Thursday, February 27, 2014

An Ode to Pibble

I wake up this morning, thoughts a jumble
Pit nuts, they brought on the law of the Jungle!
Some call me a cad, a nut, a liar, a sinner
To hell with that: Pit Bull, its whats for dinner!

Dog attacks on the rise, look out below
Bad times, yes, but do not wallow!
You should not despair, you sad fellas
For .308 Winchester is on sale at Cabelas!

I chose my rifle and ammo, so proudly
This is politically incorrect, must lie loudly!
Put on hat, vest, step out into the morning air
Tell them all, I am off to hunt "Bear"!

Pit Bull lovers, so incredibly bitchy
Can't compete with my trigger finger, so itchy!
Pit Bull at large, a great many
Feel the blast from my 700 Remmy!

Pick out the ingredients with care,
Its dinner at my place, if you dare!
Dog for dinner, you laugh, you squeal?
Indeed, a Pit Bull makes a fine meal!

I heat water to boiling in the pot
This one dead before he heard the shot!
I turn up the heat, careful not to burn
Soon, it'll be time to eat "Pibble" in return!

Chop up vegetables, spices so fine
Should I soak my kill in refrigerated brine?
I have a great recipe that cannot be beat,
Pit Bull, the new white meat!

The meat is too tough, you rebuff
Has it been in the pot long enough?
It will be like an old boot, you moan
Wrong, that meat will slide right off the bone!

You look so tired, would you like to stay over?
Pit Nuts looking for me, don't blow my cover
I promise to entertain, not to be a bore...
Pit Bulls, they're not just for breakfast anymore!

Sunday, February 23, 2014

An unpreventable tragedy, Part III

Were Dayton AC, Police, et. al. Culpable in Klonda Richey's death? The woman made multiple calls to AC, multiple 911 calls, and sought a protection order and got NO relief. The dogs she was complaining about ultimately killed her.

Many have been saying: "AC was negligent!" "Fire Mark Kumpf!" (the AC director) "Impeach the magistrate!" "Sue the Police!".

Did the Dayton City government run interference for the dog owners in the Richey case? Absolutely. However, the devil is in the details. It not so much the ENFORCEMENT of the laws, its how those laws are written.

Unless you have been physically on the front lines of the dog wars, you need to take everything you know about AC laws and throw them out the window. I have written many times in the past about the special legal protections that Fido enjoys. I was not kidding or exaggerating. I am completely serious.

Lets consider barking laws for a moment. What is the purpose of an "anti" barking law? If you think the purpose of an "anti" barking law is noise abatement you would be flat out, 100% WRONG. Indeed, the purpose of "anti" barking laws is to protect the owners of noisy dogs. The purpose of "anti" barking laws is to shift the entire legal burden to the victim AND to set the standard of prosecution so ridiculously high that few will attempt it.

Consider the letter I sent to my county administrator regarding some proposed "anti" barking laws in my locality. Generally, "anti" barking laws burden the victim and protect the perpetrator in 2 ways:

  1. Multiple household rule. I am not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure this is unique in the legal universe. What this means is, each complaint requires that MULTIPLE complainants step forward before ANY action is taken. Imagine that someone steals your car and you have to get at least 2 neighbors to agree, in writing, that having your car stolen is a problem before authorities take any action... your head would explode, for sure, BUT this is EXACTLY what happens in the Fido universe!
  2. Consecutive disruption laws. This is another one that helps seal up Fido's overclass status. What this means is, in addition to having multiple complainants, the offense itself must continue unabated for a minimum amount of time before any action is taken. So, going back to the car theft analogy, if the thief joyrides for less than, say, 1/2 hour the theft was completely legal... even if you get all your neighbors to agree that the theft was an issue.

Its also important to consider that you can clear those enormous hurdles and the State may still find against you, particularly if the judge is Dorg.

Note that, typically, neither of the above is contemplated for any OTHER nuisance noises, such as fireworks. Fireworks enthusiasts typically get busted right off. Again, Fido and his owner have special protections the rest of us do not (though YMMV).

