|
|
Saturday, June 28
A FEW THINGS
by
Selma
on Sat 28 Jun 2008 11:58 AM EDT
I just found out about a great site, Pet Defense. Thanks to S. Kennedy for the link.
http://petdefense.wordpress.com/
Be sure to read the entries on AB 1634, California's horrendous enlistment into the AR extinction plan. It's been the talk of the 'sphere this week, since the original piece of garbage was rewritten - but not for the better. We'll have to keep tabs on this one - California is easy meat for militant animal rightists and other fad-carrying propagandists - it's all about stroking the egos of the manipulees. My links go to the Pet Connection and the marvellous Lassie Get Help.
Brent over at KC Dog Blog has an interesting post regarding Kansas City's failed mandatory sterilization law. Despite the numbers, the City is trumpeting the success of the program and appears to have also brainwashed local media - who have access to the same figures that KC has.
This reminds me of a passage in a book I'm reading. The thesis of the book is that emotion plays a major role in decision-making, overriding logic and facts, which is why arguing dispassionately and rationally aren't working for us:
"What [Lyndon] Johnson and [Dr Martin Luther] King both intuitively understood is what colleagues and I demonstrated with brain imaging forty years later: that arguing about the rationality of rationalizations is attacking the wrong target. Rationalizations are the post hoc smoke that billows from emotional fires. In our study, only after partisans had come to emotionally biased judgements did we see any activation in circuits usually associated with reasoning, suggesting that they had begun to develop rationalizations for their emotional biases. You can systematically debate the fine points of these realizations, but you're wasting your time.
You don't put out a fire by waving at the smoke. You put out the fires. And if someone keeps starting those fires, you put out the arsonist."
--Drew Westen, The Political Brain, p. 351
Words to live by.
More later, have to get on with my big project.
Sunday, June 15
OHIO BAN FANS USE MEDIA TO PUSH THEIR AGENDA
by
Selma
on Sun 15 Jun 2008 11:19 AM EDT
KC Dog Blog has a good 'un this morning.
It's all about the Councillors in Ohio towns and the depths to which they are sinking in order to spread their tainted message. It's kind of funny that they are writing letters to the editor, since local media have already proven themselves to be onside.
Two Ohio lawmakers are using the letters to the editors in their local newspapers to sell their ideas on banning 'pit bull' dogs in their cities...and when you dive into the logic, it's a bit scary.
KC, my man, you're a master of understatement.
It's downright frightening.
Saturday, June 14
OHIO: COMING OFF THE KOOL-AID?
by
Selma
on Sat 14 Jun 2008 10:14 AM EDT
If so, it's way past time for that.
Whitehall, Ohio looked at a 'pit bull' ban and rejected the idea. The Councillor behind the scheme was Jacquelyn Thompson, an individual who seems to have some issues and I'm not talking about 'pit bulls'.
Some of her wild and crazy statements are redolent of Nelson, Bryant and of course, the animal haters at Peta. Here's a sample from the story at KC Dog Blog:
"Meanwhile, the woman who proposed the ban, Jacquelyn Thompson, seems like quite a trip and has seemed to have lost her grip on reality a bit as she ranted about pit bulls as the "new order" of evil in society and "tools of terror'. "
Fortunately, Ms Thompson, a new Councillor, has been left out in the cold as the proposal was rejected by saner heads at a recent meeting.
"That's the way I wrote it, the way I intended it, and the way I'm leaving it," [Councillor] Bailey said.
Ohio Revised Code stipulates all pit bulls are vicious dogs. The words "pit bull" appear nowhere in Bailey's breed-neutral ordinance, but rather refers to Ohio law. Bailey maintains his reference in the local law to the state law effectively addresses pit bulls.
However, Thompson and LaCorte said they think otherwise.
"You made sure the words 'pit bull' were not in here. ,,, I do not think it would be a bad thing to say 'pit bull,' " LaCorte said.
Thompson said inclusion of the words would "spell it out" for all the city's residents.
Thompson's failed measure grandfathered only one pit bull per household and prevented any new pit bulls, or other vicious dogs, from entering the city. Bailey's ordinance does not address the number of dogs, rather it simply allows the existing law -- of no more than three dogs of any breed per property -- to prevail.
<snip>
I'm liking Mr Bailey very much:
"Bailey said the goal of his ordinance is to educate people about the proper treatment of animals as much as it is to protect the public.
"This ordinance is a tool, not a weapon," Bailey said."
