Local vet clinic bans 3 breeds... WHAT?!

[cowgirla]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Denver has had their BSL on the books since the 80's, but hasn't actively enforced it until '05. So it might be fairly accurate.

Except when the study itself comes right and says "we didn't bother counting all the pitbulls in this study, and didn't include them, because Denver has BSL." Kind of makes the study null and void if you want to compare pitties to other breeds that were included.

 

[NStarz]

I was a child, like 7 and 8. You dont usually think to call the cops on your care takers at that age.

I would. But I don't know your situation fully, so I'll refrain from judging. You may be a little biased about the issues, though, considering your background.

 

[peachy3214]

You implied that more lower class people fight dogs than higher class people. Vick was no longer lower class, and the rign they busted in the mid-west last fall involved middle and upper-class citizens.

I was refering to the area that he was raised in which didnt have a lot of money at the time and can effect who you are as a person. To say that dog fighting is occuring just as much in middle class america as in poorer places is ridiculous.

[/QUOTE]I grew up down the street from Eminem lol. You aren't the only person living in an urban area where dog fighting exists. It's awful that your uncles would go to dog fights, let alone take a child to one. The thought of it makes me sick to my stomach. You can argue the race card all you want, but dog fighting is not a sport specific to an ethnic group, just as terrorism is not specific to the Muslim community. What's going on in Darfur? Or how about North Korea? Are those people not considered terrorists because they aren't threatening the United States?[/QUOTE]

I didnt say I live in an urban environment. Im not saying race entirely. The white people that live in my area participate in it too but because they are emulating the black culture that surrounds them. It is a problem in some black communities in the south...... end of story. This does not mean that all blacks do it. Each of the terrorists in those particularly situations do fit certain profiles depending on the situation.



[/QUOTE]You don't hate dog fighting more than most. You make the problem worse by throwing all of these stereotypes out and hoping it will go away. People like you are the reason others cross the street when I am walking my CGC, therapy certified APBT on the sidewalk. You say you like "pits," but you just continue to add ignorance to the negativity surrounding the breed.[/QUOTE]


I accept stereotypes so that the issue can be addressed head on at the root of the problem. Ignoring them only allows the problem to persist. I haven't said one negative thing about the breed, only those that use them for the wrong reasons.

 

[peachy3214]

I would. But I don't know your situation fully, so I'll refrain from judging. You may be a little biased about the issues, though, considering your background.

You dont know that you would.......no one can say that until they are in that situation. To expect a child to do something like that is ludicrous.

I'm not biased at all. Im saying that pits have the image they have because of the people that abuse them. In order to help the dogs we have to be honest about where the problem stems from and nip it in the bud there first.

 

[NStarz]

You dont know that you would.......no one can say that until they are in that situation. To expect a child to do something like that is ludicrous.

I'm not biased at all. Im saying that pits have the image they have because of the people that abuse them. In order to help the dogs we have to be honest about where the problem stems from and nip it in the bud there first.

I agree with you there! But I don't agree that banning these dogs from seeking medical attention is the answer to the problem. Rather, educating dog owners on responsible ownership and influencing their pets (or your own) to be good ambassadors of the breed is a wonderful start.

 

[bunnity]

So I'd like some evidence for your terrorist stuff.

And I'm not throwing anyone under the bus. I can't help it if you're jumping there yourself.

I think the research on the "types of people" surrendering to shelters is really eye-opening. It's not about fighting, but it is about what a lot of us would consider irresponsible ownership. Here's one to get started - there are a lot more from the same site:

http://www.petpopulation.org/Movingcharaceristics.pdf

We recently had a presentation from work with some great research - turns out that income has very little to do with good pet care and likelihood of surrender. I'll ask my boss where he got the presentation.

 

[pibbles]

You dont know that you would.......no one can say that until they are in that situation. To expect a child to do something like that is ludicrous.

I'm not biased at all. Im saying that pits have the image they have because of the people that abuse them. In order to help the dogs we have to be honest about where the problem stems from and nip it in the bud there first.

😕

We HAVE been acknowledging the root of the problem all along. You are the one being "dishonest" and thinking that only a specific class is involved in dog fighting and all dogs owned by "thugs" are dangerous. Ignoring the situation and refusing to treat breeds and adding more ignorance to the bully dog world just lets the bud go free..

