Liberal Flip-Flop over Pit Bulls

December 13th, 2006 at 7:23 pm by Mark
Tags: , , , , ,

     Back in the 1980’s, various liberal organizations began trying to ban people from owning “dangerous dogs.”  Pit bulls were quickly lofted to the first position as the most cantankerous canine.
     But when a six-week-old pit bull puppy chews four toes off of a one-month-old baby, liberal organizations all over the country call for volunteers to adopt the puppy.
     At least, that’s what I hear…

     “The puppy is too young to know what it’s doing!”
     “It’s so young, it may have been trying to nurse!”
     “Killing puppies is cruel!  No animal deserves to die!”

     So, umm… What did these same organizations want to do with all the pit bulls they tried to have banned?

     The story is simple, really.
     Two parents went to sleep on the floor their home.  Their one-month-old child stayed in her car seat on the floor beside them.  An impromptu “fence” was constructed to keep the dog from waking them up.
     Somehow, the parents didn’t wake up to the screams of their own child, screams which I’m certain would have been indicative that something was wrong.  Instead, they slept two feet away as the puppy ate four of her toes.
     Because, you know — it’s the parent’s fault, not the puppy’s.

     Clearly both were at fault.

     So let’s sit back and think for a minute…
     What if the baby had been killed?  Would the dog be saved, or would it be put down as a “dangerous dog?”
     And if the puppy had been a opossum instead?  There would certainly be no saving it.