Until recently, the maximum penalty for canine homicide, a technical and rather unemotional term for describing the fact that someone’s dog killed a human, was 19700.-AUD. After the string of fatal pitbull attacks here in the last 18 months, the Domestic Animals Act was revised, and now the maximum penalty finally involves jail time.
So I am reading with utter astonishment that the person who failed to secure a deadly weapon pitbull in his house, giving it the chance to run across the street and kill 4-year old Ayen Chol, was today fined a mere 11000 Dollars in the Sunshine Magistrates Court. I understand that jail time was not an option because at the time of the killing, the Domestic Animals Act hadn’t been changed yet. But the judge didn’t think that at least the maximum financial penalty available was justified in this case? Why ever not? Because it was a black child, from Sudan, and not one of ours? Because the guy showed remorse? Because what happened wasn’t really bad enough to deserve the maximum? How completely appalling. Shame on you, Magistrate Grinberg. What would the penalty have been if it had been an unregistered firearm instead of an unregistered pitbull that did the killing, I wonder?
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Pitbulls and their mixes need to be removed from human society. How many more dead children does it need to convince people?