 

[peachy3214]

I agree with you there! But I don't agree that banning these dogs from seeking medical attention is the answer to the problem. Rather, educating dog owners on responsible ownership and influencing their pets (or your own) to be good ambassadors of the breed is a wonderful start.

i agree with this. but in my particular clinics case there were just too many incidents because responsible pit owners are few and far between. Steps had to be taken to protect the medical staff.

 

[NStarz]

i agree with this. but in my particular clinics case there were just too many incidents because responsible pit owners are few and far between. Steps had to be taken to protect the medical staff.

So your clinic (not you, specifically) is punishing the animal because the owner is irresponsible? That's like berating a child for stealing when he's not getting fed at home. Maybe this clinic is the only one that this specific owner is willing to go to (price, location, whatever reason). Now his dog is not receiving treatment. What about the people who are thinking to adopt a loving pit from a shelter who now have second thoughts because their veterinarian for their cat won't see their dog?

 

[peachy3214]

So I'd like some evidence for your terrorist stuff.

And I'm not throwing anyone under the bus. I can't help it if you're jumping there yourself.

I think the research on the "types of people" surrendering to shelters is really eye-opening. It's not about fighting, but it is about what a lot of us would consider irresponsible ownership. Here's one to get started - there are a lot more from the same site:

http://www.petpopulation.org/Movingcharaceristics.pdf

We recently had a presentation from work with some great research - turns out that income has very little to do with good pet care and likelihood of surrender. I'll ask my boss where he got the presentation.

I think asking for evidence on the terrorist stuff is ridiculous and completely off topic at this point.

I am not talking about the "types of people" that surrender dogs at shelters but the ones that use them for fighting

I didnt say income had anything to do with quality of pet care.....I said income and where in the US you grew up COULD influence how likely you are to participate in dog fighting and how you feel about it.

 

[peachy3214]

So your clinic (not you, specifically) is punishing the animal because the owner is irresponsible? That's like berating a child for stealing when he's not getting fed at home. Maybe this clinic is the only one that this specific owner is willing to go to (price, location, whatever reason). Now his dog is not receiving treatment. What about the people who are thinking to adopt a loving pit from a shelter who now have second thoughts because their veterinarian for their cat won't see their dog?

I'm not saying its not unfortunate, but im not willing to be attacked by a visibly aggressive dog just for the sake of a check up.

 

[bunnity]

I think asking for evidence on the terrorist stuff is ridiculous and completely off topic at this point.

I am not talking about the "types of people" that surrender dogs at shelters but the ones that use them for fighting

I didnt say income had anything to do with quality of pet care.....I said income and where in the US you grew up COULD influence how likely you are to participate in dog fighting and how you feel about it.

You brought it up - so it's on you to substantiate it if you want me to take it seriously.

I brought up the surrender thing because we were just learning about it at work and there are some parallels.

Anyway, if you won't take it from me, will you take it from ASPCA?
http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/dog-fighting-faq.html

 

[peachy3214]

😕

We HAVE been acknowledging the root of the problem all along. You are the one being "dishonest" and thinking that only a specific class is involved in dog fighting and all dogs owned by "thugs" are dangerous. Ignoring the situation and refusing to treat breeds and adding more ignorance to the bully dog world just lets the bud go free..

I'm sorry, what did I say that was "dishonest"?

 

[NStarz]

I'm not saying its not unfortunate, but im not willing to be attacked by a visibly aggressive dog just for the sake of a check up.

No one is saying that you can't refuse treatment to a visibly aggressive dog. But you just stepped the line there by equating visibly aggressive with pit bull.

 

[cowgirla]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-09-29-dogfighting_N.htm

"The most active and numerous dogfighters, experts say, are 13 or 14 or 17 years old "

""There are at least 100,000 young kids fighting their dogs under the radar in America," estimates Chicago-based anti-violence advocate Tio Hardiman, who built his estimate on conversations with young dogfighters and authorities in 35 states he has visited. In contrast, about 40,000 adults are involved in organized dogfighting, according to the Humane Society of the United States."

" "I saw a kid in a park, he was probably 8 or 9 years old, training and strengthening his pit bull by having him tread water in a creek.""

