Being
a Judge at Rainbow Bridge means that I had to sever my ties with my
former law firm. Originally I was going to appoint Pocket as head
litigator but I have changed my mind for two reasons. One: Pocket is
an excellent researcher but not very confident when it comes to her
speaking abilities during trials and two: If you had to go to court
would you want to look at the opposing counsel and see this:
And
now we have our first big case. Several dogs have come to me to
complain about items being sold at pet stores. They pose a direct
threat to both the dignity of dogs and our rights to peacefully enjoy
their lives. I shall now list our three main pieces of evidence in this
case.
First is this:
It
is a bottle opener attached to a dog collar. I have heard tails told
of men who convince their adoring pets to fetch them alcoholic
beverages. While I believe the law should not become involved in the
relationship between dog and parent I find such behavior an abuse of
said relationship. For the parent to grasp the dog by the collar and
use it to open his disgusting beer, filling the pups nostrils with the
noxious smell and treating the sweet angel like an appliance is
appalling. While some pet parents do not use the best judgment,
especially the more they drink, we hold that the company selling the
produce it at fault and we are seeking a restraining order to make them
stop. If the do not cooperate with our request to stop selling the
collar bottle opener they will be face with this.
Our second piece of evidence is this:
Again,
it has to do with humans’ love of beer. They are treats that taste
like beer. Not wine, or another tasty beverage like Sex on the Beach,
but, gross, skanky beer. I believe the idea behind this product is,
when our Dads have drank too many of these beers, and are regurgitating
them into the toilet, we will be next to them, regurgitating our treats
right next to them. This is an abuse of our bodies. Treats are our
weakness. We will eat any treat presented to us even if it is harmful.
Since a small percentage of humans are using bad judgment in buying
these treats we ask that they be pulled from the shelves immediately or
the store owners will be summoned to court and face this.
And this is our third piece of evidence:
I
lived my life under the banner “Freedom to Bark” and this means freedom
to live without muzzles. Now I know these are a necessary evil. Lots
of dogs go out and put things in their mouth they shouldn’t. My sister
River is one of them. But there should be no other reason to muzzle.
This product not only silences our freedom to bark, but mocks us in the
process. A muzzled dog is a humiliated dog, and to add to the
humiliation with cartoon drawings, is an unspeakable injustice. We
demand that these products be moved immediately. If not you will have
to face this.
The plaintiff rests.
