Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

Court of Appeals is wrong: Pit bull adoptions continue in Albuquerque

In his column, "Pit bulls: Own them at your own risk," Dan Rodricks quotes a recent Maryland Court of Appeals decision that says the Albuquerque Humane Society has stopped accepting and adopting out pit bulls "because of their potential for attacks on other animals and people." That is doubly incorrect.

First, the "Albuquerque Humane Society" does not exist. Second, Animal Humane — New Mexico, a 47-year old private animal shelter based in Albuquerque, N.M. (often mistkenly called the Albuquerque Humane Society), has always taken in pit bulls and pit bull mixes. We have never refused admission of any dog based on its breed. Further, we are extremely proud of our highly successful track record for adopting hundreds of safe pit bulls into loving homes.

In support of this often misunderstood and maligned breed, Animal Humane has created a program called 505 Pit Crew that is aimed at education school aged children and young adults to address the horrors illegal dog-fighting. 505 Pit Crew program combines humane education and outreach with free dog training classes in an effort to divert youth from dog fighting and provide them with the education and tools needed for responsible dog ownership.

As New Mexico's oldest humane society, Animal Humane — New Mexico opposes all breed-specific legislation because it has been statistically proven to be ineffective; does not acknowledge that multiple environmental factors that to cause dog bites having nothing to do with the breed of dog; and passage of such laws result in the deaths of thousands of perfectly sound, stable and loving pit bull type dogs.

Peggy Weigle, Albuquerque, N.M.

The writer is executive director of Animal Humane — New Mexico

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Another diatribe against pit bulls

    Another diatribe against pit bulls

    As a woman of a certain age and a pit bull adopter, I was dismayed to read another attack on pit bulls by columnist Dan Rodricks that this time seemed to question whether senior citizens are appropriate companions for such dogs ("In Frederick, a tragic reminder of pit bull ruling," Jan. 20).

  • Violence against pets must be taken seriously

    Violence against pets must be taken seriously

    In response to the editorial "Man's best friend" (Oct. 13), I am disappointed that The Baltimore Sun turned people's reactions to reported abuse into a competition as to which victims of violent crimes are more worthy of sympathy or outrage. Violence is violence, and none of it is good for our...

  • Tougher minimum sentences needed for animal cruelty [Letter]

    Tougher minimum sentences needed for animal cruelty [Letter]

    Animal cruelty is a violent crime that is often an indicator crime and a predictor crime as well. Animals, however, are property under the law, and while we have seen an increase in the number of prosecutions, most judges continue to treat these crimes as minor property crimes ("Man's best friend,"...

  • People who abuse animals are likely to abuse humans, too [Letter]

    People who abuse animals are likely to abuse humans, too [Letter]

    Is it too much to ask for The Sun's editorial board to consider both animal abuse and violence against humans as deserving of stiff sentencing ("Man's best friend," Oct. 12)?

  • Pit bulls still dangerous [Letter]

    Pit bulls still dangerous [Letter]

    I want to thank journalist Dan Rodricks for his informative column about pit bulls ("Two years after Maryland court ruling, pit bulls on attack," April 26). It helps me understand more about the pit bull lover uproar and their jargon about it being "the owner, not the breed." However, nothing will...

  • Rodricks feeds into pit bull hysteria [Letter]

    Rodricks feeds into pit bull hysteria [Letter]

    I was disturbed on multiple levels after reading Dan Rodricks' recent article, "Two years after Maryland court ruling, pit bulls on attack" (April 26). Not only does Mr. Rodricks feed into anti-pit bull hysteria for the sake of sensationalizing a hot-button issue, but his piece can hardly be called...