Another good example of this effect is the infamous "One Bite Rule". This states that a dog/owner gets to attack you one time and get off scott free. I wonder, how do they even keep track of this? They probably don't, particularly if the dog owner changes jurisdictions. In any case, again, contrast this with the rest of the legal system – Where is there a "one burglary rule" or a "one bank robbery rule"? Sure, perhaps the penalty for first time offenders may be less than for repeat offenders, but its generally not nothing. Again, the purpose of many of our "dangerous dog laws" is NOT public safety. The purpose of many "dangerous dog" laws is to keep biters biting.

In Florida, KILLING someone with your dog is only a 2nd degree misdemeanor. Off property attacks are often given a complete pass. Again, consider the Roy McSweeney incident.

The bottom line is, many of these "animal control" laws are crafted in such a way to protect the individual animal and individual animal owner. They are NOT crafted to protect public safety. This gives authorities a TON of plausible deniability.

Personally, I seriously doubt that the owners of the killer dogs in the Richey incident get any real jail time.  As far as I know, no charges have been filed at this time. Hell, the only reason the dogs are dead is because they tried to attack the cops at the scene (who promptly shot them). If they hadn't been killed at the scene I would not have been surprised to see the dogs spared and returned to the owners. Technically the dogs were first time offenders.

I also seriously doubt that Kumpf or anyone else in authority will be held accountable. Again, the laws are likely crafted in such a way that they ALL have a ton of weasel room. This is NOT unique to Dayton or anywhere else.

Saturday, February 15, 2014

An unpreventable tragedy, Part II

Its axiomatic!

So, more and more news is coming out about the Klonda Richey incident. The situation leading up to her killing is not exceptional in any way. Almost every neighborhood has a bully like Andrew Nason (the killer dogs owner).

Here are the actors in this boiler-plate story:
  • Klonda Richey. Victim of doggers. Begged for help, denied any kind of due process.
  • Andrew Nason. Bully dogger. Used his pets to project intimidation, terrorize the neighborhood. Had no restraint placed on his behavior.
  • Mark Kumpf. Corrupt and lazy AC officer. It appears that he withheld some information from the victim that may have gotten her some relief. Dawn at Craven Desires did some SUPER investigative reporting on this character.
  • Dayton PD / 911. Does not take animal related complaints seriously.
  • Magistrate Kristi Wuebben. Did not take animal related complaints seriously. Denied protection order in spite of video showing violations taking place.

There are literally ten million stories like this. Sure, 99.9% of them do not end with the dogs killing the victim. However, they are all epic fails with the lives of the victims changed for the worse, perhaps forever. Many of these scenarios typically result in a different, but still awful, outcome.

What would some of the more likely outcomes been?
  • Victim moves away. Often, taking a big financial loss. Many folks get literally "barked out" of their homes. Very common.
  • Dog owner kills complainant/victim, or at least tries to do so using a non-canine method. Uncommon but happens.
  • Complainant kills dog owner. Sleep deprivation from endless loud barking can result in a psychotic episode. As per the above, the vic occasionally kills the dogger in justifiable self defense. Uncommon but happens.
  • Victim takes matters into their own hands: Shoots or poisons the dogs. May wind up in jail for doing so. Fairly common.
  • Dog owner arrested / incarcerated for something other than a dog related offense. Its noteworthy that Nason had a long "rap" sheet – he would have likely wound up back in prison before much longer. Fairly common.
  • Dogger moves away for various reasons. These people have very unstable lives and often move around a lot. Sometimes, the victim will "out asshole" the perp who then go project their aggression onto someone else somewhere else. Fairly common.

Why were Richey's pleads for help summarily ignored by authorities? (This is my favorite rhetorical question). Remember, many hold dogs and dog owners are absolutely perfect as a First Principle. Its axiomatic! So when they receive a complaint, that leaves only 2 options – 1) the complainant is a crank and a liar, or 2) they deserved what happened. All evidence is summarily dismissed as forgery.

And it IS axiomatic – Its like a computer program:

IF COMPLAINT
THEN DECLARE FALSE
END IF
IF EVIDENCE PRESENTED
THEN DECLARE FORGERY
END IF
IF EVIDENCE IRREFUTABLE
THEN BLAME VICTIM
END IF

Of course, there are a small handful of places where these scenarios are taken seriously, so YMMV. There are a handful of people who are not brainwashed by The Collective. Unfortunately, none of those people were in Dayton.

