I never thought the day would come I'd actually agree with PETA, but this time I have no choice.
San Francisco's politicians must have been raised on Looney Tunes cartoons that were apparently deeply embedded in their subconscious.
Handing over free puppies to drug addicts, alcoholics and the severely mentally ill isn't a good idea for obvious reasons I need not even go into. You know San Francisco's city government is getting worse when even PETA appears more rational and mature by comparison.
Teresa Chagrin, a rep for PETA's cruelty investigations department in Norfolk, Va., called the plan "slapdash" and "ill-conceived."
"Most former panhandlers are financially destitute because of struggles with substance abuse and mental-health issues," Chagrin wrote to the mayor. "Placing any animal with them is risky at best, (and) it should be out of the question to play Russian roulette with these animals, allowing them to be used as lures or pawns."
Rather than have San Francisco risk the dogs' injury or even death by handing them to "troubled people," Chagrin said, "PETA is willing to put up $10,000" - equal to the private grant being used to launch the effort - if the city will instead institute a program for the down-and-outers that is "100 percent animal-free." - PETA Pans SF Plan On Panhandlers, Pups - SFGate.com
Handing over free puppies to drug addicts, alcoholics and the severely mentally ill isn't a good idea for obvious reasons I need not even go into. You know San Francisco's city government is getting worse when even PETA appears more rational and mature by comparison.