There's this bullshit petition that's been floating around on twitter. An update to Romania's laws on stray dogs is going to result in the euthanasia of Romania's stray dog population. The animal activist set is in an uproar. In other words, in a country where a significant number of people survive on subsistence wages, and where they suffer the added indignity of being attacked by flea-bitten strays, this is the primary focus of the international civil society. I'm not going to link the actual petition because it has zero merit, but I'm going to address the absolutely false, misleading, and pretty much insane claims that it makes, one point at a time.Let's start with the law itself. It defines a several new provisions to an already existing 2001 law that deals with "ownerless dogs" aka. 'Maidanezi' in Romanian, aka. Strays. I'm not going to put every single bit of it, just the clearly relevant aspects of it. Also added emphasis in bold where it's particularly relevant to the bullshit petition I mentioned.1. It gives authority to county and city officials to implement animal control measures in the form of 'services that manage dogs without owners.' Said services will also manage a database of all the dogs with no owners. (Basically, set up dog shelters)2. The expression 'dog without an owner' is defined as: "" It's wordy, but clear.3. Local Councils are required to arrange and supplement their funds as needed to create public shelters for stray dogs. Local Councils are required to employ at least one veterinary technician to the specialized services for the management of stray dogs, for recording and surveillance.4. Shelters are required to chip dogs or carry out any other veterinarian interventions, and to manage adoptions.5. Stray dogs will be accommodated in shelters for a period of 14 days. The local community must be informed of the shelter, visiting program, the possibility of adoption or claim by posting at the shelter and specialized services. (Hours given as M-F 10:00 - 18:00)6. Incurably sick animals deemed as such after a medical examination performed by the veterinarian, an examination to which representatives from animal welfare NGOs can assist, will be euthanized immediately.7.8. Dogs captured and recorded in shelters can be claimed or adopted as follows :a) in the first 7 days from the date of registration in the records of shelters , dogs may be claimed by the owners ;b ) after the expiry of the letter . a) until the expiry of 14 days, dogs can be claimed or adopted by individuals or legal entities in the country, under the law ;c ) claim and adoption are free.( 2 ) Dogs unclaimed or not adopted will be euthanized , according to a decision issued by a person authorized for this purpose by the mayor, according to the deadline set by this decision. The term will be determined taking into account the capacity of accommodation and budget availability . This period may be modified if motivation is provided.( 3) The decision for euthanasia is issued for each dog individually, only if all steps prior have been taken.( 4 ) Pending the euthanasia procedure, dogs can still be claimed or adopted .( 5 ) Expenses necessary to comply with the procedures stipulated by the present ordinance is supported by the local budget and/or other sources."There is a bunch more to this, several more addenda, all well defined and available here (in Romanian), but I recommend translating it all for context. If I was able to find the information I needed to inform myself, anybody can. This is not a cruel, unjust, or ambiguous law. But it's easy to find a sob story to dedicate yourself to when you live in a country where packs of mangy mutts don't wander the city streets following people around, snapping at their heels, and biting them.So, time to tear this ridiculous petition apart.It starts with the sordid description of a man pouring gasoline over a stray and then setting it on fire. His motivation according to the petition's author? That he would not be charged by authorities for his crime. Regardless of Romania's poorly enforced (though very clear) animal cruelty laws, this red herring only serves to incite readers while saying nothing of the issue -namely that the law on stray dogs has been reformed to allow for the euthanasia of dogs who roam the streets posing a threat to - and I know this is irrelevant to animal activists -Then, she goes on to say that these are everyday occurrences in Romania, as if people have nothing better to do than to kill and maim animals. I'm lucky I live in one of the few cities in the country where strays are a rare sight, but I've been followed by packs in Bucharest, and I know plenty of people who've gone through the same thing, or worse, who've been attacked and bitten. In fact, it's a guarantee that it's going to eventually happen if you live your entire life in Bucharest, or any city with large stray populations. In Canada, any dog owner knows the drill when their dog bites somebody, here, it happens with impunity and yet they still live.Now here's the section where it really really started to piss