Middle often drowned out by fringe elements

A STORY titled: Chance to own a dog for the Boxing Day Cup has generated a larger than average amount of online comment.

Certainly there are a number of people who are troubled by the use of animals in sport and for good reason will not tolerate any cruelty in the pursuit of that sport.

An anonymous supporter of the greyhound industry rang the Daily Liberal and handed out an intemperate spray liberally sprinkled with expletives. Nothing like a shot or two at the messenger along with personal abuse to get the message across mate...

But on the other side there were evangelistic missives condemning all greyhound people, painting them with a singular brush as cruel and thoughtless people.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact one industry supporter acknowledged there were some cases of mistreatment but there were also responsible and caring people as well.

That person raised a good point: what about dogs and pets that are not of sporting breeds that might be mistreated?

There are many cases of cruelty to animals but in the whole scheme of things the proportion of offenders, compared to the general pet-owning population, is a percentage in just single figures.

There must be open discussion and means to drive out of the industry those who undertake acts of cruelty.

But anyone who knows greyhounds knows these gentle animals [bred for speed] love to run and are equally loved by their owners.

Let's have a balanced approach from both sides of the argument?


Discuss "Middle often drowned out by fringe elements"

Please note: All comments made or shown here are bound by the Online Discussion Terms & Conditions.