Lalala, the facts are the facts people with pets refuse to take care of them. And if you can see where I defended the cops post it. I said responsible pet owners would have their pets on their property.
“Lalala, the facts are the facts people with pets refuse to take care of them.”
You seem to have difficulty distinguishing between “fact” and “opinion”.
A fact is independently verifiable and can be backed up with evidence. An opinion is a statement of belief. You have provided the latter.
The pet owners in question were not at home. That is a fact. Refusal to take care of the dog in question is your opinion, and an unsubstantiated one.
Another faulty assumption. For me, the question remains, How did the dog get out? Was it let out by a punk kid, a mailman not locking the gate, digging under the fence, etc.? What? How? We simply don't know.
To state it's a "fact" that this owner "refused" to take care of the dog is a faulty assumption. We don't have all the facts regarding how the dog came to be loose in the neighborhood.
But let's take your "argument" a little further.
So, under your definition, if I kept my dog in our yard, behind a fence and someone lets it out and it's ultimately shot by the police because it became agitated after being chased and tased for over an hour, I'm an "irresponsible" pet owner?
Sorry, no sale.
And what about the pets the cops have shot in their owners own yard, or in the owners home? I can tell you this, I’m sorry you’re breathing my dogs air.