of innocent weapons and guilty perpetrators

Earlier, I blogged about the prevalence of Third World Mentality and the inhuman killing of the endangered sun bear that was unfortunate enough to have roamed into human territory.

In clear disgust, Manchester based Tantty Bujang fires ammunition against the Malaysian Department of Wildlife and National Parks (Perhilitan) for not doing their job. I lift the following directly from the letter:

In our quest for economic development, humans have time and again enlarged its territory through land development. In doing so, our environment- animals, birds and wildlife always pay the price. Their territory becomes smaller and inevitably, humans and wildlife comes across each other- with the wildlife almost always paying the price. These wildlife are part of our heritage which we should preserve. They have been around longer than us, and should be treated with respect.

Bingo, Tantty. Despite our fascinating twin towers, supersized international airport and hardly-used F1 track, we have lost touch with common sense, respect for nature, and compassion for life. We have become ignorant, arrogant and kiasu in our endless pursuit of material wealth.

The innocent dog

Earlier this week, reports of a nine-year-old boy "brutally" attacked by a large dog surfaced in mainstream media. Authorities were quick to respond by reprimanding the errant dog owner for not keeping the dog under strict care nor possessing a legal dog license, allowing it to roam the streets and hurt unsuspecting children. Additionally, the family members of the injured boy is contemplating legal action against the irresponsible dog owner.

Umno Youth Deputy Head Khairy Jamaluddin offers consolation to the victim, but insists on putting a racial and religious spin into his statements. I wonder, had the victim been a non-Malay, would he have visited and offered his moral support?

In any case, so far the owner has been quite cooperative with the authorities. One questions his motives, however. Is he trying to plead for a lighter sentence?

Why third world?

It seems that the authorities are more interested in the weapon than the perpetrator. Dogs are in nature docile and non-violent. However, poor upbringing and living conditions (both the responsibility of the owners) could cause emotional distress in the animals. Constant taunts and harsh living environments also contribute to the anguish that dogs could face.

News followers urge the authorities to impose heavier punishments on errant dog owners rather than punishing the dogs, which don't even understand human law. Regular The Star columnist and social activist Anthony Thanasayan offers his defense for the gentle creatures.

One wonders what the authorities would do with all the dogs "confiscated" from this errant owner. More importantly, what knee-jerk reactions they would impose to increase their efforts in rounding up stray dogs. What would they do to the innocent creatures while letting the actual "criminal" walk away with meagre fines? It may seem that they would stop at nothing to ensure that these "intruders" of human territory are removed or, worse, destroyed.

How much influence do associations such as the SPCA have in these cases? Could we depend on them to safeguard all life regardless of "race" (in this case, "species")? Or would these innocent creatures become victims of mankind's unstoppable dominion over the planet?