This one is really worth noting.
Let’s say you’re a police officer and you pull someone over for going 50 MPH in a 35 zone. They challenge the ticket and it goes to court. The speeder’s attorney puts you on the stand and asks you if you are anti-speeding.
You respond – “Of course.” So the attorney says – “A-hah, you are not credible because you’re out with your radar gun and you want everyone to stop speeding.” (Of course, no credible lawyer could do this.)
Well … that’s basically where one greyhound racing supporter went late last month. American Greyhounds Council PR specialist, Marsha Kelly was quoted in an Orlando Weekly blog as saying:
“GREY2K is out to eliminate the industry and abolish the industry, so I’m not sure they’re a credible source of information on the issue.”
So if you’re against something, you’re not a credible source of information on that issue? If you want to abolish something horrible, then she doesn’t believe you can be a credible source of information on that issue?
It’s just one of those silly statements with no real meaning. The blogger rightfully noted the information presented by GREY2K comes from reports off the Florida greyhound tracks.
And then the writer, Fred Lambert, goes on to quote an industry lobbyist, who says he doesn’t want to compare greyhounds to children and then proceeds to compare the deaths of greyhounds to the deaths of abused children. He tries to justify the deaths of racing dogs by saying a higher number of children died.PACK MENTALITY BLOG: Compassion - teamed with Science and Logic