"It actually generated more interest among urban youth," Grim says. Suddenly, kids who had believed dogfighting was only a ghetto or rural Southern sport saw rich role models were involved. "They thought, if (Vick) does it, it's cool."

"We discovered (in St. Louis) a group that held a dogfight for a church fundraiser, and that sends a pretty strong message to children,"


Wasn't the article I was looking for, but worth quoting anyway, I think.



ETA: Not sure this is from a "reliable source" but is very recent (about a month ago)
"Sandra Bullock's husband Jesse James is involved in another scandal as he is accused of animal cruelty. The West Coast Choppers CEO allegedly took his pit bulls to one of those dog fighting rings and forced the poor animals to participate in a battle for their lives"

 

[Minnerbelle]

I dont believe that facts are prejudiced......Terrorists tend to be middle eastern muslims.....fact.

Your "facts" are totally prejudiced. What kind of terrorists are you talking about exactly? apparently only the ones that George W was going after with his war on terrorism... cause there are PLENTY of non-middle eastern muslim terrorists in the world, let alone this country.

You know, the animal liberation front is a terrorist group, as well as the KKK. Anti-abortionists are pretty bad too. And look at 'em Irish people. They're not going to stop their terrorist activities anytime soon.

and before I get thrown under the racist bus, my mother is black so I have nothing against the black community.

you're only throwing yourself under the racist bus. no one asked you to make a really random racist statement about middle eastern muslims. and i'm not sure if you were ever told this, but just saying that you have a family member or a friend of another race doesn't automatically make you not racist. everyone is racist to some degree, but you cross the line when you openly express it.

it's true that dog fighting is more prevalent in certain demographics, but i don't see how that has anything to do muslim terrorists... and i fail to see how that justifies a breed ban either.

 

[NStarz]

You brought it up - so it's on you to substantiate it if you want me to take it seriously.

I brought up the surrender thing because we were just learning about it at work and there are some parallels.

Anyway, if you won't take it from me, will you take it from ASPCA?
http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/dog-fighting-faq.html

The ASPCA's not so pro-pit either. Google "oreo's law"

 

[pibbles]

I'm sorry, what did I say that was "dishonest"?

The post before this, you said "we have to be honest about where the problem stems from and nip it in the bud there first," so I counter-acted that by saying you are being "dishonest" by ignoring the problem and banning an entire profile of dog breeds.

And yes, you crossed the line when you associated "visibly aggressive" with pit bull dogs.

 

[peachy3214]

You brought it up - so it's on you to substantiate it if you want me to take it seriously.

I brought up the surrender thing because we were just learning about it at work and there are some parallels.

Anyway, if you won't take it from me, will you take it from ASPCA?
http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/dog-fighting-faq.html

The people who commit terrorists acts against the US tend to muslim and from the middle east.......I dont think there should be much argument here aside from home grown terrorists like Mcvay. Those in darfur and north korea have certain political agendas and tribal alliances that make them identifiable. Just like whats going in in russia, the cechnyans do fit a certain profile. The IRA devolution sympathizers.

The point is that a guy who grew up in Pakistan a muslim told to hate american and exposed to terrorism and more likely to be a terrorist(towards the US) than the hindu from india.


Im not saying that he WILL BE, but certainly more like then the other guy

 

[bunnity]

The people who commit terrorists acts against the US tend to muslim and from the middle east.......I dont think there should be much argument here aside from home grown terrorists like Mcvay. Those in darfur and north korea have certain political agendas and tribal alliances that make them identifiable. Just like whats going in in russia, the cechnyans do fit a certain profile. The IRA devolution sympathizers.

The point is that a guy who grew up in Pakistan a muslim told to hate american and exposed to terrorism and more likely to be a terrorist(towards the US) than the hindu from india.


Im not saying that he WILL BE, but certainly more like then the other guy

I meant substantiate like give studies from a credible source.

 

[cowgirla]

The people who commit terrorists acts against the US tend to muslim and from the middle east.......I dont think there should be much argument here aside from home grown terrorists like Mcvay. Those in darfur and north korea have certain political agendas and tribal alliances that make them identifiable. Just like whats going in in russia, the cechnyans do fit a certain profile. The IRA devolution sympathizers.

