I have a Belgian Malinois, which, if you're not aware, is basicallythe breed of dog used by military and police that aren't German Shepherds. They are absolute maniacs of dogs, full of all kinds of prey drive and herding instincts and such that have long-since been bred out of your average family pet.

So for a while when I still had a Facebook I followed a couple of Malinois pages to help me better understand what was going on in my dog's head.

Now some malinois owners are great, they understand the reasons why their dogs are the way they are and understand how to manage them properly.

Others are absolute assholes who just wanted the really cool supersoldier dog that can run up walls and eat bad guys, and don't really do anything to channel that energy properly

I remember one post in particular of some guy's dog "playing" with a turtle, picking it up, throwing it around, etc.

I'm a dog owner, I've at times dabbled in hunting, I'm an environmentalist and conservationist, I know what sort of laws are out there and what is and isn't allowed. And people are stupid and make entirely too much information about themselves available online.

So I could see from this guy's profile what state (and in fact what city he was in, what high school he went to what company he works for, etc.)

And I could easily Google what the laws in that state are

And lol and behold, allowing your dog to harass wildlife is not allowed in that state. There were fines, potentially prison time, the officials could even take your dog and have them destroyed over this. I think it might have even been legal, maybe even encouraged, in that state for anyone witnessing this happening to just shoot your dog on the spot.

I of course wasn't about to report this guy over this, I didn't want his dog put down or anything, I just wanted him to be a better, more responsible dog owner, so I pointed this out in the comments, that were, up until that point, mostly just other assholes jerking each other off over how cool malinois are.

He, of course, quickly took the past down after that.

But not before a whole bunch of people got really pissy about me looking at his profile (to see the information about himself that he made publicly available I guess?) and taking the time to Google the relevant laws in his state so that I could point out exactly why what he was doing wasn't just morally wrong but actually illegal.

There were disturbingly few people commenting on that post who were simply angry that this jackass was letting his dog fuck with a turtle.

As an aside, my dog is a rare "lazy" malinois. She's still more energetic and driven than pretty much any other dog I've ever met, there's a part of her that definitely wants to eat someone's face, but she's content to sleep on the couch all day instead. She definitely would chase some rabbits, deer, foxes, squirrels, etc. given the chance (I don't give her the chance,) and she's never seen a turtle, but she seems to like just sniffing and occasionally licking frogs and toads (I try not to let her, but she occasionally finds them before I do on our walks, the amphibians seem mildly annoyed by this, but not enough to hop away from her, and I make sure to get her away from them ASAP so that they can continue frogging undisturbed.)

We dont know the whole story. The second driver might not have seen the chicken until it was too late. Nothing in the story indicates that the second driver purposely hit the chicken, but bear mace in an enclosed environment is no joke and can lead to permanent damage. Nothing about this story is "right".

I got the feeling from the article that the impatient driver didn't kill the chicken on purpose but rather accidentally, but the article doesn't really give enough info about that

I'm sorry, but what?!

Do you know of people that intentionally kill animals with their cars? I've never once hard of this. That's serial killer shit.

No, 99.99% of roadkill is accidental.

Imagine a cyclist who came upon some birds blocking the cycle path, pulled out a pocket knife, and started stabbing them so they could get through 20 seconds faster.

Not to deny the overall message, but now I want to see a comic strip about that with an unhinged cyclist telling car-persons' arguments in the most weird way while trashing the poor bird with any next sentence.

CYCLIST: Let me tell you about a cycling efficiency. Keeping a speed doesn't consume as much energy as constantly speeding up and slowing down, as in the jam you've selfishly caused. When I'm hopping on a bike I expect to get from point A to point B in a set amount of time, on a speed aknowledged by the road signs if not a bit faster, as set by a road authority. The infrastructure built exclusively for my mode of transportation doesn't consider surprise deviations, and as a daily driver I should not care for them too. There are two types of obstacles, and I'm completely in my right to drive over those I couldn't predict or couldn't see in time as it's their own problem that unlike type 2 obstacle they haven't made themselves visible for me to react as it's their responsibility to do so. That is not an isolated instance I'm angry at, but a systemic issue that I shall double down on every occasion because giving them a step means they'd take a mile from us, cyclists, the cowboys on gears. Allowing you to jaywalk like that on my lane would mean losing the world I love and brought up to be in. You are a destroyer of the cycling civilization, and it's only you to blame for what's coming to you.