El_Marsh posted...
but instead of ousting them for their lunacy, people flock to them and form cults around them for the purpose of "sticking it to the other side"
Only one side cares about "sticking it to the other side", the counter side to that wants to mitigate/prevent the harm that side seeks to achieve.
kingdrake2 posted...
i have to agree with this part. reminds me of the trauma that my grandfather did to my dog when i moved away for a few months. he took it out back and shot it with a gun after it attacked another dog. there was an easier way to rectify this (take it to a vet clinic to have it put down).
this didn't happen to my currently deceased dog, it was the one before it many years ago.
I think something both you and Alteres are missing is that her puppy killed
other people's
chickens (IE property), not her own. I feel like we all know of stories where one person's dog maimed/killed another person's dog, and the victim dog's owner had government authorities come to remove and put down the aggressive dog. That doesn't seem all that different from this to me. Not justifying her decision to put it down like it was some rabid problem and I agree she should have rehomed the dog instead of executing it, just saying the chicken story is like the most "justified" thing she talks about in regards to the puppy's behavior justifying her reaction in her mind.
Also, as I heard pointed out, it is her fault for even allowing Cricket the opportunity to escape in the first place, so first and foremost the blame lies with that and her intentions of training the dog to view birds as targets and prey.