Skip to main content
Opinion
Palm Coast Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2017 1 year ago

Palm Coast Observer readers defend pit bulls

Share
Also in letters: Flagler Cares' suicide awareness campaign, and the Palm Coast Community Center

Facts show that Muneco the pit bull should not be put down

Dear Editor:

Jimmy Winters is correct: “What happened to Muneco is unfair.” I want to fight for him, too.

This is not an issue of sentiment. It is an issue of facts and evidence.

The victim “thought the bite was a freak accident.” She did not call the Sheriff’s Office, nor did she “realize she had injured until she was home.”

The Flagler Humane Society director put Muneco through a series of tests to determine temperament and got “never so much as a growl.” She also explained the clear difference between a bite and mouthing behavior; the latter “is not intended to harm.”

A certified behavior consultant evaluated Muneco and got “no aggressive response at all,” concluding the dog is not “a danger to the public,” but rather a “very behaviorally well-tempered, very stable, friendly dog.”

In October 2016, when the city was called about a bite case at the owner’s home, a child was grabbing Muneco’s collar and pulling, “choking the dog.” Even then, Muneco did not bite down on the child.

During the Feb. 2 hearing, dog park witnesses testified to Muneco’s “friendly,” “playful” behavior and temperament.

In light of the above reported facts, how can the hearing officer say she didn’t have “testimony from anyone” that Muneco did not “aggressively attack a person, severely injuring that person”? Additionally, the hearing officer has chosen to ignore the revisions to the city codes, currently being worked on, that do not mandate destruction of the dog.

Upon appeal, this death penalty verdict deserves to be overturned. The evidence is clear.

Judy Hucik

Palm Coast

 

Why do you only report on the misdeeds of pit bulls?

Dear Editor:

Almost every week, we see negative articles in the Palm Coast Observer about pit bulls committing bad acts. In those same weeks, there are probably an equal number of attacks from other breeds. Why only report negative stories on the poor, mistreated pit bull population?

The terriers you are so inclined to print negative articles about are some of the sweetest, most loyal breeds. Try asking some of their owners once in a while. These dogs are never mean or aggressive unless their owners have made them that way. It is the owners you should be writing about, not the poor mistreated dogs who only want to please their owners.

Any dog can be starved and mistreated to the point where it will act aggressively, but dogs in general, and especially pits, only want to please their owners. Dogs will chase other dogs and cats and squirrels; it is their nature. It requires responsible owners to own big, strong dogs, and they should always be leashed to inhibit their natural instincts to chase.

Roger Biddle

Flagler Beach

 

Thanks for sticking up for those at risk for suicide

Dear Editor:

You are doing important work calling attention to Flagler Cares’ search for communitywide involvement for suicide awareness and prevention initiative (“Suicide: A Flagler County Emergency,” published Feb. 15).

Those of us associated with the newly formed Atlantic Coast Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State (find us on Facebook) are particularly concerned about statements made by some faith-based organizations that being LGBTQ is “disgusting, unnatural and aberrant behavior.” These messages may be the religious beliefs of some, but certainly have no place in our public schools and other government-run programs. They do nothing but help tip the scales in a very wrong direction for those who contemplate suicide. 

Let’s work together to preserve the mental health of those who need the most help. Let's keep our schools and community safe for LBGTQ people by keeping them free of faith-based bigotry.

Merrill Shapiro, president

Atlantic Coast Chapter

Americans United for Separation of Church and State

 

Community Center reconstruction was not the will of the people

Dear Editor:

I am a concerned citizen and wish to express my disappointment in our elected representatives. My chargrin is with the way the city is using money to pay for city projects without having input from the voters and taxpayers of Palm Coast.

To cite a couple of examples: the recently constructed City Hall in Town Center and now the Community Center

When City Hall was placed on the ballot years ago, it was denied. The Community Center renovation was not placed on a recent ballot. We, the taxpayers, had no say in the need or validity of these expenditures.

Another example is the costly landscaping, irrigation system and I assume the relocation of utilities to accommodate the undertaking. While there may or may not be a valid logic for these projects in the minds of the city staff, it should be incumbent on our elected officials to ask questions and determine if the city taxpayers should have a vote.

There are more critical projects that should be funded: safe zones for school bus stops with adequate lighting; street lights in neighborhoods that are experiencing high volumes of burglarly, break-ins, vandalism and crime; and sidewalks in neighborhoods to alleviate residents and children from having to walk in the same lane as traffic.

The concern of the majority of most neighborhoods is that there is only one egress, and that can cause huge problems in the event evacuation is necessary. I hope this points out to all of you one citizen’s concern about government and taxation without representation.

O.W. "Buck" Troesch Jr.

Palm Coast

 

Related Stories

Advertisement