The point is that a guy who grew up in Pakistan a muslim told to hate american and exposed to terrorism and more likely to be a terrorist(towards the US) than the hindu from india.


Im not saying that he WILL BE, but certainly more like then the other guy

So they're only a terrorist if they bomb a US government building, or a large group of people?

There are certain US based animal rights groups known for fire-bombing the homes of those who go against them, or those who they feel arent treating their dogs right. It happened to a woman I know, after animal cruelty charges against her were dropped. Apparently, this group didn't feel that was good enough. Her entire home and kennel went up in flames that night.

So that group wouldn't count as terrorists, because that was only one person they hurt, not an entire country?

 

[peachy3214]

The post before this, you said "we have to be honest about where the problem stems from and nip it in the bud there first," so I counter-acted that by saying you are being "dishonest" by ignoring the problem and banning an entire profile of dog breeds.

And yes, you crossed the line when you associated "visibly aggressive" with pit bull dogs.

Oh so no pit bulls are visibly aggressive! your right we live in a world of sunshine and rainbows where every dog is a good dog and no pit bull could ever be anything but sweet. GIVE ME A BREAK! get off your high horse for a second and realize that I meant ANY aggressive dog! it just so happens that in my area they happen to be pits.

 

[TrocarKarin]

Except when the study itself comes right and says "we didn't bother counting all the pitbulls in this study, and didn't include them, because Denver has BSL." Kind of makes the study null and void if you want to compare pitties to other breeds that were included.

Yeah, didn't RTFA. My bad.

I'm not biased at all. Im saying that pits have the image they have because of the people that abuse them. In order to help the dogs we have to be honest about where the problem stems from and nip it in the bud there first.

How does making it harder for a whole breed of dogs to get medical care help the problem in any way?

i agree with this. but in my particular clinics case there were just too many incidents because responsible pit owners are few and far between. Steps had to be taken to protect the medical staff.

Then why not ban particular clients? Why not work to educate them on responsible care? The worst of the worst aren't even going to bring their dogs to the vet, and those that are seeking vet care are the ones that have the ability to be educated. Why does turning your back on them make sense?

 

[peachy3214]

So they're only a terrorist if they bomb a US government building, or a large group of people?

There are certain US based animal rights groups known for fire-bombing the homes of those who go against them, or those who they feel arent treating their dogs right. It happened to a woman I know, after animal cruelty charges against her were dropped. Apparently, this group didn't feel that was good enough. Her entire home and kennel went up in flames that night.

So that group wouldn't count as terrorists, because that was only one person they hurt, not an entire country?

Yes they are terrorists and they fit the profile of their particular breed of terrorism by being members of those groups

 

[cowgirla]

Oh so no pit bulls are visibly aggressive! your right we live in a world of sunshine and rainbows where every dog is a good dog and no pit bull could ever be anything but sweet. GIVE ME A BREAK! get off your high horse for a second and realize that I meant ANY aggressive dog! it just so happens that in my area they happen to be pits.

So you don't see any other breeds in your area that are "visibly aggressive?" Somehow I find that hard to believe. Aggressive dogs are everywhere, every size, every breed. I doubt all the evil pits congregate at your doorstep, and "ban" all other breeds from coming near you.

 

[cowgirla]

Yes they are terrorists and they fit the profile of their particular breed of terrorism by being members of those groups

And yet they aren't Muslim or Middle Eastern, and they don't wear turbans, or have dark skin, or talk with a heavy accent.

 

[peachy3214]

I meant substantiate like give studies from a credible source.

you can do you own research into this topic if your really that interested in it. But im sure this can be found in the news and wherever else you deem necessary to look as studies arent really needed.

 

[pibbles]

Oh so no pit bulls are visibly aggressive! your right we live in a world of sunshine and rainbows where every dog is a good dog and no pit bull could ever be anything but sweet. GIVE ME A BREAK! get off your high horse for a second and realize that I meant ANY aggressive dog! it just so happens that in my area they happen to be pits.

Visible aggression..

 

[peachy3214]

And yet they aren't Muslim or Middle Eastern, and they don't wear turbans, or have dark skin, or talk with a heavy accent.

wooooooooow I was speaking of the terrorists that tend to attack the american people and government as a whole for religious and cultural reasons.

 

[peachy3214]

Visible aggression..

