A simple question about dogs; How does a normal person answer it, as opposed to a Leftist freak?

 

I'm fascinated by the difference between us normal people, and the Leftist freaks in the world.

So much so, that I've always considered what would happen if a liberal or a right-winger saw a dog crossing the street and suddenly a car, turning into the street, ran over it—not a bicycle, but a car (Editor: You love them bikers!).  I love ALL people!

First, I KNOW this is a simple question.  I KNOW that there are multiple viewpoints.  I KNOW that the two views can be swapped here as well.  But, this is done only to generalise about two distinct groups.

I believe the reactions from either side highlight the differences between the two "sides". 

I'm not saying which side is correct, as in this case both may be partly right and wrong, but it does show how they think, feel, and perceive things.

A Conservative Perspective: A conservative might view it like this: the dog crosses the street, the car comes around the corner and accidentally hits it. From a neutral perspective, we might say that there was nothing the driver could have done—the dog is not human—and that we should pay our respects and move on with life.

A Leftist Perspective: On the other hand, the leftist would undoubtedly see it in a completely different manner. 

They would likely react emotionally, thinking, "How can this possibly happen in this day and age? How could a dog, something as sweet as Fido, suffer death and be taken from its owner?" 

They would question the driver's actions, saying, "What was wrong with the car driver? How dare they not take all due care and have compassion for the dog? How dare they make the turn?" and so on, ad nauseum.

They would express this with such intensity as if the driver was completely in the wrong, and anyone who questions them would be labelled a fascist, Nazi, or a Trump supporter. They would simply never consider that these accidents happen, that the car owner and driver likely took all reasonable care and respect for the dog, but did not see it until the last second, and that everyone should just get on with life.

They would NEVER react like this.  They would persuade themselves, and at the same time attempt to persuade anyone near them, that they were in the right.  And that the case was settled and that the dog and their owner(s) were the victims, ripe for some form of compensation.

My Explanation: To anyone who actually examines these two opinions or anyone with common sense, the first opinion is literally the only reasonable one. 

Yes, it explains the behaviour correctly.  Yes they (the driver) did not try to kill the dog.  Yes, these are accidents, and yes, please don't notify the police. 

But if you do wish to bring cops into this (the Leftist opinion), I thought you didn't like the police?

Therefore, I'd believe that the matter is over and done with.  If the dog is registered; contact the owner. If the owner was with the dog; have sympathies - there was no foul play. 

Just could everyone PLEASE accept this, and do NOT try to assign blame!

The case is closed.