Heil Mickler!

Mick Heil, you non-dog-loving PEONS!

Comments have been great.  Talk about whatever you want (at least marginally on topic).

KaD had a great comment the other day.  WHY does Fido get to make life and death decisions over us?  Why does HE get to decide when we get up in the morning?? 

You don't like getting bit?  You don't want to listen to barking 24x7?   Say 100 HEIL MICKLERS and all will be well!  

HEIL MICKLER!

Another juicy Pit Bull Predicament!

Another trainwreck a happenin'!   And, just in time, too!  I squeezed the "Mickey" debacle for all its worth,  and now its time for another juicy pit bull predicament!

Meet "Gus" a multiple time supermauler!  Gus has his own facebook page, though not nearly as popular as our cherished "Saint Mick"!

From a lawsuit filed against Gus' Mommy and Cesar Milan, Here is the backstory on Gus.

From the link above:  "She claims Gus had an "extensive history of vicious and unprovoked attacks on individuals and animals," and that the dog was previously impounded in Texas after attacking a trainer."   Hmmm... sounds like a great family Pit Bull to me!

STRIKE ONE:  "Feb. 7, 2013, Bitney says, Gus attacked trainer Amber Rickles ..... During a 20-minute attack, Bitney says, the dog bit Rickles on the right arm, and then latched on to her left breast when she tried to put it in a kennel.
     "With the pit bull still attached to her left breast, Ms. Rickles backed into a laundry room where the dog released his grip, enabling Ms. Rickles to close the door," the complaint states. "The pit bull then broke through the door and attacked Ms. Rickles a third time, latching onto her left arm and breaking it in two places."   Now, that is ONE game pitbull!!!

" Three men eventually pulled Gus off Rickles."   That must've cause poor 'ol GUS some real FEELBAD!

THEN!   "On Feb. 26, 2013, a Montgomery judge ordered the state to destroy the dog. But the rescuer who brought the dog to Rickles' boarding and training center, co-defendant Jennifer L. Romano, appealed the order, Bitney says.
     Milan's Dog Psychology Center then agreed to take the pit bull and rehabilitate it, according to the 27-page lawsuit."   Thank Dog for that!

STRIKE TWO:   In April 2014 the pit bull [Gus] bit an Alaskan malamute on the neck, [Awww.... he was just PLAYIN'!]  Bitney says. Knowing that the dog was still a danger to the public, the center released the dog on Sept. 17, 2014, according to the complaint.  Hey, DOG aggression does NOT equal human aggression!  A million pit bull rescue angels can't be wrong!  Its not like Gus attacked a person, or anything.... derp!

STRIKE THREE:  "Bitney says the dog [attacked] her at Vazzoler's home six days after Millan's center released it.     Her injuries allegedly included "disfiguring open wounds, deep muscle and tendon lacerations and open comminuted fractures to the radius and ulna of her left arm and permanent loss of feeling and function in her left hand."  Quite the party, Indeed!

Its my understanding that GUS finally received a well earned, and long overdue, DIRT NAP.  This was AFTER his "rescue mommy" Jennifer Romano pulled out all the stops to save GUS AGAIN!

The Bleeding Heart Battalion

Why does the Animal Uncontrol predicament roll on and on?  There are many reasons, but the topic for today is THE BLEEDING HEART BATTALION.

We are beset by a horde of bleeding heart fools who will NOT tolerate ANY force being used against ANY animal or ANY pet owner for ANY reason!

Here are their rationalizations:

- Fine them?  That would take food out of their mouths!  Just because he sic'd Fido on the neighbor is no good reason he should give up a cent!  Who cares if the victim lost a leg and his job!  HAVE A HEART YOU NAZI BASTARD!

- Arrest them?  You can't punish someone for what their dog did!  There was nothing they could do!  OWNING A PIT BULL IS A CORE NECESSITY YOU TROGLODYTE!

- Confiscate the dog?  HOW CAN YOU TAKE A PRECIOUS PUPPY AWAY FROM THEIR OWNER YOU BOLSHEVIK MONSTER!  Who cares if no one in a four block radius has slept in the past month?!?  They are just a bunch of 2 legged BOOGEYMEN!  Waaaaaah!

