Posted on 04/10/2013 7:56:54 AM PDT by Bon of Babble
The Union Pacific railroad engineer brought his train to a screeching halt as the locomotive came roaring toward the 10-month old terrier mix Banjo. Authorities tracked down the 78-year-old owner who told agents his family 'didn't want the dog' and he 'didn't know what to do with him.'
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
I agree. a “screeching halt” on a train is tens of thousands of dollars worth of damage to the wheels and brake pads.
I assume it was going very slow, cause these things don’t stop very quickly, and how far ahead could the engr see?
I assume so too. What I can’t get is why someone would do this to a dawg? I guess he thought he was doing his part to make this a better world or something.
Story said the owner suffers from senile dementia and won’t be charged with a crime.
Since it’s California, maybe he should run for Congress...
I hope if I get crazy like that someone will save my kittehs. They’re pretty tough. Especially that one. Fred.
Tying the dog to the track. No, it doesn’t make it better for me. You mean to tell me the guy couldn’t have thought of some other convenient method of doing away with the dog? Like dropping it off to PETA? They’d kill it for him.
I don’t understand people who can’t show compassion for both. Or why animal threads on FR attract so many pro-life posters who in turn make sweeping generalizations about those who happen to care about animal cruelty.
Sorry, but I find it hard to listen to posters claiming those who show sympathy towards animals aren’t able to care about the murder of innocent children. Just because the hearts of the thread-hijackers aren’t big enough to do both, doesn’t make it true of others.
Proverbs 12:10
My comments were directed only to your assertion you would not have stopped for a dog, but only for a person.
Never asked you if tying the dog made it better for you. Asked if the possibility the engineer started to stop the train because the guy who tied the dog to the track might have still been close enough to jump or fall in front of the train, made it better for you. Thus, the motive would have been stopping the train for the person, instead of directly for the dog.
Please go back and re-read my post if this doesn’t make sense— and work on not twisting other people’s words.
Agreed, PETA would have killed the dog for him.
That is one terrified puppie!
Sorry, my original reply was to glyptol, who made the comment about not stopping for a dog, only a person. So, I can see if you didn’t follow the thread back.,,
I only included you on it, having to do with other trains that might be on the line behind it comment.
My apologies.
Please do not "REPLY" to my comments unless you are actually going to make a "reply" instead of a "Lookie here dummie"
Ditto - please excuse my latest post to you as well.
“Very pleased this had a happy ending, but damn... there are some evil “people” out there.”
Me too. Get that special place in hell ready for the perps.
We’re good.
I’m just a bit down to bare wire tonight...
Take care...
No wurries .... you too.
Who said it wasn’t possible? Our gripe is that the MSM doesn’t do what’s possible.
Your criticism is a straw man argument. You claim we say it’s not possible to be compassionate toward both.
I never said that. I said that in fact a lot of people have more compassion toward animals than toward unborn babies. Indeed, they have zero for the latter.
So this story becomes MSM news and babies tied to railroad tracks are yawned at.
The criticism is NOT directed at you but at the people who turned this into a big story but REFUSE even to lift a brain cell toward the human parallel.
If you wanted to you could agree with our criticism without getting defensive and mad at us.
if you wanted to.
And my comment was sparked by the direct linking of doggies and babies by someone (was it you?) who wrote that someone who lacks compassion for this dog on the railroad tracks must not have any children.
It was the dog-lover who drew the parallel, equating compaasion for children with compassion for dogs.
I’m perfectly fine with compassion for both but I insist that dogs and babies are NOT equal. Period.
No, wasn’t me.
And no, they aren’t equal. But a person should be able to have, and express, compassion for both.
You seem not to know what the word continuum means.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.