The animal rights/welfare argument about violence done to animals escolating to violence to humans falls flat for this reason - and not because it's invalid in itself. Ars support violent acts toward humans. They hate humans, so their cry of violence to animals becomes violence to humans - really, these ars shouldn't even be saying that. Because violence toward humans is exactly what they want. They're just using this theory to look like they care, which of course, they do not.

They need to stay out of that particular area and let real, honest humanitarians worry about this.

Also, their claim falls apart because they call everything humans do 'animal abuse'. What the ars are trying to do is lump all the good humans - the ones that use animal products but are not violent, in with the few sicko psycho dog beaters and cat burners - especially those that became serial killers.

Anybody who beats a dog and sets her on fire to get their kicks out of torturing it is not a normal human and never should be compared with normal humanity. That kind of a person should never be around anything or anyone it can bully and hurt.

But that sicko sadist is an abaration and not to be confused with the farmer who kills pigs, chickens, and cows for food. And PEta and their ilk are trying their damdest to blur that line.