Thursday, May 14, 2015

Party Time!

Anybody following the trial of Jena Wright in Iowa? has the details.

Here is the article on the original incident.

Know what, Colleen did such a great job of reporting the incident and the follow up I will refrain from my usual snarky dissection (for now, I probably won't be able to control myself for much longer).

Long story short - Pit Bull owner exposes its KNOWN MAULER to a 4 year old, which the mauler (predictably) mauls to death.


All I can say is:

This is a HUGE win!  This is EPIC!  For us, this is like the flag being hoisted over Iwo Jima!

Thumbs up, Iowa Jury!



  1. The dog owner entitlement mentality suffers a huge setback!

    1. Seems right on target. Don't dog owners bleat about it being how you raise your little wiggle butt.

    2. Hopefully this is a growing trend of dog people being held responsible for their dogs.

  2. I am so glad, I hope she serves every second of 35 yrs. When I read about the details of this case I didn't see how she could NOT be found guilty. I hope the judge gives her the max. She deserves it, and, maybe it will send a message to future POS pit owners.

  3. Murder charges should be mandatory for anyone who allows their mauler to kill. One small step in the right direction but much more is needed.

    1. " One small step in the right direction but much more is needed. "

      Agree 100% - we need to advance this "front" to cover ALL of the social problems involving dogs. Going after a dog fanatic that used their dogs to kill is a good START. Now, we need to press the attack and drain the swamp of useless barkers, off leash dogs, service dog fraudsters, and the like.

  4. The tide is turning in our direction. And soon it will be a tsunami.

    1. I truly believe the people disgusted with the dog fanatics out number the nutters by a wide margin. The trouble seems to be linked to the personality attracted to dogism. Loud mouthed , ignorant and self-entitled vs anyone who has a social conscious of even a moderate degree.
      The fact a jury returned a guilty verdict on a woman is great. Now I want to see one handed down on a nice middle class yuppie parent when their pibble goes all DNA on someone and leaves a grave marker. Give them 35 years and we'll really see the tide turn.

    2. And howzabout if that middle class yuppie parent was a RESCUER? That would be good...

    3. "I truly believe the people disgusted with the dog fanatics out number the nutters by a wide margin."

      If you're talking core pit bull advocates, possibly, but dog fanatics in general, not a chance. The "Dogs are better than people" mentality is so pervasive and ingrained it's actually becoming scary.

    4. The doggist reminds me of the Born Again Christian. It's real popular and so are you right after you get dunked. They drive everyone around the crazy insisting you are missing the greatest orgasm on earth for denying yourself that come to Jesus moment.
      The majority settle down after a while.or just stop going. The hard core ones just dive deeper down the rabbit hole looking for even more fulfilling pleasure releasing sensations from their brains....I mean God.
      Dogs and Gods are interchangeable. Most of the world believes in something. Only a few are the real trouble makers.

    5. The dog cult is definitely a religion. They have a belief system based on faith and confirmation bias. They've all been lying to themselves for so long, they have completely disconnected themselves from reality.

      RE: Pit Nutters vs. rank and file dog fanatics. There is currently an internecine conflict being waged for the soul of Dogdom. At least some dog lovers hate pit bulls because pits blatantly trash the narrative that all dogs are angels sent from heaven. To them, the pit is the "anti-dog", the epitome of pure evil. So, they are trying to cast the pits and their owners down from the pedestal they all currentl occupy.

      The above point is why I don't necessarily align myself with all of the pro-BSL folks. While I believe BSL is a legitimate arrangement, it does not address most of the social harm related to pets. My priority would be to focus on known troublemakers FIRST and contemplate what MIGHT be a problem second. From many conversations I have had over the years, and from reading many of the pro-BSL blogs and comment threads I have come to the conclusion that many of the pro-BSL folks are fine with projecting aggression via a dog, and fully support the canine owning overclass. They really don't care about public health or safety, they just hate pit bulls.

