A new sad story about the liberal government deliberately and unnecessarily killing a person’’s beloved pet. There are pictures, but you will have to look it up since I can’t post them right now. Look up “Peanut the Squirrel” for the completely story. Here is what happened. Several years ago, a guy saw a squirrel get hit by a car in New York, and the mother squirrel died , but left behind a baby squirrel. The guy tried to get rescue places to take the baby squirrel, but none of them would take him, so he took care of the baby himself for a few months and then released him in his back yard to join wild squirrels out there. A day or so later, the squirrel was back, with half of his tail gone, so the man took the squirrel inside and trained him in the house. Over time, he posted pictures and videos of Peanut on social media, and the squirrel had a following of over a half million people. Some people must have complained that he had a “wild creature” in the house, because then the New York tuthorities came and took the squirrel away. Rather than release it back into the wild (where it would not have survived very likely), they just euthanized the squirrel. People everywhere are outraged at the government for doing this, and I do not blame them. While I agree that we should not just be capturing wild animals as pets, when an animal is rescued and raised as a pet, and is happy and content in that life, it is wrong to take it away just to kill it. All the latest memes are of President Trump saving squirrels, but so far i have not seen him saying anything about what happened to poor Peanut. He didn’t look actually black, but in the pictures, he definitely looks a dark coffee-color of brown. Trump has now posted about the liberals executing squirrels and not terrorists. He says that if Peanut had been able to tell them that he was from Mexico, they would have given the squirrel a $5,000 gift card and sent him off to shop and live in his own home. Both Trump and Kennedy love animals, so maybe they can stop this kind of useless killing of pets.
PETA Set all animals free. Like liberals throwing money, laws or programs at everything without knowing the circumstances.
I just watched the story about the squirrel today on YT, he also had a raccoon, they killed both of his wildlife rescue animals.
This story is really "trending." Here's a great op-ed put on Twitter by Buck Sexton (a conservative commentator and radio/tv talk show host): I understand that NY State killing Peanut the squirrel involves the death of a rodent, and to some people that seems unimportant, but when you bond with an animal as a pet, there’s a sentimental and emotional connection that should be respected. That New York state would allow some bureaucrats under the umbrella of a “conservation” agency to take someone’s pet and kill it, just displays the vindictive sociopathy that is a defining feature of so many (democrat-controlled) govt agencies today. None of this is an accident. The mentality of the Democrat-bureaucrat is much more similar to the statist-sadists described in Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago” than we want to believe. But just like then, they demand you submit to the whim of the machine, even when vicious, random, and unfair. That's because the underlying premise of the machine is that it cannot be wrong, by definition, and your “rights” are just in the way. Solzhenitsyn described the frustration that Soviet officials would feel with the outrage of those innocents arrested- it didn't matter that the victim of the state had done nothing wrong, the machine was a system and anything slowing it down was friction, to be treated as waste. So it is with many of the statist-bureaucrats today. They have low-show jobs, often of little or no productive value, so they wield whatever authority they have in a vindictive, mechanistic way. Now an employee of the state of New York pretending that a beloved pet, one that raised money for animal rescue, is a “rabies risk” is the worst kind of petty tyranny. Everyone knew it was bullshit, but the state goons went along with it anyway. The govt, and public at large, had no real interest or benefit from the machine’s actions in this case, but its assembly line of pointless cruelty continued. Yes, Peanut was just a squirrel, but a state agency that would confiscate *and kill* your harmless pet for no reason is also one that would lock you up for refusing to take an experimental vaccine---and in the name of “the system,” under certain circumstances, do things far more monstrous and cruel under the guise of necessary and right.
John that squirrel popularity also made it possible to care for domestic animals recues. He was famous on TY and generated funds for the rescue animal sanctuary of 100s of farm and ranch animals. Watch the video about the taking of Peabut.
Peanut had 1,000,000 Followers on social media, and his owners are pissed at his being killed and at they way the government bent them over (the government got a search warrant and they searched every nook & cranny of the guy's home for 5 hours.) This is not over.
John remember the first time I showed you Pipkin the rabbit, you didn't seem to like Pimkin? He was adopted too, Pipkin lived to be 13.
I feel this is another way of taking control of us. Now Rocky Raccoon and Rocky the Squirrel, This killing of these two wild animals is just a hint of whats coming.
There's more backstory to this, but it is impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff. Supposedly the critters were killed to test them for rabies based upon complaints and one govt worker claiming she had been bitten...supposedly. I have no idea why a judge signed off on a search warrant for their house.
I read that nonsense. What happened to keeping the animal caged for a month for observation? Found on Reddit: "There is no such thing as illegal squirrels. Just Undocumented."
I think that they justified killing it right away because the squirrel supposedly bit someone, so they had to know right away if it had rabies, to be able to treat the person if he was infected. However, these people were from an agency that is supposed to deal with wildlife, and they should have been properly dressed and wearing gloves before handling a terrified tiny creature whose main defense was his sharp little teeth. Regardless of whether the owner was not following proper procedure, it sounds like he had applied for everything to be done properly, and the whole thing could have been handled in a much better way. They had to know that a squirrel who has lived all its life inside a house is not going to be able to be returned to the wild, so I do not think they intended to let the animals live, right from the start.
There are lots of unanswered questions. Among them are: 1-Inferences that there was "a rabies diagnosis," but it is not clear if it was in the region or on the property. The pet raccoon's presence as a "rabies vector animal" may have been a factor. 2-Why was a search warrant for the entire premises authorized? It smells like massive intimidation to me.