Yep, nothing like finding out you live in a county of total wackos who have nothing better to do than write to the editor about the pressing issues of the day – like squirrel murder. I’m not kidding, I recall a few years back someone writing an open letter to the red SUV at Fifth and Main who `refused to stop, although you must have known’ as they injured a squirrel who was trying to cross the intersection. Your callous indifference to the poor animal’s pain and suffering, at a time when school children could have been walking by, etc., etc. etc.
Now I’m an animal lover, but this letter was over the top.
But tonight’s was better! I reproduce it here with a link to the paper and further comments:
To the Editor: Another deer ran into me-taking out my right front fender
and my lights. There I was, careening down the road with no lights. The
prospects for death and dismemberment were too good for my taste.This is the
second time a deer has attacked me in five years on Route 14. Once again, I have
joined the legion of victims of a happening that easily could be avoided.
Millions of dollars and too many deaths are the result of animals intent on
satisfying their reproductive needs.I know that suggesting we get rid of
alcohol, and the resulting 29,000 deaths and disfigurements on the highway each
year is blowing in the wind; there are just too many of us who depend upon it
for conviviality. But surely no one who has attended the funeral or the bedside
of someone in the emergency room because of a deer can object to killing them
all.By eradicating deer, the savings in money and life would be well worth it.
We kill mice and rats, and they aren’t nearly the terrorists that deer are.These
furry terrorists were not here first, I am told that Adam and Eve were.
Where to start? There’s as much here to object to as a Michael Richards outburst.
First off, I don’t think the deer are attacking you, sir. Unless your car is a Pinto or a Mustang, and in heat…
Secondly, nothing wrong with reducing the population of deer, but why elimination? I think not. Whose fault is it that there are more deer in the area now than when it was first settled? Man’s. Man eradicated the deer’s natural enemies and then grew corn here, two great population boosters. Man encroached on deer territory, not the other way around.
Thirdly, I love the way this conservative Republican points out the deer are terrorists that must be eliminated. (Deer, Possum, Raccoons: Axis of Evil)
Any deer-huggers are just Commies that hate America. Sounds like a quick and easy fix. Look how easy it was to wipe out mice and rats. Cheap, too, I’m sure.
Just march into the woods with some big guns. The little fawns will be so happy they have been liberated; they will lick the hands of the hunters who just killed their lactating mothers (looking for nourishment, but it will make a great photo-op). A huge success will be declared. Meanwhile, insurgent forces in the form of elk will invade from the north…
As for the final line, “These furry terrorists were not here first, I am told that Adam and Eve were,” I find this laughable. Excuse me? Are you a fundamentalist? What copy of Genesis do you have? The one I just consulted says God made all kinds of wild animals, THEN said Let Us Make Man…
I really don’t recall the Bible story about how Bambi was exiled from the Woodlands of Eden due to development, but I’m sure it should be added.
(By the way, the paper’s website notes this is one of today’s most discussed stories. It’s not just me!)