There is, of course, certain logic to madness. Hence, in the summary execution of criminals, the logic had been that the city would be a safer place without these robbers, rapists and murderers.
In gunning after stray dogs, the rationale is that the south reclamation project having become a new destination for migratory birds, stray dogs in the area run the risk of getting infected with bird flu if they happen to eat dead infected birds they may find there.
Admittedly, it is hard to argue against twisted logic. After all, who would not want to live in a community that is not only free from criminals but also free from one potential risk of contracting bird flu.
But why has there got to be so much killing involved? A community can still be safe from criminals without having to gun them down. There are judicial mechanisms, properly utilized, that can take care of that.
Besides, allowing the killings to go on with impunity sends the wrong signal to people, particularly the young, who may start assuming that it is perfectly all right to kill, so long as you do not get caught.
As to gunning after stray dogs for fear of catching bird flu, that seems too loose a screw even if indeed the world is on tenterhooks over the possibility of a bird flu pandemic in which millions could be dead.
Bird flu is too sweeping in its possibilities only a puerile mind would bother to even think about fighting it by shooting dogs. In all the discussions by learned men and concerned leaders on how best to deal with the menace, no canine aspect ever crossed sober minds.
Twenty shotguns, at what cost to taxpayers, are needed to go to a misdirected war against the stray dogs, the city believes. Even thinking about should be an actionable offense for mental misappropriation and dishonesty. Maybe the idea was born in a sour burp.