Showing posts with label legislation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legislation. Show all posts

August 31, 2010

SB 250 is dead, yay [whew!]

According to a nice phone person in Assemblymember Monning's office as of 7:35 or so.

I sure hope this is the final stake through the heart of [state-wide] mandatory spay/neuter. From my lips to doG's ear...

UPDATE: Then again... see Save Our Dogs for the latest.

UPDATE II: It's 10:15 PM, and darned if this crappy bit of legislation isn't being voted on again. Sheesh.

Aaaaaaand UPDATE III: SB 250 not only merely dead, it's really most sincerely dead.

Huge props to Laura S of Save Our Dogs for all she's done and continues to do for dogs and the Californians who care about them.


And so to bed.

June 23, 2010

"Susie's Law" signed by NC governor


Susie greets a supportive legislator. Photo by Jerry Wolford for the Greensboro News & Record.

Contributor keithan81 over at Pam's House Blend tells it:

Susie isn't a person. She's a pit bull mix who bears the scars of torture. In August, 2009, Susie, just a puppy, was found by passers-by in a Greensboro park, badly beatened with her jaw and teeth broken, and with second and third degree burns on over 60% of her body. Maggots infested her wounds; maggots that had been there for two weeks.

What on earth would cause a human to do this to Susie? Apparently, her attacker went crazy after she licked the face of his newborn baby. He beat her, then sprayed her with lighter fluid before setting her on fire. His mother turned him in; he accepted a guilty plea and was sentenced under the state's burning of property law. He will be in prison for 6-8 months. Yep, months. He would have gotten the same punishment for setting a couch on fire and more for setting a mailbox on fire.

Susie's Law changes all of that. Starting December 1, in North Carolina, the malicious abuse of animals will be deemed a Class H felony, punishable by up to ten years in prison, even for first-time offenders.

H/T to the Blend, where proprietor and pit bull owner Pam Spaulding advocates tirelessly for pits and pit mixes.


*************

[Here in SoCal, some legislators actually support mandatory mutilation... er, spay/neuter for anything that looks like a pit bull, no matter how responsible the owner or how blameless the dog, but that's another story.]


Related:
Susie's Law Signed After Months In The Making
Susie’s Law passes

May 6, 2010

Sick pervs

A while ago Brent asked what I would think of a new and improved law to ban "crush videos." For the record, few things horrify me as much as the sight of brutal creeps killing pets that are screaming in fear and pain:



So I'm all for criminalizing videos, because what this nation really needs is more excuses for jackbooted thugs to break into homes in the middle of the night, and more reasons for goons in body armor to shoot your dogs and place you under arrest.

Not.

The seven year old child in that video will hear his dogs screaming for the rest of his life. Oh, and check this out: after the cops broke the door down, terrorized the family, shot the house up and killed one of the family dogs [the other was shot but survived — you gotta love when grown men wearing enough body armor to stop a f*ing tank have to shoot a corgi], the parents were charged with child endangerment. I repeat, the PARENTS. were charged with child endangerment. On account of a bag of dope, for crissakes. Yay War on [some] Drugs! I feel so much safer. Shit.

"If the First Amendment means anything, it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch." [Thurgood Marshall]

Here's how things are right now. We have entire websites devoted to the corruption and brutality and militarization of the police. Reporting on pets killed by cops is a growth industry. And in spite of all this, our legislators, in their boundless, staggering idiocy, want to give MORE power to the state to invade homes and arrest people.

And this will help animals? How, exactly?

I would bet money that cops on raids kill more dogs in a month, in the U.S., than there are people selling crush videos online. Want to reduce animal cruelty? Then don't give cops even more power to invade homes, arrest people and kill pets.

Fun fact: downloading the video above could totally have led to your arrest and imprisonment under the animal-cruelty video law [pdf] ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.


Edited to add: fallout.


Related:
Radley Balko [Essential reading. "There are 100-150 of these raids every day in America, the vast, vast majority like this one, to serve a warrant for a consensual crime."]

"This is what evil looks like" [from Obsidian Wings, with a terrific comment thread]

And this, on another police development: "[The] whole thing appears, rightly or wrongly, to be law enforcement doing the bidding of a private company."

April 29, 2010

Helluva lobbying group, Wayney

Dunno what's worse — a puppy-mill victim with a vacant stare, or a man so freaked out at the thought of handling an animal that he has to summon his girlfriend to remove her pet cat from his chest.

What's worst, actually, may be the fact that the cat-averse individual in question is lobbyist-in-chief of the beleaguered Humane Society of the United States. Which shouldn't be confused with your local humane society, not that anyone ever does such a thing.

Brent over at KC Dog Blog has an excellent run-down of some of the HSUS's most flagrant abuses and current troubles. "Help us care for the Vick dogs," oy. With a friend like Wayne "I don’t want to see another dog or cat born" Pacelle, dogs and cats don't need enemies.

The most excellent Laura Sanborn rages against the machine [in a comment at Pet Connection]:
HSUS & PETA —> still raking in tens of millions of dollars a year despite the Great Recession. Again, their fund-raising models work because they effectively and misleadingly leverage our compassion for defenseless animals. I won’t use those tactics myself and don’t have an answer for how to ethically compete with it.

*************

Here's a HumaneWatch.org guest column on the HSUS lobbying effort. [News flash: money talks!] Yes, I know HumaneWatch is a front for CAFO-lovin', environmentalist-hatin' extremists. It's just that they seem so much more... factual about the HSUS than the HSUS seems to be about unfunded mandates and wildlife management and such. The man who said, "The whole art of government consists in the art of being honest," never met a lobbyist. [I kid. He knew a few.]