I am not really sure what point you are trying to make?

I said that were I live the dogs with aggression problems are pits because of bad owners.

I did not say that all pits are aggressive.

 

[cowgirla]

wooooooooow I was speaking of the terrorists that tend to attack the american people and government as a whole for religious and cultural reasons.

You said "terrorists are Middle eastern......fact"

And yet, you agreed that Animal rights groups who firebomb are considered terrorists. So therefore, you would think they were Middle Eastern.

And you are wrong. It doesn't matter what the reasons were. You can't make a "fact" statement about terrorists, and not expect to have to defend it.

 

[Shanomong]

.

 

[peachy3214]

So you don't see any other breeds in your area that are "visibly aggressive?" Somehow I find that hard to believe. Aggressive dogs are everywhere, every size, every breed. I doubt all the evil pits congregate at your doorstep, and "ban" all other breeds from coming near you.

we do see them with much greater frequency because of where i live. I cant change that. I wish is wasnt so but its true.

 

[Minnerbelle]

I meant substantiate like give studies from a credible source.

From The National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), which "is a U.S. Department of Homeland Security Center of Excellence, tasked by the Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology Directorate"

I searched on the Global Terrorism Database of all terrorist activity in the US between 1990 and 2007 I think, and here's what you get:

http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search...=GTDID&od=desc&page=1&count=100#results-table

Anti-abortion and Animal Liberation and Earth Liberation seem to dominate... hmmmm... I have a feeling most of these people aren't middle eastern or muslim

 

[organismal]

Yes they are terrorists and they fit the profile of their particular breed of terrorism by being members of those groups

.... but being in one of those groups doesn't mean they fit an ethnic or economic stereotype? the people in those animal rights organizations or whatever can be white or black or rich or poor. you can't look at a person and say, "i think they are part of alf because they are white".

regarding muslim terrorists-- while i haven't been keeping up with news very well at all, the terrorist threats i've heard of 'recently' seem to be mostly people who don't fit the middle eastern look. i can think of "jihad jane" (blond) and that one nigerian man who set his pants on fire or something (african american), off the top of my head

on the other end of things, my friend's dad is completely your stereotypical middle easterner. he's iranian and has got a wicked beard and an accent (not too strong though). he's a really fun guy, even though he's a lawyer.

edit: whoops, i think i just indirectly stereotyped lawyers 😉

 

[NStarz]

I'm not saying its not unfortunate, but im not willing to be attacked by a visibly aggressive dog just for the sake of a check up.

You have been speaking about pitties for the majority of this conversation, so why are we to assume any differently when you say you don't want to see "visibly aggressive dogs"?

Also, the majority of us on this thread have been good about backing up our claims with substantial evidence to supoprt them. As future scientists, I hope this would be a priority. We're asking you to back your own claims to support your case; I shouldn't have to do research on the claims you made if you're not willing to at least start the ball rolling. (Although, a good scientist knows both sides of the argument.)

Oh, PS. As much as we may have divided opinions here, I appreciate the fact that a civil debate can be had.

 

[peachy3214]

You know i should have worded this better. So lets try again.......

Terrorists will each fit the profile of their individual causes for the most part.
I made the assumption that when i said terrorist, the most common use of the term in todays media would be assumed, obviously this is wrong.

Terrorists that sympathize with Muslism extremist groups and other groups of that nature tend to be muslim radicals and from the middle east....I would say that this is for the most part true.

Terrorists that blow up research labs that use animals tend to fit certain profiles....i would say this is also true.

I mean all of this in the sense that they will follow certain lifestyle choices in their respective causes

I do not mean to say that all terrorists of every kind fit one profile. So I apologize that this is the way it was taken.

 

[NStarz]

You know i should have worded this better. So lets try again.......

Terrorists will each fit the profile of their individual causes for the most part.
I made the assumption that when i said terrorist, the most common use of the term in todays media would be assumed, obviously this is wrong.

Terrorists that sympathize with Muslism extremist groups and other groups of that nature tend to be muslim radicals and from the middle east....I would say that this is for the most part true.

Terrorists that blow up research labs that use animals tend to fit certain profiles....i would say this is also true.

I mean all of this in the sense that they will follow certain lifestyle choices in their respective causes

I do not mean to say that all terrorists of every kind fit one profile. So I apologize that this is the way it was taken.

