I feel for butter… she shouldn’t be treated like that…
Summary
But at the same time… PUNT!!!
2 Likes
Show a horrible fate for the babbehs that ruin the mothers hope in the world
1 Like
So appropriate! Can’t wait for the next part.
Very Hasbio of you
Tell that to this professor
1 Like
Regardless they all deserve death so let’s see some of that
1 Like
- When did we start talking law?
- These aren’t legally animals or pets.
- Regardless of the government’s opinion, you are still morally wrong
1 Like
Well that escalated quickly
kill fluffy
3 Likes
And this is why i vote car accident. No more little hooman mummah no more problem.
We are also largely water 
Not that we do not form bonds of obligation with animals ( some of which we have bred into them ) but it does bear keeping in mind that animal rights are what humans think animals should have, not what animals have asked for.
One Bite law does sound like an overreaction - a bit like UK knife laws, say.
People are forgetting that these series, are about how the “Mummah supwise” line would have lots of incidents with the costumers, because of the impractical nature of the “toy”. It’s obvious that this would have happened, since, the way the product is being promoted, can be misleading in itself. Which is, like a “kid’s toy”, but is at the same time a living breathing being; thing that isn’t taken into consideration even by the brand itself. The disposal of Butter by the family is a smart way of demonstrating how this line would lead to poor care of the product, contamination, and more fluffy infestation in the world.
Making the family die and the mare to be “happy” is taking the point away from the initial idea, unless the author decides to make it an individual story or something.
Either way, good job, I enjoy how the comic is developing.
11 Likes
I like this take on the story.
You’re more or less correct about the story and how it is a VERY likely result of what could and would happen in the world as presented in Fluffy fiction… And it IS very good and the art is absolutely solid. LongFluffering’s fluffies are adorable for me in a way that by no means provokes cute aggression.
Also, since they keep coming up.
@Bonnacon ,
One bite laws aren’t “Euthanize the animal after one bite!”. In fact, they’re quite the opposite, being named such in the assumption that a dog would get one “Free” bite.
In states without them, an owner is criminally liable for an attack by their animal if the individual in question is in an area in which they are legally allowed to be. In the “One Bite Law” states, there has to be foreknowledge by the owner that the animal could be dangerous.
Of course, even without criminal liability negligence could still be proven, and in a case of a repeat pattern of aggression or demonstrable serious harm to the victim, the animal could be destroyed by court order. But despite the name, it isn’t “It bites someone, it gets put down immediately.”
2 Likes
My idea of animal rights would be for them to be legally recognized as separate from inanimate objects, and be afforded legal protection from any sort of harm.
And any unjust bullshit like breed discrimination laws and legal loopholes allowing mistreatment would be abolished.
I hate this being used for living creatures. They aren’t objects.
1 Like
Happens allllll the time. Happens where I live even if you help the animals by leaving food out in your yard. Black bear raids your picnic table? It will die because it now wants to get easy food from humans.
Kill that nasty yellow vermin with fire
3 Likes
Sadly her babies be dead by then tough luck , you be mummah no more.
2 Likes
Well, part 1 is already accomplished.
After that, things become rather unfeasible.
Hopefully the babbehs don’t die with butter