- Shoot the dog?  WAAAH!   So what if Fido is shredding at 3 year old?!?!?  NO ONE LOVES HIM ENOUGH!  Put down that pistol and get him some TREATS!  YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND DOG BEHAVIOR!

- Oh, and don't even TALK about putting a dog down for any reason!  Fido must be turned loose to bite again because he's JUST A DOG BEING A DOG!  The rest of us need to LEARN DOG BEHAVIOR!  NO KILL 4EVAH!!!!!!!

- Dog owners are REALLY NICE PEOPLE!  They are all wonderful by definition!  We must KISS THEIR ASSES UNTIL THEY STOP BEHAVING LIKE THUGS!   Maybe if we kiss their asses a WHOLE LOT they will stop bullying us!

- STOP TELLING ME TO BE ASSERTIVE!  You are just a meanie!  Uses of force never solved ANYTHING!   See, every problem is solved by holding hands with psychopaths, bullies, rapists, murderers, child molesters, and the like and SINGING KUMBAYAHHHH!

Have any of the above sentiments?  This is what you must see when you look in the mirror:

Get a grip, people.  Grow the hell up.  All policy reduces to the use of force.  Anyone who does not admit that is a fool or a liar.  Clamp down on the malicious dog owner next door or say goodbye to your sleep AND your face!

QUIT THE BLEEDING HEART BATTALION!  PENALTIES NOW!

Pit Bulls and Parolees!

Great News!  Animal Planet's "Pit Bulls and Parolees" (PB&P) has been renewed for its Seventh Season!  (/snark)

Get the "great" news here.

I have never seen the show.  I tend to dislike "reality TV" (Pawn Stars a notable exception).  I estimate it's primarily feel good propaganda created to feed the bottom tier of the Dogocracy.  I also estimate, given is notable cast, that LOTS of footage winds up on the cutting room floor.  Watching these dogs behave dangerously would be a sure buzzkill for the Canine-ocratic proletariat.  Or, maybe not?  Perhaps most/all of them are watching in hopes of an impromptu pit killing spree?

There is now a petition going to have the show cancelled.

For the record, I do not support the petition.  Pit Bulls and Parolees should stay on the air as long as it has an audience.  Does anybody really think the Pit Bull Pyramid scheme (or any part of the canine supremacy movement) will collapse without this little piece of fluff?  Indeed, cancellation may just feed their persecution complex.   Thanks to 21st century technology, if AP were to cease production and remove PB&P from the air, past episodes will live on in YouTube, DVR's, bootleg DVD's and the like.  This is not going away.

Moreover, this trash is aimed directly at a target audience that won't be swayed by a mere absence of their feel good TV show.   Does anybody really think that PB&P has an audience other than pit/dog nutter degenerates?

I agree with the show's critics that the show is at best in very bad taste, and at worst dangerous propaganda that may get people hurt.   However, the producers have a right to air this garbage and the lumpen proletariat that crave this stuff have a right to consume it.   What do you watch that promotes bad behavior?  Do you want that taken off the air?   Unless you consume nothing but Disney material produced prior to, say, 1970 then supporting this petition is rather hypocritical.   If you do not like the show, do not watch it. 

Here, here and here I wrote that censorship is the ultimate fail.   By attempting to get the show off the air, you have just admitted that you have no point.  

Indeed, "our" side has LOTS of good points.  It is our adversaries that are ethically and intellectually bankrupt.   See, we need to get OUR word out, and that is going to be impossible in an environment of censorship.

So, what to do?  In my opinion, the best way to move forward would be to have a show of our own that shows the downsides of pet ownership generally, and pit bull ownership specifically. 

I am contemplating a hosted newsy type show with video clips of recent, relevant news events; interviews with victims, activists, and experts;  Etc...   A show that is hard hitting and delightfully gruesome would be a BIG hit.   President Obama recently said "If it bleeds, it leads" and this show would be a real "leader"!