In any case, I'm sure the judge who was reviewing Richeys case was following a similar decision tree. There is no thought process, judgement, or reason involved. Its pure binary logic. I mean, the videos clearly showed violations in progress, but that did not fit the narrative: There is no programming for that.

I'm sure the cops and the judge were fully confident that Richey was indeed an evil mastermind, using all her considerable skills as a special effects guru to frame the innocent dog owner and his absolutely perfect pets for wrongdoing. What else could it have been? There is no other explanation. See, during process of elimination you first eliminate the dogs and dog owners from the calculus, as being a dog/owner is a rock solid alibi in itself. Hell, they might as well have been on Mars when all this went down!

Kumpf, I am sure, probably was not too concerned as to the validity of the complaints... he just needed to protect a fellow Nutter at all cost: That is HIS programming.

As an aside, I've been taking some flak recently for a few things I've said on here and some comments I've made on Craven and other blogs. Again, I did not create this regime nor do I contribute to it. Look, when you are confronted by "The Dorg" your life as you know it is over. Don't freaking get pissed at ME about it. You can't afford a kevlar body suit for your pet bunny? AR15's with night sights ain't your thing? Those things may be true but they don't mean squat. That and 99 cents will buy you a cup of coffee in this town What it means is, YOU just outsmarted yourself.

Friday, February 14, 2014

Phony complaints my ass

I live in marginal peace. Doggers within a half block radius know better than to tone up the neighborhood with their yard barkers... pursuant to the 2 year conflict with the foaming at the mouth raving dognuts across the street. They would LIKE to tone everyone else up, but they know I won't let them get away with it.

However, if you increase that radius to say, 3 blocks you get into some serious AC issues. If I step outside at any time in a 24 hour period, it is impossible to NOT hear a dog bark. I literally see off leash dogs on a daily basis.

I don't bother complaining for the primary reason that I am burnt out on that, and again I have at least marginal peace in the home... I can sleep through the night and do my work without interruption. I am sure these other doggers are making their immediate neighbor's life pure hell but that is a battle for them to fight, not me.

This is an intermediate essay regarding the Klonda Richey incident. I have been reading the facebook pages, blogs, news websites and the like regarding the incident. Not surprisingly, I see a trend in the comments indirectly blasting those who make complaints.

Here are some good ones from the Montgomery County Animal Resource Center:

Heather Coleman How long did you stay and watch? Most loose dogs don't hang around at home...but do come back shortly...yeah 90% of these complaints come from pissy neighbors with too much time on their hands, but you are out there for that time that there is a legitimate complaint, like this one. Hope this is a wake up call to everyone.

Deborah Koehler Agree with Christina, some people use the ACO to harass neighbors regarding their pets.

Yup, thats right Heather – in spite of the fact that neighborhoods all over the world have an epidemic of barking, biting, dog off leash, and dog crap everywhere, a full NINETY PERCENT of such complaints are false! All I hear are barking dogs, but I'll just go ahead and FABRICATE a complaint since I am just a nasty dog-hating Nazi.

Tell you what Heather – come to my block and throw a rock... there is probably a 90% chance you will hit a nuisance barker, dog off leash, dog behaving dangerously, dog destroying property, or a dog shitting on someone else's lawn. How is that for a great statistic??

The absurdity of Heather's statement is compounded by the fact that, in most places, it is next to impossible to prosecute a dog owner for ANY bad behavior. This is based on the First Principle that all dogs are wonderful and all dog owners are Noble. Anybody who does not love Fido unconditionally is a bad person, and all dogs and dog owners are by definition justified in ALL of their actions.

Seriously, if I were to harass a neighbor I would use ANYTHING other than a dog complaint. Dog owners are given a pass on just about everything. Authorities go WAY out of their way to protect dogs and their owners. Their overclass status is nearly rock solid. It would be, literally, the path of MOST resistance. I'd be the knife wielder at a gun fight. Only a complete idiot would pursue that avenue.

