Dear Editor,
Let me start by stating that I will be as neutral as possible and in no way want to defend or accuse anyone of wrongdoing. There are always different sides to a story, but nowadays cameras can help to show the truth. In the paper of Thursday, October 10, I read a letter sent to you by Cathy Kangas, which prompted me to react.
Mrs. Kangas, I have become more familiar with dogs’ behaviour, since at home we are also involved in the life of a Belgian Malinois. But that sceptical part of me reminds that if human beings can have psychological and/or psychiatric problems, so can animals. Just as there are no absolutes in human behaviour, I believe the same goes for animals. For this reason, I am not a favourite of having those dogs in the centre of people’s movement.
For example, I am not sure how the dog will react to someone slipping in its immediate area. I have not taken time to observe how the dogs are handled or treated, so I cannot voice an opinion on that either. But the intention of this letter is not about dog training. In my forty-odd years as a police officer, I have witnessed umpteen cases of overreaction from fanatics.
Whether they were political party followers, animal lovers, car worshipers, you name them, we were called. And on too many occasions it was a question of overreaction, which is very understandable. Thankfully those cases were generally resolved in an amicable manner. Like I stated before, I am not defending anyone, but after taking in the contents of that letter to you by Cathy Kangas I believe that instead of writing to you, Mrs. Cathy Kangas,(who could have expected that that letter could be published) being a member of the board of Humane Society of the United States could know the ramification of that letter.
I believe that Mrs. Kangas could have taken a different route. I do not believe that Mrs. Kangas is really out to destroy Sint Maarten because of an unpleasant situation which she writes could be remedied in another way. I do not believe that anyone personally offended Mrs. Kangas, I believe that the security officer was being cautious.
Hopefully from the side of TEATT there will be a speedy reaction to avoid any further missed interpretations. Apart from the dogs used by security companies, what I know is that the situation as it is at the moment is not conducive for having loose dogs. By now we all should have realized that the behaviour of 10 dogs on an area of 100 square meters is much more visible than the behaviour of 10 dogs on an area of 10,000 square meters.
Russell A. Simmons