Haha you just made our case! Not all pit bull owners fit one profile. And not all pit bulls fit one profile either.

 

[Shanomong]

.

 

[Minnerbelle]

I mean all of this in the sense that they will follow certain lifestyle choices in their respective causes

In which case what? we should generalize and ban these people of certain lifestyle choices (which apparently includes color of skin) from things they may potentially harm?

does that mean catholic people in the bible belt should all have restraining orders restricting them from being 200 ft from abortion clinics, and if a catholic woman wants to have an abortion, she's SOL?

 

[peachy3214]

Haha you just made our case! Not all pit bull owners fit one profile. And not all pit bulls fit one profile either.

I am really confused as to what is being lost in translation here?

Yes, not all pit bull owners fit on profile. But MANY if not MOST pit bull owners that use them for the wrong reasons DO in one way or another.

Yes, not all(maybe even the majority on an international scale) pit bulls fit one profile. But MANY if not MOST of the pit bulls in my community do.

 

[Shanomong]

.

 

[peachy3214]

In which case what? we should generalize and ban these people of certain lifestyle choices (which apparently includes color of skin) from things they may potentially harm?

does that mean catholic people in the bible belt should all have restraining orders restricting them from being 200 ft from abortion clinics, and if a catholic woman wants to have an abortion, she's SOL?

NOT AT ALL! but it does mean that when an abortion lab is blown up your first suspect most likely wont be the pro-choice supporter who had an abortion at that clinic.

 

[NStarz]

But she wasn't saying that they did... she was saying that the people who acquire pit bulls specifically for the purpose of fighting tend to fit a profile... and by most accounts that is accurate.

Okay, that makes sense. But that brings us back to the point that not all pitties are used for fighting. And even if a dog is used for fighting, that's not necessarily a bad, people-aggressive dog. Yes, the owner may suck and the dog may be trained to be dog-aggressive, but dog-aggressive DOES NOT equal human-aggressive by any means.

Also, someone made a good point earlier that I think got lost. The worst dogfighters out there are not going to seek veterinary attention, because that would raise flags if there are fighting wounds, scars, etc. So, if anything, you're only seeing the "moderately awful" people. Not sure if that's any consolation, but it is a good point.

 

[peachy3214]

But she wasn't saying that they did... she was saying that the people who acquire pit bulls specifically for the purpose of fighting tend to fit a profile... and by most accounts that is accurate.

FINALLY! haha someone understands what I am trying to say!

 

[NStarz]

NOT AT ALL! but it does mean that when an abortion lab is blown up your first suspect most likely wont be the pro-choice supporter who had an abortion at that clinic.

But that also doesn't mean that you can round up and "ban" all of the pro-life people because of something that one person in a million may have an inclination to do (not real numbers, just stating a point).

 

[organismal]

but i think the problem is that it works the other way around... the issue here that started was when she was saying something along the lines of "99.99% of 'thugs' with pit bulls have them for fighting"

 

[Shanomong]

.

 

[Shanomong]

.

 

[peachy3214]

Okay, that makes sense. But that brings us back to the point that not all pitties are used for fighting. And even if a dog is used for fighting, that's not necessarily a bad, people-aggressive dog. Yes, the owner may suck and the dog may be trained to be dog-aggressive, but dog-aggressive DOES NOT equal human-aggressive by any means.

Also, someone made a good point earlier that I think got lost. The worst dogfighters out there are not going to seek veterinary attention, because that would raise flags if there are fighting wounds, scars, etc. So, if anything, you're only seeing the "moderately awful" people. Not sure if that's any consolation, but it is a good point.

I agree with what you said here. Basically I was being asked as to why i didnt have a problem with this clinic doing this and I explained that my clinic had to because it was a very real problem and it got into this debate that has made me seem like a racist and a pit bull hater haha.

I have been speaking on the basis of my community. Where the majority of aggressive dogs (towards everyone and everything) that came into the clinic were pit bulls, so the ban was needed.

this was not be a sweeping generalizations about the nation as a whole only for communities like mine where aggressive pits are more common than not.

I was only trying to give an example as to why we shouldn't jump to persecute this clinic when they may have a good reason based on their particular situation.