I submit the polar opposite: For every complaint, there are 10 offenses: A bare minimum of 90% of offenses go unreported due to the facts that: Authorities don't give a shit, doggers are neighborhood bullies backed by the State, and endless propaganda that everyone has to love Fido no matter what.

Yeah, we are all a bunch of cranks and liars and Fido is just absolutely perfect.


An unpreventable tragedy, Part I

Past performance is always a good indicator of future returns. There is no real surprise when a situation comes to its entirely predictable conclusion.

Klonda Richey of Dayton OH was killed by her neighbors PitBulls while taking out the trash this past February 7th. Dogsbite.org has all the details.. read about that here.

Before I dissect that, I want to dissect a similar situation that happened in my area a couple of years ago. The dissection of that situation will segue into a dissection of the Richey incident in later essays.

On June 10th 2011 Roy McSweeney of Hawthorne FL was attacked by his neighbors pit bulls while he was gardening in his back yard.

The dogs tore off one of his arms, partially severed his other arm, and bit down on his head in a manner that "left his brains hanging out". The dogs belonged to Deanna Blitch and her son William Braxton.

Blitch and Braxton hid the bloody dogs from authorities, claiming they had shot them and dumped the bodies in a nearby lake.

McSweeney died on June 15th 2011 as a result of the injuries sustained in the attack.

Guess what boys and girls! The dogs had Prior Attacks.

Strike one: In January 2010, another man was bitten by the dogs, according to police reports. The man said he was caring for the property next door when the animals "came through the fence and knocked him down and attacked him," biting him all over his body, according to the reports. Now, that man is suing Blitch and her ex-boyfriend for his injuries.

Now, what was done about so called "Strike One"? Not much. The dogs were quarantined and returned to their owner. Well, I'll be dipped in shit! Attack by dog is legal as long as they are up to date on their shots!

Strike two: According to police reports, the dogs attacked a 23-year-old man last month [ this would be May 2011 ] as he entered the back door of Blitch's home to visit her son. He had to get more than 40 stitches and is still having trouble using his hand, according to his family.
Blitch, however, said the man wasn't invited and shouldn't have been trespassing.

Whats a hand between good friends, anyway? Good news is, the dogs got what they wanted. This scenario is proof positive of Overclass Status: Pursuant to Strike One dog owners not only have an unconditional right to unlimited violence on their land, they also have an unconditional right to unlimited violence on OTHER people's land!

Strike Three: Two pit bulls that mauled a 74-year-old man who was gardening in his own yard, ripping his right arm off and partially severing his left arm, ultimately leading to his death, were no strangers to attacks, according to police reports. 
 
Yes, but it seems like the police are strangers to holding dog owners accountable for the behavior of their mutants! Who could have seen THIS coming?!? Look, they can't be psychic. Give them a break, already!

Listen dog owners! In my state, killing somebody with your dog is a SECOND DEGREE MISDEMEANOR! Its way up there with other heinous crimes such as: Driving with a malfunctioning tail light, building a tool shed without a permit, and other unspeakable acts so WATCH IT.

On a lighter note, Deanna Blitch Pleads Out.

Yes, boys and girls, BLITCH was sent to jail for the horrendously long duration of NINETY DAYS! Oh, joy – I get three WHOLE MONTHS of peace and safety! Thank you Government! Justice is served. Well, if you want to be technical it was 45 weekends in jail. I am safe on Saturdays and Sundays at least.

Interestingly, BLITCH got the hard time NOT due to the canine homicide, but due to the fact that she and her son lied to the cops about the dogs. See, killing someone with your dogs is Okey-Dokey if you are upfront and honest about it. Lying to the cops bumped it up to a FIRST DEGREE MISDEMEANOR. I am really glad they throw the book at these criminals! Moral of the story? If you kill your neighbors with your dogs, please be upfront about it... remember that Fido was "just doing his job"!

So, what do you think is going to happen in the Richey case? More on that later...

Wednesday, February 12, 2014

Trust no one

In an age of activist politics you can trust no one in authority to protect your rights. Do you really think the fact that you pay someone's salary makes them obligated to you? Do you really think they are obligated to follow the law? They are not. Activist politics means that, they take your money and proceed to do whatever they want. There is no rule of law: The law is what THEY say it is. Enforcement agencies, executive boards, and courts are stacked with ideologues that have ONE priority – promote their cause at all costs.  They make up rules and regulations to fit their ideology, and if any extant rules don't fit, just ignore them!

