Tuesday, March 8, 2016

The Padster Strikes Again!

In a not-so-shocking development, "Padi" the ear-eater has struck again!

Here is Dogsbite Decatur AL's article on the issue.

Here is my backstory on PADI.


A Manatee County dog that was given a second chance after biting a child is under investigation again. Deputies say the dog named Padi is now accused of biting a 4-month-old puppy on the nose at his owner's veterinary clinic. The sheriff's office says Dr. Garenberg could face criminal charges.

Now, if they had taken MY advice and killed the damn thing after the last attack, this would not have happened!

Why was Padi not only spared, but left to CONTINUE to run loose in Gartenburg's office?  ...Soon a Free Padi Facebook page racked up more than 27,000 like and hundreds of supporters turned out at county commission meetings and at the hearing in November.   Yep, the dog-worshiping crusade was out in full force!

His owner asked a judge to spare the dog's life; the judge ruled that the dog wasn't dangerous. Sarasota Judge Andrew Owens ruled Florida's 25-year-old dog bite law unconstitutional calling it "arbitrary and unduly oppresssive." That move released Padi.

These folks need to learn the basic definitions of words.  There was nothing "Arbitrary" about the original decision to destroy Padi... the dog attacked a 4 year old!   If that is not a good reason to put down a dog, then what is?

Pursuant to that, there is also nothing "Oppressive" about killing a dog that attacks children.  You want to know what is REALLY oppressive?  This "anarcho-tyrannical" regime that dictates that dog owners get to attack us any place, any time and for any or no reason and there is NOTHING we can do about it!  That regime, my friends, is VERY OPPRESSIVE. 

I might have been overwhelmed by the rank foolishness of Gartenburg and Padi's rank-and-file fans, but for the fact that these people are by definition totally delusional.  In their world, dogs and dog owners can do no wrong.  The victim was blamed for the last "encounter" so they figured that there was no need to contain PADI.

I truly hope PADI gets his long overdue dirt-nap, and does not move on to permanently maim someone as Gus did.


  1. I cannot understand why a dog, any dog is allowed to run loose in a veterinary clinic. As to Padi being a black lab...

    1. I recall, now, that as part of the original deal, Gartenburg would contain Padi in such a way that the dog would no longer be running loose in the clinic. It was this lack of restraint that contributed to the original incident.

      If that is the case, Gartenburg may be in serious trouble. Will be an interesting case to follow.

    2. I believe you are correct. But then again dog owners don't think any rule applies to them. The truth is my foolish dog owning neighbors have issues far exceeding the outward display of their untrained DOG. Since one came up missing. More and more I observe that people with problem pets as in making other people deal with their choice to have one most likely have other issues brewing out of sight.
      Consider their three children. Despite the fact I'm sure their children are or were used to the cacophony going on outside their windows all night it's got to be detrimental to their overall well being to have never had a peaceful nights sleep.

    3. RE: Your dog-nut neighbor's kids - I am confident they are suffering. Many dog fanatics put their love of dog ahead of their children's well being. Dog noise pollution is incredibly noxious and I'm sure its leading to mental and physical health problems for the entire family.

    4. Lack of sleep is even more serious than we think, something that may take to cognitive issues, for life, specially in kids. Wish I had time to write more about it.

  2. Any sensible person would PTS any animal that attacks humans. Dog worshippers are crazy, and pit worshippers are state hospital nightmares. But they are loose and running AC.....

  3. This latest episode in the Padster saga is going to leave the worshippers agonising over how to apportion blame. In Round One it was easy - it was the child's fault! Dog worshippers, for the most part, hate children. In Round 2 it's not so straightforward. They can't blame the puppy because it's a dog - and it was hurt. They can't blame the Padster because that might imply that it is vicious. It will be interesting to see how this case pans out.

    1. Turning on Padster's owner , the vet for letting his dog be put in such a situation , twice. Of course that might bring up the responsibility word.
      Popcorn ???

    2. Dog worshipers will occasionally mumble about owner accountability, but that is strictly in the abstract.... when something actually happens, they typically blame the victim.

      As Pioneer noted, they will be reluctant to blame the puppy, it being another dog. They may be able to blame another person in the waiting room, i.e. a cat owner. Who knows?

      A likely culprit is the puppy's owner. Still a dog owner, but dog lovers seem to want to protect the most reckless, irresponsible and destructive of their own much of the time.

  4. Each time I scroll and see that insane picture of the mauler with flowers on his head I don't know if I should puke of laugh. If a bunch of flowers stuck on the head of a mauler works we could empty the prisons and obtain world peace and save the bees.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.