As we all know, the nuts would try to get the show pulled, but hey:  We let them have THEIR show, they let us have OUR show.   Equal protection, bitchez!

With all of that said, if the petition is actually successful (I really don't think it will be), I will likely have a colossal case of Schadenfreude as the primary censors themselves are now censored!  Hoist by their own PETARDS.  Can't say anything nice about Pit Bulls on TV, petunias!

Open Thread

Big Mickey is WATCHING YOU!

....So you better keep up with your Dog Worship!

A few points for discussion:

Debarking.  Yay or Nay?   This "savage" practice has been banned in multiple places... sort of like BSL!   Hey, Fido is more equal than the rest of us... lets let him yell at us day and night!   Lets ban Spay/Neuter and leash laws while we are at it.  Do you think Fido is all that upset that he can't wake the neighborhood for a radius of a mile?   How about you ask him and get back to us?   Oh, and try not to shatter all the concrete in the vicinity, puhleeezzze?

Dog works in mysterious ways.  "Sheba", the dog that killed the man trying to save the life of her owner (WHY does that have to be such a mouthful?  Have we gone THAT far off the deep end?!), is a multiple time mauler and MAY get off the hook - keep an eye out for SHEBA in your neighborhood! 


Freedom of speech takes another dump.   Don't say anything bad about SHEBA.   Doublethink demands that multiple time maulers are the sweetest thing ever!  "Yes, Nicole Marie, anyone who has something rude or unpleasant to say is being removed from the page. We are not required to allow "freedom of speech". This is our page, not yours. Don't like that news? Stay off the page. Problem solved."   Sorry, asshole, "problem" NOT solved as we are STILL HERE.  You shut everyone else up as there is no defense for this monster.

The Kennel Barkathalon

Allahu Mickbar!  When I make the claim that "our neighborhoods sound like kennels", that is no minor claim.   A neighborhood that sounds like a kennel is a BIG problem.  Oh, and those kennel noises are primarily related to squeaky hamster wheels (/sarc).

Anyways, how to answer the Barking Question?   Now, NOBODY gives a crap about the effects of dog noise on people, so that angle is a dead end.  Who cares if you can't sleep in your own house?  Remember, the dog owner next door gets to set the noise level in your home, NOT you!   Praise Dog!

Moving along, the above does not mean that nothing can be done.  Has anyone considered the effect of dog noise on OTHER DOGS?   See, nobody cared about dog attacks UNTIL pit bulls started attacking other dogs, so NOW that problem gets some attention.

If you can prove that dog noise is toxic to DOGS, that is an angle that may gain some traction.

Consider this excellent article containing an analysis of the effects of dog noise in kennels.  Note that only the effects on other dogs is considered, as no one cares about the effects of noxious barking on ANY other species.

Some excerpts with a few comments of mine added in for emphasis.

Sound levels in animal shelters regularly exceed 100 dB. Noise is a physical stressor on animals that can lead to behavioral, physiological, and anatomical responses.  [try not to forget about us 2 legged animals... we are "people" too!] There are currently no policies regulating noise levels in dog kennels [of course not, who are WE to quiet the Voice of Dog?]. The objective of this study was to evaluate the noise levels dogs [the hell with the other animals] are exposed to in an animal shelter on a continuous basis and to determine the need, if any, for noise regulations [how about a sensible noise regulation OUTSIDE the kennel?]. Noise levels at a newly constructed animal shelter were measured using a noise dosimeter in all indoor dog-holding areas. These holding areas included large dog adoptable, large dog stray, small dog adoptable, small dog stray, and front intake. The noise level was highest in the large adoptable area. Sound from the large adoptable area affected some of the noise measurements for the other rooms. Peak noise levels regularly exceeded the measuring capability of the dosimeter (118.9 dBA). [well, I'll be dipped in sh!t] Often, in new facility design, there is little attention paid to noise abatement, [obviously, because the noise level has everything to do with the building and NOTHING to do with the dogs] despite the evidence that noise causes physical and psychological stress on dogs  [pay dirt!]. To meet their behavioral and physical needs, kennel design should also address optimal sound range. 

