Nearly 40 percent of South Dakota residents said Gov. Kristi Noem’s (R) shooting of her dog was justified after the governor faced backlash over sharing the story in her new memoir, according…
It’s all in how you interpret the story. Animals that endanger humans and can’t be redeemed do need to be dealt with. The stories do talk about attacking humans and in particular the goat being aggressive toward children.
However, it seems minimized: I’m not getting anything about actual danger nor irredeemable behavior. Dogs are dogs, especially with insufficient training: there’s a huge difference between a warning bite and one intended to hurt, and I don’t see references to damage or hospitalization. Is the dog sufficiently trained for the intended role or did she just assume she can take prey out of its mouth with no objection? Certainly the first response to a rented goat not serving the needs should be to return it, potentially with a complaint.
Could 40% of South Dakotans be interpreting this as endangering humans, and with no better options?
I’m going to take the position that misinformed actions or stances still make a trashy person. I understand animals harming humans needing to be put down, however that does not seem to be the case (?)
She killed a dog because it pissed her off. It was a poorly trained dog. I also understand dogs that won’t listen pissing you off, but I know if I killed a dog in the same way my farmer/country friends would crucify me.
This is a story you don’t state with pride. She stated this story with pride which is baffling, but it makes a little more sense if you take the reductionist view that she’s stating, with pride, that she is willing to kill things that don’t listen, work her desired way, or are untrained and “irredeemable.”
Coming from someone with ambitions to be a fascists VP, that’s horrifying.
It’s all in how you interpret the story. Animals that endanger humans and can’t be redeemed do need to be dealt with. The stories do talk about attacking humans and in particular the goat being aggressive toward children.
However, it seems minimized: I’m not getting anything about actual danger nor irredeemable behavior. Dogs are dogs, especially with insufficient training: there’s a huge difference between a warning bite and one intended to hurt, and I don’t see references to damage or hospitalization. Is the dog sufficiently trained for the intended role or did she just assume she can take prey out of its mouth with no objection? Certainly the first response to a rented goat not serving the needs should be to return it, potentially with a complaint.
Could 40% of South Dakotans be interpreting this as endangering humans, and with no better options?
I’m going to take the position that misinformed actions or stances still make a trashy person. I understand animals harming humans needing to be put down, however that does not seem to be the case (?)
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/kristi-noem-dog-killing-story-worse-context.html
She killed a dog because it pissed her off. It was a poorly trained dog. I also understand dogs that won’t listen pissing you off, but I know if I killed a dog in the same way my farmer/country friends would crucify me.
This is a story you don’t state with pride. She stated this story with pride which is baffling, but it makes a little more sense if you take the reductionist view that she’s stating, with pride, that she is willing to kill things that don’t listen, work her desired way, or are untrained and “irredeemable.”
Coming from someone with ambitions to be a fascists VP, that’s horrifying.