Caveat
Caveat
Search
Alltop. Seriously?! I got in?
Caveat
Caveat
Login
User name:
Password:
Remember me 
Year Archive
This Month
June 2008
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30

Put The Big Red Button on your site
Caveat
image
Locations of visitors to this page Who links to me?
incivility
Free Web Counter
Free Hit Counter
View Article  A FEW THINGS

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.

 

 

View Article  OHIO BAN FANS USE MEDIA TO PUSH THEIR AGENDA

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.

View Article  OHIO: COMING OFF THE KOOL-AID?

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. 

View Article  'I BECAME DINNER'

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.

 

View Article  OHIO BILL PULLED

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

View Article  OOH OOH THAT SMELL...

Richard Brenneman: Wearing body armor and carrying a military assault rifle, a Berkeley police officer stands guard outside the Ocean Gardens apartments where a man armed with kitchen knives held off police for 30 hours before surrendering early Thursday..

 

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.