Noise in an animal shelter has previously been discussed (Key, 2000; Milligan, Sales,& Khirnykh, 1993; Sales, Hubrecht, Peyvandi, Milligan, & Shield, 1997). Sales et al. reported that sound levels regularly exceeded 100 dB. Sound is measured in decibels (dB) and the scale is logarithmic, meaning that 90 dB is 10 times the intensity of 80 dB and is 100 times the intensity of 70 dB. A noise level over 70 dB(A) is considered "loud" (Baker, 1998). To put this into context, 95 dB(A) is comparable to a subway train, 110 dB(A) is a jackhammer, and 120 dB(A) is a propeller aircraft; any sound in the 90 to 120 dB(A) range is considered to be in the critical zone and can be felt as well as heard (Key, 2000). No single method or process exists for measuring occupational noise. A noise dosimeter is preferred for measuring noise levels when the noise levels are varying or intermittent and when they contain impulsive components such as barking. One consideration when using a noise dosimeter is that the microphone is within the hearing zone of individuals being monitored. 

It has long been documented that audible sound has profound physiological and psychological effects on nonhuman animals and disturbs the healthy equilibrium of the body (Wei, 1969). Noise has been found to be a physical stressor on animals that can lead to behavioral, physiological, and anatomical responses. Noise-induced cortisol increases can cause immunosuppression, insulin resistance, cardiovascular diseases, catabolism (molecular decomposition), and intestinal problems (Spreng, 2000).   [Indeed, but lets just keep the barkathon going, shall we?] The hearing of animals differs from that of humans; dogs (Canis familiaris) have much better hearing and can hear sounds up to four times quieter than can the human ear. Recent research shows that noise in dog kennels may be a welfare concern for the animals (Sales et al., 1997), but currently no policies regulate noise levels in dog kennels.  [Again, HOW ABOUT THE NOISE LEVEL EVERYWHERE ELSE?]

The objective of this observational case study was to evaluate the levels of noise to which dogs are exposed on a continuous basis and to determine the need for noise regulations. Regulations may emphasize the necessity to control levels through building design and materials instead of trying to reduce the noise produced by the animals. The facility where this study was conducted was designed and built in the last 7 years. However, as is often typical, there were no obvious preventative measures in the design to reduce noise and, in fact, design may have had the opposite effect due to animal arrangement, the use of concrete block, and exposed metal roofing. 

So, in closing, the best way to counter the barking scourge is to present evidence that barking is bad FOR DOGS and that should solve the problem. 

Demand Accountability

The Mickey trainwreck goes round and round... round and round....

A great facebook site to check out is The Truth About the Lexus Project.  They have been my muse on a few occasions (including this one).

So, we have decided to "save" all of our dog killing and child maiming supermaulers.  The big question is:  Who Pays?  And, how MUCH are they paying?

From the facebook site indicated above:

Indeed, a rational person (after slamming a car door on their head) would assume that the costs associated with housing, feeding, and medically administering to these monsters *might* rest with private donations(?)  Or, maybe dog licensing fees (ROFL... good one!)

Answer:

Ladies and Gentlemen... we have a WINNER!

In all seriousness, I am not sure WHERE the funds to sustain Mickey and his ilk really come from.  That said, here are the questions to ask:

(1) What entity is paying for the care and housing of this animal, and those like him?
(2) From where, exactly, does this entity draw the funds to pay for (1) above?  General taxpayers?  Dog licensing fees?  Private donations?  Another source(s) (please indicate source(s))?
(3) Who determines appropriate care for this animal, and under what circumstances may it be humanely euthanized?
(4) Is the animal to be kept alive as long as possible?
(5) Is there a limit set on the funds to be allocated for the care of this animal?  If so, how much?
(6) Are the acts of removing the animal from the facility (pursuant to veterinary care) consistent with the court order remanding that animal to that facility?
(7) Why is this animal granted resources considered unavailable to:  Other animals currently within the animal control system; Other animal control activities including (but not limited to):  Barking cessation, pursuing animals at large, and investigating dog bite situations; and, the needs of other, unfunded county projects?