    6. Uncontrol,I think you have 'em dead to right. I recently bailed out of an anti-pit group on Facebook. Too many dog worshippers who thought that their FiFi was just wonderful, but pit bulls? How icky!

    7. YQN - remember that anti-barking site we were on a few years ago? Similar situation. Rather than focus on pragmatic barking cessation, or any type of realistic animal control, it was more about protecting the interests of dogs and "outing" any heretics who did not show Fido the proper respect.

      Every time I proposed using the "big stick" (legally / legistlatively NOT literally) I got censored. Someone else got kicked off the forum completely for squirting a canine trespasser (who was behaving dangerously) WITH A GARDEN HOSE. What was she supposed to do, throw rose petals at it's feet??? This was the same dog that was barking all the time.

      In any case, yes, pushing unlimited doggy worship, full civil rights for dogs and general canine supremacy seems to be rather at odds with BSL.

      Now that I have slept on it (it's now 7:20am on my coast) I believe the main reason some doggy worshipers want BSL is due to the fact that Pit Bulls are a danger to other DOGS. People who are victimized by dogs in various ways are of no consequence to them, because they believe the interests of dogs outweighs the interests of people. Instead, they want pit bulls GONE from society because they are now unable to turn fluffy loose or leave him tied out all day (to bark) because there is a high risk a Pit Bull will kill him. They can't use dog parks because Pit Bulls have now taken them over and those places are now unsafe for other dogs.

      Of course, everyone who supports BSL is not an overt or undercover dog worshiper. Hell, I support it. BUT I would be VERY wary of someone who seems to think that our entire animal control code should consist of a Pit Bull Ban.

      The entire dog owning population needs to come down a notch. Pit AND non-pit owning alike.

    8. I should probably make it clear that some of these pro-BSL folks have been CAUGHT promoting canine supremacy. For example:

      - Clearly stating that dog off leash/at large is acceptable if the dog is not a pit bull. Really? Sure, when your loose dog craps in my yard, I'll clean it up given that I exist strictly to suit your interests. My property rights are of absolutely no consequence, correct? Also, if your loose dog runs into the road and causes a fatal car crash, those lives are of no consequence.... all that matters is that your lazy ass did not have to put down the cheetos, get off the couch, and take your dog for a walk?

      - Dogs in restaurants, grocery stores and places where dogs are expressly prohibited and/or unwelcome is perfectly OK. Sure - Everyone elses right of association needs to be suspended around your dog. As long as the dog and the owner get what THEY want, nothing else is of any consequence. Everybody else needs to get down and kiss your dog's ass!!! Got it!

      - Etc...

      The above is slathered on top of the usual canine supremacist drivel: Dogs are man's best friend, dogs make us all healthier and live longer, there are no bad dogs, don't trust anyone who does not love dogs, dogs and humans have this special genetic connection, dogs make everything better, etc.... etc... ad nauseum.

    9. Dogs that get hit by cars should see the owners charged with animal cruelty. Owners are so misguided many think if their dog gets hit by your car you will be liable for the dogs vet bills.
      I have no doubt my neighbor letting her dogs become a nuisances is nothing more than her being lazy and not wanting to walk them or clean up their crap in HER yard.
      The beasts have been quiet at night now. I still have to chase the one nasty POS little one off. The big one has gotten enough OC from me by now it tucks tail and runs when I walk out .
      Any dog crap I find is returned to her yard via poo flinging shovel. Someone should market a device just for shooting the neighbors dog crap back in their yard.
      Do you know what dog crap does in your yard besides stink and play booby trap ? It attracts other stray dogs. Let it lay and you'll have a craphound convention in your yard

    10. The laws in my jurisdiction are very clear: The dog owner is 100% liable for ANY damages related to a car crash caused by their off leash dog, and that includes damages to the dog.