So put that in your pipe and smoke it, Thompson - or maybe that's the problem. The full report is available here.
In other news, the Ohio statewide ban proposed by Tyrone Yates, which is now being pulled, engendered some interesting discussion.
One thing that mystifies me is why they ask dog wardens their opinion about particular shapes of dogs. To say they usually see dogs in unusual circumstances is a bit of an understatement, so their view will be skewed, much like the outlook of those involved in rescue, who think there is an epidemic of abuse, neglect and pet overpopulation.
I call it Snapshot Vision.
Here's a sample of what I mean, although this dog warden seems to have a head on her shoulders, unlike some others in Ohio I could name - if I wanted to give them vanity search satisfaction:
Vinton County Dog Warden Sheila Brooks estimated that about 30 percent of the county's dogs are pit bulls or pit bull mixes.
While not fully aware of the bill's ramifications, Brooks attested to what she's found to be the prickly nature of some pit bulls or pit bull mixes.
"I'm not very trusting of them because you never know what's going to set them off," Brooks said. "Dog wardens everywhere have difficulties with these dogs."
But when questioned about the supposed viciousness of the dogs, Brooks wasn't ready to point at any one factor to explain their behavior. The issue of whether the dogs' alleged aggressiveness is a product of breeding or environment is one not easily settled, according to Brooks. "Any dog has the potential to be mean," the dog warden said.
"But, when they have the reputation behind them, you learn to be a lot more leary."
Well, yes, the reputation is the whole point, isn't it? It's leery by the way but I shouldn't quibble.
State Rep Evans, who is actually a personal friend of Yates's, had this to say:
"Perhaps following the AKC's advice, many calls were made to Rep. Clyde Evans' office. Evans, who represents Ohio's 87th District, of which Vinton County is a part, said pet owners shouldn't worry about the bill. "In my six years in the legislature, it's one of the most ridiculous bills that has been introduced," Evans said during a telephone interview Friday.
Evans, who counts Yates as a personal friend, said the Cincinnati area representative "Put a bill out there that's not going to go anywhere," adding that the matter will likely fizzle after a single hearing.
"They are not by their nature an aggressive dog," Evans said of pit bulls. "They have been taught to fight."
Overall, the report is pretty good - here's a link.
I've heard there's a good group of people in Ohio who recently got together and are ready to kick ass and take names. They have credentials, knowledge, connections and the will to win.
We'll be watching and cheering them on from up here in Ontaristan.
Wednesday, June 4
'I BECAME DINNER'
by
Selma
on Wed 04 Jun 2008 07:52 PM EDT
I'm a little late posting this story from British Columbia, where the typical machinations leading to a 'breed' ban have started in the wake of a bite a few weeks ago by an alleged 'pit bull'.
It sounds as though this guy was being eatern from the ground up, to borrow a colourful phrase from our wacky former Attorney General. The victim likens the appearance of his leg to a 'pork chop'.
I'm sure the local citizens will be standing on the lawn of the legislature with torches and pitchforks, flooding the local tabloids with letters full of 'facts', demanding the extermination of the 'breed' and trolling their tushies off on the intertube comment boards.
'I became dinner,' says B.C. dog-attack victim
Christopher Sun , Canwest News Service
Published: Wednesday, May 28
BURNABY - The search is on for the owners of two dogs that attacked a man, biting his leg to the bone.
David Scoular also broke a couple of his ribs, twisted his knee and hurt his neck from hopping a one-metre fence in an attempt to flee from the attacking dogs near Burnaby Lake on May 18.
"It looks like a pork chop that opened up," Scoular said, explaining how his leg looked after the attack. "The (Labrador retriever) bit right to the bone and ripped it."
It took three paragraphs to discover the 'breed' of the attacking dog, which is definite progress. That information is usually buried unless it's a mutt who can be labeled a 'pit bull', no matter how bizarre that designation may be. In those cases, the shape appears in the headline.
So, how about it, British Columbians? Are you ready to ban Labrador retrievers? We'd like a change of pace over here at Banned Aid, things are much too predictable lately.
Surprise us.
OHIO BILL PULLED
by
Selma
on Wed 04 Jun 2008 12:50 AM EDT
Tyrone Yates has had second thoughts about his proposed statewide ban - the search-and-destroy variety - on 'pit bulls'.
He's decided that perhaps it wasn't too logical and might have been a bit Draconian.
He's right.