All of the above goes to point that saving an animal like Mickey is a TERRIBLE policy.  ALL pets that maul and kill MUST be put down, otherwise we end up with endless predicaments like this one. This debacle, among other things, likely presents an absurd misapplication of public resources.

  

Fault

Allahu Mick-Bar my Friends!

When a dog offends against a person or another animal, who is at fault?  The dog?  The owner?  Another entity entirely?

The current politically correct atmosphere demands that the victim and/or the complainant is to blame.  ALWAYS to blame.  This stems from the cultural First Principle that dogs and dog owners are always the agents of Good.  Therefore, both dog and owner are automatically removed from blame, accountability and responsibility in any scenario.

An interesting case popped up the other day where a pit bull dog apparently killed the individual giving CPR to the owner.  Dogsbite.org has the details.  Both men are dead as a result.  I refer to this as a "TwoFer" as the dog's behavior likely resulted in BOTH deaths.... if the dog had not killed the man giving CPR to it's owner, both may still be alive.  If I were to kill someone in the act of saving YOUR life, would I not be accountable for YOUR death as well?

Hilarity ensued when the Apologista horde came out of the woodwork granting absolution to the dog.

"So sad. A very freak and tragic happening. The dog was being loyal & thought he was protecting his incapacitated owner. I will pray for the families of both the heart attack victim and the victim that was attacked by the dog".

The above sort of mental vomitus has spewed forth in every news article and forum reporting the incident.  The prevailing attitude is that a dog killing someone who is trying to save the life of the dog's owner is acceptable dog behavior.   Hell, not just ACCEPTABLE, it is COMMENDABLE!  [EDIT:  Click on this!]

Yawn.  Hey, its OK for the dog to bark at people in their OWN (not the dog's) YARDS, and attack invited guests, so whats the big deal about this?  Wouldn't YOU want YOUR dog to kill me if I was in the act of saving your life?   Fido is always the better judge of things, better just leave everything up to him!

Moving along, who IS to blame for dog attacks, endless barking and the like?  I take the minority opinion that it is generally NOT the fault of the complainant and/or the victim.  Further burdening victims with multiple household rules, consecutive disruption laws, one bite rules and the like is not conducive to solving the problem. 

I hold that both dog and owner are at fault and affirmative action should be taken against both parties.  However, it is the owner who is responsible and accountable for the act(s).

The owner is at fault because it is THEY that created the risk.  If you can't be held accountable for what your pet does, you can not have one.  For those who want to place all the blame on the dog, consider this:  Why was the dog there in the first place?  Who put him there?  Who is allowing him to act as he does?   The owner created the scenario that led to injury via a series of deliberate acts.

The dog is at fault, or to be more accurate HAS a fault, because it will use violence or engage in some type of destructive behavior to meet its needs.  There is no place in human society for an animal like that.  They do not have rights, nor do they contribute to society in any meaningful way.

In closing, I would like to add that there is one more party to blame.  Ultimately, the fault is with our corrupt, degenerate dog worshiping culture.  A culture that automatically grants absolution to these anti-social and destructive acts, and lays the groundwork for the acts to continue.

Censorship FAIL - proto Animal Uncontrolism

So, here and here I made the case that censorship is the ultimate FAIL.  Is there ANOTHER case to be made?

Here is the rhetorical question for the day:  Why did I start this blog in the first place, considering that I had been content to write and comment on other sites for the past, oh, 20 years or so?

In any case, THIS post was censored from a supposedly ANTI-BARKING site about 4 years ago.

Anybody have a problem with this content?  Feel free to let me know:

 Hello [site host],

That is unfortunate, I think this was generally a good "venue".

In regards to "anti-dog"... how do you define "anti-dog" and why does one need to be "pro-dog"?  I think that "anti-dog" is an oversimplification. 