The above is not a true conflict of interest. A conflict of interest indicates that one has competing interests where one interest may outweigh the other. In many cases, authorities have NO conflict of interest – they are motivated ONLY by ideology and their job mission / description is far below consideration.

I got "flamed" on Craven Desires the other day. Stow the kleenex... I can handle it. Apparently, somebody got a bug up their ass because I indicated they should protect their livestock from at large dogs (pit bulls). Short version: Somebody had taken ownership of a miniature horse and it was on their property for barely a couple of hours before the neighbor's pit bull ripped its face off. I then suggested they should gun up and shoot every mauler on their property. The flamer was incensed that I suggest they take affirmative action. Well, if YOU don't who will... the pit nuts running your AC, LE and circuit court? Bwahahahaha!  You will see me ice skate in hell before THAT happens.

Seriously, what did they think was going to happen? Dog owners don't restrain their dogs, nor are they expected to. The government does not restrain dog owners, nor are they expected to. Therefore, if you are a horse owner you are completely on your own. Before somebody flames me again... listen, I did not create this regime nor do I contribute to it. Please do not shoot the messenger.

As I have noted in the past, I am forcibly prevented from housing a horse on my property. According to the activist ideologues, one horse is worse for the community than 30 dogs (or whatever the backyard breeder du-joir can handle). Even if horse ownership were legal, I would be foolish to do so as neighborhood dogs are free to kill it via unlimited means. Sorry pit bull haters, I have seen MANY horses literally harassed to death by non-Pits. Is running a horse into a fence or a road full of cars really that worse than ripping its face off? You are debating velocity, not trajectory.

In any case, the reality is that NO you cannot house a horse or any livestock unless you are prepared to kill any potential predators 24x7. Why not? Because you are OWNED, that is why. Authorities are firmly on the side of those who want to KILL your livestock. You think they are going to jail them for killing your horse? Think again... all they care about is promoting the interests of dogs and dog owners.

Saturday, February 8, 2014

Off Leash Lunacy

I often wonder: Do the Doggers really think their consumer product can make its way in the world as well (or better than, as they would like to think) as the rest of us sentient beings? I figure they must, as they let them run off leash at every opportunity.

I spent New Years holiday up in Brevard, NC. I have a little travel trailer I use as a base for day hikes and I stayed in the Davidson River Campground. It was a great week, and I had some friends come out to hike with me.

One of the best hikes in that area is Johns Rock. The Rock's prominence is over 1000 feet (~300 meters) and is probably one of the highest cliffs in the eastern USA. In any case, we had a great hike up to the top. The view from up there is spectacular. It can be a very dangerous place, as many wilderness areas are – the vantage point is a granite outcropping that slopes gently downward at maybe a 1-2 degree angle. Given that it is not at the very top, during cold wet weather water will flow over this granite sheet and FREEZE making it a literal skating rink with a slight downward slant.

Everyone have a good mental picture? Super.

So, after we finish up we stop by the forest ranger's office to get more hike info and BS generally. The ranger tells us that a dog had died on the hike just recently. Apparently, some genius had let his dog off leash up on the Rock, it was running around, hit that ice sheet, and slid over the cliff. This would be roughly equivalent to falling off the Empire State Building. More interesting was the fact that this was NOT the first time something like this had happened!

What is the terminal velocity of a dog? More than fast enough to kill it.

I wonder what the genius owner had been thinking... that Dog is is really God spelled backwards and that a God can defy the laws of gravity? Perhaps after destroying his neighbor's property values and quality of life with his yard barker he figured that that, similar to the laws of man, the laws of nature did not apply to him and his Dog? Perhaps he anticipated that Fido would hang in midair, and even fly like Superman? As we all know, Dog created nature: How could the laws of nature apply to Dog?

All that is irrelevant. What is relevant is, there are a lot of things out there that can kill your dog. Don't believe me? Hang out at the bottom of Johns Rock for a while.... the answer will literally hit you on the head.