Giving credit where due, at least Yates had the guts to admit he'd made a mistake and is trying to put things right for the people of Ohio. For that, he'll get respect, unlike some politicians I could name.
KC Dog Blog has the details.
Note: Posting has been super-light lately for various reasons.
I'll be working the DLCC booth at Woofstock this weekend in Toronto. Drop down and say 'Hi' if you're in the area (Front Street between Church and Jarvis). We'll have t-shirts for sale, some designed by me. All proceeds to the Ontario legal fund.
Support BannedAid
Tuesday, June 3
OOH OOH THAT SMELL...
by
Selma
on Tue 03 Jun 2008 05:38 PM EDT
As pointed out by Opposition Members of the Provincial Parliament (MPPs) in Ontario, the McGuinty revisions to our outdated Animal Welfare Act are problematic, to say the least. I posted some notes about it in May.
While checking a few of my favourite blogs today, I read that a very similar type of legislation is being discussed for the Schenectady area of New York State. In Ontario I don't think the plan is to have SPCA employees carry weapons or use Mace or body armour because we tend to be somewhat less escalated that way compared with the US. Other than that distinction, both scenarios have the same rancid AR smell about them.
Blue Dog State and Smart Dogs' Weblog have excellent posts about the granting of police powers to civilians employed by a private organization which is not subject to public scrutiny or oversight.
I wonder if this is what they talk about at those H$U$ Expos? There is certainly a lot of similarity among certain pieces of pet-related legislation that are popping up here and there across the continent lately.
Tuesday, May 27
BUT THAT'S WHERE I GET MY INCOME...WAHHHHH!
by
Selma
on Tue 27 May 2008 09:23 PM EDT
Maybe it's time to get a real job... more »
Wednesday, May 21
NOVA SCOTIA: OWNERS FEAR BREED BANS
by
Selma
on Wed 21 May 2008 11:30 AM EDT
Minor amendment causes major kerfuffle more »
Tuesday, May 20
OHIO GOING BERSERK
by
Selma
on Tue 20 May 2008 11:36 PM EDT
Uh-oh. The whackjobs in Ohio are upping the ante for owners of the nonexistent 'pit bull' breed.
This is a bad one. They plan to kill - not 'euthanize' - a lot of dogs in Ohio if this bill gets passed.
"Ohio House Bill 568, introduced by Representative Tyrone Yates of Cincinnati, seeks to prohibit the ownership, keeping, or harboring of a dog that “belongs to a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog.” Furthermore, if this bill is passed and adopted into law, all such dogs will be seized and euthanized. It is imperative that all concerned dog owners in Ohio contact their elected representatives and express their vehement opposition to this draconian legislation."
No Pit Bull Bans has the details, available here.
Friday, April 25
PETSMART EXCLUDES BULL- AND-TERRIER TYPES
by
Selma
on Fri 25 Apr 2008 10:59 PM EDT
We will just exclude PetSmart then... more »
EQUAL TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW? NOT IN AURORA, CO
by
Selma
on Fri 25 Apr 2008 11:33 AM EDT
From second to third-class status - selective enforcement, subjective decisions more »
Thursday, April 3
SO, HOW ABOUT THEM 'PIT BULLS', EH?
by
Selma
on Thu 03 Apr 2008 05:33 PM EDT
What kind of dogs ARE those little guys, anyway? more »
Saturday, March 29
FLORIDA HOUSE BILL 101 IS DEAD
by
Selma
on Sat 29 Mar 2008 12:53 AM EDT
Good news.
I just found out from the BadRap Blog that Florida's HB101 is dead.
The ill-conceived Bill had planned to revoke Florida's statewide prohibition against banning dogs because of their physical appearance.
It hasn't hit the mainstream media yet, so that's all I know at this point.
Friday, March 28
MAYBE BRYANT WOULD LIKE TO CAST A VOTE
by
Selma
on Fri 28 Mar 2008 10:52 PM EDT
Since he's such a freaking expert.
Here's how animal pound workers are deciding who is a Fib-Bull and who isn't.
http://www.mississaugablogs.com/2008/03/all_in_favour_of_a_stay_of_exe.html
Aren't you proud to live in Ontaristan?
Now, get back in line. Forward, march!
PS I forgot to thank Mac for the heads-up about the story.