Would you consider any of the following "anti-dog", and if so, why?
- Using lethal force against a dog that is attacking a human being.  Note this is legally protected almost everywhere.
 - Insisting that any dog that has attacked a human being or killed another animal be summarily put down or incarcerated indefinitely, as opposed to being turned loose in the community.
- A preference for dog-free communities, public parks, etc...  Again, this is not a dog ban, merely a recognition that dogs are not appropriate in all venues.
- Preferring to not own a dog:  preferring another pet over a dog, i.e. a cat, rabbit, horse, etc...
- Recognizing that there is such a thing as a "bad" dog.  Consider Alexandra Semyonova, et. al.
- Recognizing that there is a down side to owning a dog, just as there is to Anything.  Dogs are not perfect, and owning a dog is not for everyone.
- Belief that a dog is inferior to a human.
- Belief that a dog is equal to other animals.
- Self help options are legitimate where and when the legal system has completely failed.

[Here] I'll give you MY answers to my own questions and leave that open for discussion:

- Using lethal force against a dog that is attacking, or otherwise threatening the safety of, another human being is legitimate.  I will not surrender to a vicious animal nor will I stand by and allow another human or animal to be mauled by a dog or any other animal.  This is a protected legal right in nearly every jurisdiction.   Again, I am contemplating SELF DEFENSE not initiating force for no reason.

- I insist that any dog that has seriously injured or killed a human being, or has killed another animal, be summarily euthanized.  I will not tolerate vicious animals being turned loose in my community.

- I prefer that some locales and public places be zoned "dog free".  61% of households in the United States do NOT have a dog and this large majority should be accommodated.

- I prefer cats over dogs.   Cats are lower impact and fundamentally superior in many ways.

- There is such a thing as a "bad" dog.  The worlds leading animal experts say so, and its clear that while to dog's behavior is the owners *responsibility*, the dog is acting with volition (i.e. choosing to bark over being quiet, meeting its needs with violence, etc...).  Furthermore, some dogs have been bred to be disruptive and vicious, and those breeds should be treated with extreme prejudice.

- There are many down-sides to owning a dog.  There are downsides to EVERYTHING including driving a car or owning a home.  Personally, I put dog owners in the same category as smokers.  They have a right to pursue their lifestyle choice to the extent that it does not adversely affect anyone else.  I'm sure they all love their dogs, but smokers love their cigarettes even more (I know, I'm an ex smoker!).  Hell, smoking improves concentration, brings on a sense of well-being, etc... if it were all bad no one would do it.

- Dogs are inferior to humans.   There is no equity between humans and dogs:  When the rights of a human and the interests of a dog intersect, the dog loses.  Discrimination against dogs is legitimate.

- Dogs are equal to other animals. 

- Self help options are legitimate where and when due process has been summarily denied.   This may include using force against the dog.

I am not "anti-dog" I am dog tolerant.  I'm willing to tolerate any dog that does not cause anyone a problem.  I want commonsense limits put on dog behavior.  "Dogs bark, its what they do" does not fly with me.  I think that the downside of owning a dog and harboring dogs in human communities needs to be presented as well as the upside, and the upside is ALREADY very well presented.   The hegemony of the dog-owning entitlement overclass needs to be broken.  Owning a dog does not entitle one to any special treatment.  Dog victims deserve due process.   I think that a large minority (say 20%-30%) of people who own dogs would be better off not doing so.  I think that dog owners should be taxed heavily as they externalize the costs of their high impact pets.  I will not subjugate my needs to those of a dog.  Human cities are for human consumption, and bringing ANY animal into that city is a privilege.

Anyone who finds fault in my logic or feels that my position is somehow driven by irrational hatred, please show me my error.

