show that they do have brains and can use it if they want to. Time to start using those brains for the right reasons - what about offering Mr Eng to re-house his dogs?

I must say - I'm not even sure why I'm shocked at the Malaysian authorities' actions. The bias-ness towards dogs happens all the time. In order to get a dog licence in one of the cities, you would have to get permission from your neighbours before you get a dog. I'm sure there is good reasoning behind this. But why dogs only? Why not cats? My parents had a neighbour two doors away who had about ten cats and there was no sign that he would stop the cats breeding anyway. Fair enough if it's his choice. But he doesn't stop his cats from trespassing into others' houses and doing their business in others' gardens. He doesn't stop them from climbing onto and scratching neighbours' cars. When asked about them, he merely shrugs. Then when one of his cats trespassed into my parents' garden and my dogs got excited, he got annoyed at MY dogs in MY parents' garden for aggravating the cat who trespassed. Ooooooh - was I annoyed then. Why blame the poor things whose only crime was to give all their love and trust to (wo)men - more than I can say for most humans?

So ok, agree that the authorities in here may have had a case. But why stop at dogs? If you have good reasoning for it, then the same should be done for cats, etc. I can make it my personal mission to find all houses with more than 2 cats (the allowed number for dogs in most places) and will happily provide it to the authorities free of charge. But I won't do that. Because 1) I don't believe the cats should be shot either; 2) I won't stoop to the same level of the authorities and smug dog shooters; and 3) I have better things to put my brain to use on. Authorities should think about having more events to make sure people are responsible pet owners. That they know when dogs do their business outside, they should scoop it up and dispose of it properly. That their cats should not wander around into others' gardens.

Here's another thought for the authorities thinking up of more excuses to make dog owners' (or actually, all residents) lives miserable and give authorities a chance to earn their money: Why don't you make all residents ask their neighbours' permissions before having a child? Ask all neighbours before you can have a piano, organ or any musical instrument - because it would make noise too. Ask all neighbours before you can have a motorcycle and take out the silencer so it that does the annoying loud vrooooom noise when it starts and goes.