    11. there are no bad dogs

      Some people I'm very close to believe this wholeheartedly. They're not foolish enough to allow an aggressive dog, but they totally buy into the idea that all dogs are the same at their core and it's how you raise them. I haven't seen them dispute any "studies" funded by the pet industry, either. It bums me out, because they're such smart, level-headed people when we're NOT talking about dogs.

      don't trust anyone who does not love dogs

      I like most dogs and was a dog-crazy kid, so I've never been on the receiving end of this statement. But I still hate it. How does not liking dogs automatically make someone a horrible person? People can say what they want about other animals, and provided they aren't physically harming those animals, the rest of us have to deal with it. But making one negative remark about Fido, no matter how slight, suddenly casts you into the tinted lights of the heathens!

      I don't get it.

      The Doggy Censorship Act is one of the big reasons the dog culture has become so pervasive in America. We can't say anything about its negative effects.

  5. Saw something interesting on the WMBC page:

    "Update on Mickey!

    Contrary to what the hate pages are reporting Mickey is doing great, and of course is very happy. John has been down to see him, and personally saw that he was fine. The bed maybe repairable and Aunt Annie is going down soon to see about it.

    With regards to something happening to Mickey just think about. Do you want to be the Deputy who has to tell Sheriff Joe that something happened to Mickey? I do not think so....."

    First, one can get an ORTHOPEDIC large dog bed off Amazon for SIXTY BUCKS. Are these people too cheap to drop $60 on 'ol St. Mick? Hell, you can get a cheap one for under $25.

    Also, consider the substance of the 2nd paragraph:

    "With regards to something happening to Mickey just think about [it]. Do you want to be the Deputy who has to tell Sheriff Joe that something happened to Mickey? I do not think so....."

    My takeaway from that is they are paranoid that their is either an insider conspiracy to off the mauler, or at least that no one would take action if anyone offed The Mick. Seems like they are trying, in their oh so delicate way, to motivate the rank and file cops to look out for Mick?

    1. The report of an ambiguous threat with no substance to the posting at all.
      Pot Stirring.
      I hope the dog chokes on the stuffing it pulls out it's beds. My wishing it dead doesn't constitute a threat. Continuing to give him beds he can pull apart and ingest does. His destructive nature will ramp up over time. Mickey has all the enrichment lions and tigers did 50 years ago when they were stuffed in display cages.
      Legally speaking no inmate in custody of the state should be allowed to handle a dog that has mauled and killed. He was declared legally vicious. There is also the issue of inmates being put on public display while inside a prison.
      Has anyone there thought of the monster lawsuit the taxpayers of AZ would face if old Mic went meat grinder and mauled or killed an inmate ?

    2. "Has anyone there thought of the monster lawsuit the taxpayers of AZ would face if old Mic went meat grinder and mauled or killed an inmate ? "

      Of course not. Forethought is beyond their capacity. The whole thing is a powderkeg surrounded by a bunch of lit candles.... won't take much to set it off.

    3. Eileen, you make a very good point. In a former life, I was a Habitat for Humanity volunteer. Some of my fellow volunteers were guests of the great state of AZ, and there were all sorts of rules regarding our conduct. The one rule I'm reminded of was the no photos rule. Their guards were quite diligent about enforcing this one.

    4. I know there are prison type shows on cable. I have no idea the process used to film. So they might very well be able to tie up the loose ends of inmates being on camera.
      What they can't control is the dog, declared viscous being cared for by unqualified staff. Mickey's living conditions are no better than when he was chained. Maybe worse since he was at least outside then. He has less enrichment than zoo animals in display cages had 50 years ago. Rescues don't like to talk about kennel rage.
      I feel almost sorry for the disciples who think by staring at Mickey Cam when it's up that they are somehow keeping him company.

    5. I am confident there are many aspects to the Mick debacle that, if not expressly illegal, are at a bare minimum totally unethical.

      However, whenever there is a dog involved, the only ethic that's considered is - is this somehow good for the dog cult? Everything else is of no consequence. Ever.

  6. Oh, I am so glad to read all this! Thanks you very much for sharing the details here. I agree that it is the party time. Anyway, tonight I have already been invited to a grand party at one of the most beautiful party halls in Bay area.