Sunday, March 23
JUST IN CASE YOU THOUGHT WE WERE KIDDING ABOUT MSN
by
Selma
on Sun 23 Mar 2008 05:18 PM EDT
Intact males banned from Toronto's off-leash parks more »
Saturday, March 22
I HAVE SEEN THE FUTURE
by
Selma
on Sat 22 Mar 2008 11:02 AM EDT
Hiding an intact dog slated for castration... more »
Thursday, March 13
NO, MR MULGREW, THANK YOU
by
Selma
on Thu 13 Mar 2008 09:43 PM EDT
Saving dogs by reading blogs more »
Tuesday, March 11
NEW DOG BITE STUDY FROM OREGON
by
Selma
on Tue 11 Mar 2008 01:25 PM EDT
Reaches some conclusions more »
 1 Attachments
A DOUBLE PLAY FOR TOLEDO!
by
Selma
on Tue 11 Mar 2008 12:03 PM EDT
Charging a mauling victim with failure to control a vicious dog more »
Sunday, March 9
UNSAFE AT ANY AGE?
by
Selma
on Sun 09 Mar 2008 12:04 PM EDT
Guy Walking his 'Pit Bull'
That crazy Mac asks whether Dolton is trying to kill the people in other provinces, most notably Quèbec.
I've wondered about that, too. If nonexistent, preternaturally endowed 'pit bulls' are unsafe at any age, then why is it OK to ship them to other provinces when charging people?
Let's say somebody thinks your dog is a 'pit bull' and they decide to charge you with a violation.
That's when the three charming options kick in:
1. The dog is put to death
2. The dog is shipped out of province
3. The dog is sent to a research facility for some what-if experiments
Why is it OK to export these so-called dangerous dogs. Are people in other provinces tougher, more balanced, more experienced, or what's the deal?
Mac's got some info about our old friend Mr Algar from Peterborough in her post. He is shipping some pups to another province to keep them out of the dog-killers' clutches.
Good on you, Brad.
Are you mad enough yet?
Help us win the case against Ontario. We're doing the work, all we need is money.
Donate to Banned Aid: http://www.doglegislationcouncilcanada.org/donate.html
Saturday, March 8
NO STATS? NO PROBLEM
by
Selma
on Sat 08 Mar 2008 10:47 AM EST
Somebody must have doped the water supply in Florida. Or maybe the natives have been out in the sun too long.
The unschooled have decided that shapes of dogs should be eliminated in order to prevent bites, attacks and maulings.
Why anyone believes that this goofy idea is sensible continues to mystify me.
Florida has a state-wide prohibition on banning 'breeds' of dogs, yet Miami-Dade has had a 'pit bull' ban in place for 20 years.
Get this: They have no idea whether or not it is working because they have no statistics available for analysis. They only started keeping track of dog incidents in 2005.
How can you bring in an oppressive, counterintuitive plan to kill dogs based on their looks without even having baseline information available? How can you decide to make people's (and dogs') lives miserable without having any facts on hand?
Of course, Peta supports the idea. Why is anybody soliciting their opinion or giving them print space? They are killers. They want all dogs dead. The media are so far behind the curve on this that it's a joke.
I guess H$U$ folk are mellowing their message because they now seem to be opposed to 'breed' bans. If that is their actual policy, I say it's about time, since they, too, get lots of press coverage. If they are now prepared to speak to fairness and common sense, I'll reverse my opinion of them but I'll wait to see how things unfold. They are still anti-No Kill and still promote mandatory sterilization - the kinder, gentler way to exterminate domestic dogs.
Anyway, here's the story in the Miami Herald.
*
In other news, a fundraiser to help homeless 'pit bulls' was canceled in Independence, MO (gotta laugh at the town's name) because of 'community sensitivity' about 'pit bulls'. No money for 'pit bulls' in that burg.
Memo to Missouri 'Pit Bull' Rescue: Change your name.
There's no such thing as a 'pit bull' and the trogs find that label scary.
All these 'pit bull' groups are not helping, by chattering on and on about 'pit bulls', running 'pit bull' specific courses, discussing the merits of 'pit bulls', posting pictures of 'pit bulls' on their websites and generally giving the enemy ammo to use against dog owners.
Also, next time you fundraise, you don't have to shout it from the rooftops - just say the money is going towards helping homeless dogs.
Duh.
More here.
Friday, March 7
ONTARIO, WHY I HATE IT
by
Selma
on Fri 07 Mar 2008 11:04 AM EST
Remember this?
http://caveat.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2006/5/24/1981849.html
In Ontario these days, discrimination based on appearance which is based on mythology is de rigeur. The trogs have swallowed the pitbullshit hook, line and sinker.
