Hello all,
 
I have been away for a while since school started, but felt (after reading
the latest newsletter from FA) that I should post again.  Pat Wright is in
trouble, as is FA.  His newsletter for FA has an exact copy of the court
summons...where it states:
 
"Defendants, and each of them, are and were aware of the vicious and
bloodthirsty reputation of ferrets.  In particular, ferrets have a reputation
for unprovoked attacks, often on sleeping or relaxed infants and children."
 
My first and obvious question is: Where did the defendant's attorney get
this "scientific data" that he/she claims as fact?  Do these "unprovoked
attacks" refer to toe-biting in the middle of the night?  What the heck is
he/she talking about here?
 
Secondly, and probably most importantly to this issue...if ferrets are so
"vicious and bloodthirsty," then why is it that pit-bulls kill adult humans?
Surely Man's best friend is more harmful than a 2 pound ferret?  Frankly, I
love dogs, but pit-bulls scare the daylights out of me...they are trained to
be attack dogs...and I wonder if their instinct before this training is
"vicious and bloodthirsty?" It really doesn't matter, since there are (I am
sure) exponentially greater cases of deaths and injuries inflicted upon
humans (children, babies, and adults alike) than little 2 pound rugrats!
What is the story here?  The answer, I believe, is that those who do not
understand something (i.e. ferrets in this case) fear what they cannot
comprehend...and develop a sense of contempt to protect themselves from the
unknown.  Does anyone have further comments on this?  It really makes me
mad!  Grrrrrrrr!
 
     Dave
     Father to Rosie, Maxie, Sammi, Wiggles, and Shiva
 
P.S. I pulled my head out of the textbooks for this post!
[Posted in FML issue 1718]