Thursday, October 15, 2015

The next step down

Dog fanatics have been VERY successful in protecting the interests of dangerous dogs and their owners.  They have effectively neutered ANY intervention by authorities. 

Barking laws?   Place the burden on the victim!
Biting laws?  Refer to barking laws!
BSL?  In the past year or so, we have had TWO DBRF's in Miami where PIT BULLS ARE BANNED!  Skeptical?  Consider this and this.

Consider that law is downstream from culture.   Our culture demands that the interests of dogs and dog owners is the overriding priority in all situations.  Fido's interests take precedence over all governing laws as well as the rights, interests and needs of any animal in his vicinity (and that includes us 2 legged "animals").   As long as the culture is completely dog-centric, our laws and law enforcement will be as well.

So, law enforcement is completely owned by dogger interests.  Is there any remaining territory for them to conquer?

Political agitators being what they are, they are working on the last bastion of defense that we have.  Self defense.

Consider this from the Watch Mickey Beat Cancer Page:


I wonder what their definition of "cruelty" is?   The mother beating a pit bull to get it to let go of her 2 year old child.  YUP!   Again, read the FaceBook page and consider the benefactors.  These folks think it is completely legitimate for a dog to rip the face off a toddler at the slightest provocation.  These miscreants do not care about any "cruelty" or "abuse" aimed at anything else.  This is a Pit Bull Protection Symposium and nothing else.


9 comments:

  1. I was excited to see a meeting in the town nearby where they were going to address AC. No. It was all about animal cruelty.
    BTW they are not interested in animal cruelty Just anything that might interfere with fido.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Attorneys, experts, agencies-sounds like a symposium on how much money they're making from supposed animal cruelty and how they hope to keep ca$hing in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What about cruelty to people? Y'know, like Kevin?

      Delete
  3. Sounds like they're getting a bit desperate, given that the 'likes' on what was the Mauler's page are heading south. Following a sudden plummet they're now about to drop below 73,000. Watch that space.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Mickey Page is not interested in any dog that is not a pit or that hasn't bit. Unless you're dense matter the other animals thrown in on occasion are little more than diversions.
    Take the case of the pig. There are legitimate reasons why livestock is not allowed in residential areas. A pot belly has all the needs and behaviors of a full sized pig. Of course the well being of a pig kept in the house isn't nearly as important and it is to stretch the rules to make everything acceptable.
    Reputable breeders know about these restrictions and check out where their livestock is being taken. Waiting to apply for a variance until you get caught shows the intent to flaunt the law. A very common behavior encouraged by the dog lawyer.

    Pioneer. I don't know exactly how likes are calculated but I doubt that 73K are running through that mess on a regular basis. The next surge will be when the mutt dies and the nuts blame Kevin for infecting him with cancer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its funny they are trying to defend a PIG... is a pig anything else but a MEAL for precious Fido?

      Delete
    2. It's not the pig. It's about the right to do what you want. Restrictions elsewhere might have an impact on BSL. Besides they have to keep the rabble roused up.

      Delete
  5. The pig is being defended on the basis that it's a service or support pig of some description for the boy, who has Asperger's syndrome. My son has Asperger's syndrome and we managed quite well without a pig or a damned dog (and I was always having people trying to encourage me to get him an assistance dog that neither he nor I wanted). As he got older and was able to study the subjects that really interested him he made rapid progress and is now at university.

    This child doesn't NEED a pig - the pig is a pet. And pigs aren't permitted to be kept where he is living. Presumably the parents would have been aware of this and yet they still went and bought a pig, and naturally the boy has become attached to it. THEY are responsible for this situation. The pig has to go unless they care to move to a rural area.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I've had pot belly pigs. They are wonderful intelligent pets. They also need to spend considerable time outside with plenty of room to act like a pig. This one should be marked under just because you can doesn't mean you should.

    ReplyDelete