Anyone who considers me a "hater" should take heed that I have had numerous opportunities to eliminate the source of my torment and have not done so.  And, I mean quickly and efficiently.  How?  In my jurisdiction, I have a legal right to shoot dead any canine trespasser.  For anyone who did not fully absorb that last sentence, I will say that again:  I have a legal right to summarily kill any canine trespasser by any legal means at my disposal. [EDIT:  That may not be 100% accurate, as the dog may have to be behaving dangerously or destructively at the time.  There are the 3 S's, also] The numbskulls across the street, to this day, continue to REGULARLY turn their dog loose on my property to pee, poop, and destroy my property after dozens of demands for them to restrain their dog as required by law.  I have regular opportunities to kill that dog, legally, and get away with it.  If I were to do so, they can't sue me and I cannot be charged.   I have not taken this option as I desire no harm to come to the animal.  Hater?  Don't think so.  Hell, I'm avoiding doing something that I HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO DO.   Anyone who considers me, or anyone like me, a hater can STUFF IT.

I would take over the venue, but I would rename it to "Dog Problems" as focusing on chronic barkers is too narrow.  I have sympathy for the 5 Million Americans bit by dogs every year, with the hundreds of thousands hospitalized.  I am concerned about the high level of water and soil pollution resulting from dogs defecating and urinating everywhere.   I am concerned about dog overpopulation.  I am concerned about dog attacks on other animals.   I am concerned about the bad treatment of dogs.

Regards,
[animal uncontrol]

Going big time

Here is a news segment produced by and broadcast from a CBS affiliate in Pennsylvania.  It is a relatively hard hitting piece about trauma from dog attacks.    They did not point the finger at any individual dog breed(s), probably to avoid provoking the usual bunch of hard-core crazies.  That said, I am glad that the topic is now in the wider public forum, and not limited to a handful of low-traffic internet sites.

Should be interesting to see the reaction.

Enjoy!

[UPDATE:  Here is another segment... I would keep Fido away from TV reporters if I were you!]

Who owns you?

As a much anticipated follow up to this essay, the question for the day is "Who owns you?".  Who keeps you from doing what you want to do, what you have a RIGHT to do?

Hmmmm... who is that?  The best place to start (and end) is:  Who CAN'T you criticize?   If you live in North Korea and can't criticize the government or it's dear leader, then it is THEY who own you.  Simple.

He who is above criticism is the Lord of the Land.

In many places, Fido and his owner are above criticism.  Neil found this out the hard way.  Should we not be able to critique owner of the yard barkers next door?  Nope, that is NOT tolerated.  You LOVE Fido, or shut the hell up! 

Dr. Laura was "PWND" by Pit Nutters.  Again, you can't critique the flooding of our streets and animal shelters with pit bulls, or even present a well reasoned economic analysis of the situation.  You make an argument like that on your radio show, and the entire dog owning universe threatens your sponsors.   Get BACK IN LINE DR!

How about the Walk for the victims of Pit Bulls and other Dangerous Dogs that was CANCELLED due to death threats?  Nope, can't say anything BAD about Fido, even if he is pure bred to kill and then goes on to do so!   If you think that the police or other authorities would take an interest in that, but THEY can't criticize Fido, either!  You protest IN FAVOR OF BITERS or someone will burn your house down!  Get used to it!   The penalty for HERESY is DEATH.

How about where I live?  The dog fanatics in my jurisdiction wanted to update the laws to punish victims and protect perpetrators.  Fortunately, my campaign of reason prevailed so that victims do NOT have to bear a ridiculous burden of proof.   Again, dog nuts want to force all complainants into silence.   Unfortunately, in many places the "one bite rule", the "multiple household rule", and "consecutive disruption laws" are in full effect... this is an INSTITUTIONALIZED ATTACK ON THE RIGHTS OF VICTIMS TO COMPLAIN AND TO DUE PROCESS.

I have a friend in Australia who notified me (update me if necessary) that barking dog complaints had to be accompanied with a $12 Fee... bad enough but now that fee has been upgraded to $65!   Yes, lets fine the VICTIMS to stop their COMPLAINING ABOUT FIDO!  In other words, LETS SHUT THEM UP.

On a similar, but slightly different note:  How do you know when you are intellectually bankrupt?  Well, that is easy:   When you have to silence your critics!   Hell, you can't prove anything, so just shut everyone else up!

You know what, sooner or later our right to free speech will re-assert itself.  The result will not be pretty.