In Brantford this week, a dog owner went to buy a licence for her dog. For reasons unknown at this point, she forgot to buy one last year. wasn't shown in the city's files as having bought one for 2007.
Guess what the penalty for not buying a dog tag is in Brantford, if they think you own a mythical 'pit bull'?
Here it is from the owner's email:
On Friday Feb. 15 2008 I went to city hall to get Heira her 2008 dog license. There I am told that we did not get her a 2007 dog license, thus we have three options.
1) Find her a home out of Brantford
2) Kill her
3) Let the SPCA take her
This is all because of City of Brantford Municipal Codes Chapter 206 ("the pit-bull ban"). She had been "grandfathered" in, but by not getting her 2007 license she forfeits that clause..
Since 90% of people don't buy dog tags in Ontario, I guess the courtrooms and pounds are going to be awfully crowded.
Ontario, why I hate it.
Saturday, March 1
MUNCHIE WAS A DOG
by
Selma
on Sat 01 Mar 2008 06:17 AM EST
Wednesday, February 27
AND IN THE 'MY BELIEFS ARE FACTS' CATEGORY, THE AWARD GOES TO...
by
Selma
on Wed 27 Feb 2008 11:15 AM EST
We could give one of these out every day! more »
Friday, February 22
ALBERTA AND WOLVES
by
Selma
on Fri 22 Feb 2008 07:47 PM EST
Kill the pups, sterilize the adults - sound familiar? more »
Wednesday, February 20
AN AWFUL VANITY
by
Selma
on Wed 20 Feb 2008 10:32 AM EST
Labrador lookalikes are being nabbed as 'pit bulls' in Ontario because somebody didn't think things through more »
Thursday, February 14
GOVERNMENT USING BREED STANDARDS WITHOUT PERMISSION
by
Selma
on Thu 14 Feb 2008 07:06 PM EST
Told to cease and desist more »
LABRADOR LOOKALIKE CONVICTED, SENTENCED TO DIE
by
Selma
on Thu 14 Feb 2008 02:28 PM EST
Only in Ontaristan more »
Wednesday, February 13
AURORA COLORADO MUST BE HIGH
by
Selma
on Wed 13 Feb 2008 08:14 PM EST
Their own numbers don't support a breed ban more »
1 Attachments
Wednesday, February 6
BANNING PIT FOWLS
by
Selma
on Wed 06 Feb 2008 12:14 PM EST
Killer chickens favoured pets of drug-dealing, gun-packing thugs... more »
SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR?
by
Selma
on Wed 06 Feb 2008 10:18 AM EST
No, I don't know what it means. Do YOU know what it means? more »
Monday, February 4
THE LAND OF FRUITS AND NUTS
by
Selma
on Mon 04 Feb 2008 04:03 PM EST
..will have to change its nickname if people don't get organized.
When H$U$, the A$PCA, that wanker Bob Barker and the rest of the pet-hating dreamweavers say "Bend over", Los Angeles City Council asks "How's this?"
Tuesday, January 29
DISCRIMINATE MUCH?
by
Selma
on Tue 29 Jan 2008 10:01 AM EST
Witch hunting in Ontario more »
Wednesday, January 23
OK THEN, SKIPPER
by
Selma
on Wed 23 Jan 2008 05:58 PM EST
Seriously, this is worth running?
Lee Hopkins, 70, put his dog Precious, a Pekinese/Shitzu mix, out on a chain at about 9:30 p.m. Dec. 23 in front of his Somerset subdivision home when he said it was attacked and killed by another dog.
"I let her outside to go potty and this blasted thing came out of nowhere and attacked her," Hopkins said. "It was dark outside so I don't know what it was, but I think it was probably a Pit Bull."
Probably.
Of course, they then decided to visit people who own a 'pit bull' in the neighbourhood just to harass grill check with them.
PREDICTABLE, PREVENTABLE DOG BITE CASE HAS MEDIA CALLING FOR 'BAN'
by
Selma
on Wed 23 Jan 2008 11:22 AM EST
Heads up to dog owners in Saskatchewan more »
Friday, January 18
TENNESSEE PROPOSES STATEWIDE DOG BAN
by
Selma
on Fri 18 Jan 2008 05:27 PM EST
Senator plays games, introduces awful legislation because he had to submit 'something' by the deadline. Trouble is, people will vote for just about anything these days - Ontario, case in point... more »
|
