I have tried my hardest not to be drawn into this discussion so I don't have to give a certain football player (the American version) extra attention by discussing this topic here on our blog. Unfortunately for days now the biggest pet topic out there is that HSUS says that this certain football player should be allowed to own a pet.
Wait. What? Have they gone completely nuts! That not a question that is a statement. There is no question as to whether this football player went to jail over something he did to animals and that what he did was not an accident or an isolated incident that was misconstrued. He willfully, knowingly, and with intention abused countless dogs we know about and many more that were killed by his very hands over the course of time we will never know about.
What does this Monster mean when he says he misses having pets in his life and would like to be able to own one again someday? All he did was torture the animals in his care and force them to torture each other. Is it that he misses having an innocent creature to take his frustrations out on and torture when he has a bad day.
I think that there is something I am really missing here because I just don't see how the HSUS could come out publicly and say the Monster who happens to be allowed to play football should be allowed to own a cockroach let alone a cat or dog. If he can be allowed to own a pet then honestly the torture inflicted by Puppy Millers will probably be overlooked as well and those that have been shut down and the owners convicted of animal abuse will probably be endorsed by HSUS as well and will be back up and running as soon as they can get a loan from a bank.
I thought the HSUS was supposed to save Pets from the likes of this Monster so how can they endorse him every step of the way since his release from jail?
(In your responses please do not use his name so that he does not get anymore attention)