me off. Apparently this new law, the writer claims, "allows and encourages any person on the street to torture and kill dogs". WTF! This blatant disregard for facts is more shocking even than the idea that there are people depraved enough to set fire to animals. Furthermore, she adds, "Romania has no money for humane euthanasia and therefore dogs are killed with axes and shovels or with antifreeze." I then stopped reading because this bitch is clearly off her rocker, but then I decided to formulate this post as a response instead. So I kept reading, and it got worse.This next paragraph is posted in its entirety because in addition to everything in it being a lie, it also contains the absolutely most delusional claim I've seen anywhere for a long time. It's the embodiment of that modern adage, "people will say anything on the internet".The mauling death of Ionut Anghel was one of Romania's biggest stories in 2013. The coverage it got in the Romanian media was akin to coverage of school shootings in the US. Front page news, numerous reports, ardent debates, and, of course, the eventual decision to update the stray dog law to allow for euthanasia. The doctor who examined Ionut's body said "If you saw it, you'd change your mind about the strays." All you have to search for is "" on Google and you'll find almost a million results. There are numerous stories each month, luckily rarely fatal, but every year tens of thousands of Romanian are bitten by strays. And here's a person who's never set foot in this country, who can't even be bothered to find some reliable local sources, and who is saying that the highly publicized mauling of a toddler is an unproven claim!? Stray attacks are so commonplace that only the more aggressive and shocking stories are reported by the media. With all this, I find it abhorrent that this petition glosses over the poor, innocent, friendly, and shy stray doggies, while completely disregard the threat they pose to people.The Ceausescu angle is probably one of the most ludicrous things I've read about Romania, not least of all because I lived here during that era and I know that people had pets. What she meant to say is that people who were forcibly moved from homes to blocks in Bucharest during that era didn't all choose to take their dogs in apartments. Dogs have traditionally been used for functional purposes in Romania; as shepherds, rat catchers, for hunting, and most commonly, as guard dogs. The problem is that owners were not educated to neuter the dogs, and this is what has led to an ever growing number of unwanted pups who end up roaming city streets. I also find it laughable that, of all things, the Romanians are supposedly frustrated with the state of the country's leadership and economy because of the dogs. I laughed out loud at this one. It gets funnier the more you read that sentence and fully comprehend how insanely stupid it sounds.The rest is just a rallying cry for justice for the dogs and a plea to sign the petition. The sad part is that nearly 2000 people believed that bullshit text. But at least it's far off the 50,000 mark. It's one thing when articles are sensationalist, but this is a prime example of idiocy. If I didn't know better, I'd assume this was a just troll. So sad that it isn't.There's more that upsets me about this situation though. When I googled 'Ionut Anghel' there were plenty of Romanian articles that came up. But the only articles in English appear after the law was passed. No Western news editor thought the story of a toddler torn apart by stray dogs relevant enough when it occurred, even though it was a national story here, but hey, once the dogs are in danger, everybody needs to know. Just Google "boy killed by strays in Romania" and you'll see that the animal rights angle is the the only angle.If the life of one child, another four year old Johnny, were saved in exchange for the lives of all the strays in this country, I'd consider it fair game. I've written plenty about the incompetence of Romanian politicians and institutions, and while I applaud this very sane law as a response to a quagmire of a situation, my only disappointment is that any officials charged with enforcing it will surely be too incompetent to carry it out to any significant degree.Harsh maybe, but not any more so than the Humane Society. Their site clearly states that they kill 3-4 million animals a year , down from 15 million in the 1970s. Why shouldn't Romania be allowed to control its animal population in the same way? Why should we walk in fear of rabid dogs? Are we, Romanians, less significant than our street dogs? If they're chipped it doesn't mean they can't bite. Let's get real, that's not an end-all solution. So it pisses me off to no end that, when the international community focuses on Romania, it's with such an insultingly base opinion of its people. The hypocrisy is disgusting, and though that's nothing new where Romania's international image is concerned, the fact that even Romania's stray dogs evoke more international concern than the killing of a child is particularly revolting.