*************

Terrific post over at Lucy & Friends on puppy mill legislation. Did I first bookmark Lucy nearly 20 years ago? I did indeed :~)


I've said it before and I'll keep saying it: we dog lovers screwed up big time when we told the average pet owner to forget about breeding his friendly, healthy Lab to the friendly, healthy collie mix down the street. When we did our best to prevent that, with our spay/neuter campaigns and our lists explaining "how to identify a good breeder," we gave up much of our freedom to have the dogs we really want. We granted ideologues and politicians, puppy mills, rescue groups and AKC breeders of functional cripples the power to shape and choose our dogs for us. Which reminds me: where exactly am I supposed to find a nice puppy these days? Hey, let's ask Wayne Pacelle — he knows all about animals!


[Which Times gets it right...? Image: "With his cat, Libby, is Wayne Pacelle, the Humane Society president." Photo by Michael Temchine for The New York Times.]

February 11, 2010

Dogs still at risk in Brampton

Remember those two dogs in Brampton, Ontario? The dogs that 1) have never harmed or threatened to harm anyone; 2) have never been the subject of complaint by neighbors; 3) have never escaped from their yards or been found wandering loose; 4) have licenses and law-abiding owners; and 5) are by all accounts friendly, much-loved companions?

Yeah, those two: the ones facing execution for the crime of living in Ontario while having a short coat and a wide-ish skull.

The execution has been postponed, but the families are barred from visiting or even glimpsing their pets, and their family vet is likewise barred from checking on the dogs, which have been locked up for the better part of a month. [Habeas canis, anyone?]

On Saturday demonstrators rallied in support of the families and their dogs, and the bureaucrats are now "moving forward very cautiously."
The goal is to find a solution that works for everyone in the best way possible while respecting the legislation.

"Respecting the legislation" — Gah, I love that. Because defying a piece of crap legislation simply isn't done! Unless, of course, you happen to have a backbone and a shred of integrity.

For updates on the fate of the dogs in Brampton, keep an eye on the following blogs:
One Bark at a Time
KC Dog Blog
Social Mange

Edited to add
a new bog covering this story: Brindle Stick. The more coverage of Ontario's epic BSL failure the better, sez I. Thanks to Lori for the heads up.

January 19, 2010

Rainy night links

Big dude or dudette in the sky...? It's me, down here in SoCal. You can turn it off now. Drought's over. Rain gauge is busted. Thanks, dude, it's been real.

Say again?

Gonna get worse?! Gonna last the whole week?! Oh, duuuuude...


While I still have electricity, here are some links:

First of all, a must-read by Rinalia at For the Pits. [Have I mentioned that Pacelle, Goodwin and the HSUS make me puke?]

*************

The L.A. Times [better late than never] has a report on environmental groups' opposition to feral cat colonies, and the recent injunction by a Superior Court judge "barring the city from subsidizing or promoting the trap-neuter-release program until environmental studies are completed." For related links, see Cats in court.

*************

Following Pet Connection's post and discussion on Rescue pets: How do you know when it’s ‘right’?, along comes a post by Marie Finnegan at Dog Star Daily:
What I don't understand is why more people don't ask trainers their opinion in finding the right dog for them. We see and work with more breeds and shelter dogs regularly than they will ever meet in a lifetime. Some of us even live with multiple breeds in our own homes. Not to mention the fact that dog trainers know about dog behavior and breed traits because it is our job to know this information.
Makes sense, but there's that whole "arranged marriage" vibe, nome sane? I kid. It's a good idea to take a trainer you know, or better yet, a brutally honest friend and dog person. Second opinions are a good thing.

*************

Finally, please read Michael Jernigan's latest essay for the NY Times Home Fires project: it's an appreciation of his guide dog Brittani.

From the author's bio: Michael Jernigan, a contributor to Home Fires, served in 2004 with Easy Company, Second Battalion, Second Marine Regiment in Mahmudiya, Zadon, and Falluja, Iraq, where he was severely injured and blinded by a roadside bomb. He was medically retired from the Marine Corps in December 2005.

If I try to quote part of the article, I'll end up doing a copy-and-paste of the whole thing. Also, the link is in the essay, but I'll reprint it here: read more about the Paws for Patriots program at Southeastern Guide Dogs.

June 14, 2009

Oh, Canada: the good, the bad and the ugly

First, the ugly. Canada's Supreme Court will not hear a bid to overturn the province of Ontario's ban on "pit bulls."

TheStar.com reports — badly:
Louise Ellis will never forget the horror and helplessness she felt when she saw her 5-year-old daughter being attacked by a pit bull.

But now she's breathing a sigh of relief after the Supreme Court yesterday said it will not hear a bid to overturn Ontario's ban on pit bulls.

"I'm so pleased with the ban," said Ellis, who still remembers the 1994 attack vividly. "The pit bull took the flesh off from underneath the eye, across her cheek and just down the nose, the bottom of the nose."

Ellis said her now 20-year-old daughter shows few signs today of the 300 stitches that repaired her face.

This just in: the number of pit bulls in Toronto has risen since the ban was implemented. Dog bans are quirky that way, which is one reason places like the Netherlands have repealed BSL.

And dog attacks still happen in Ontario. BSL doesn't stop serious dog attacks — it never has. In fact, let me tweak that news article: Korie-Lyn Edwards' grandmother will never forget the horror and helplessness she felt when she saw her 17-month old grandchild mauled to death by the family's own 10-year-old Rottweiler-German shepherd mix.

And now the Ottawa resident is furious that breed bans and the false sense of security they provide will leave other children at risk
.

This just in, too: there have never been any pit bull-related fatalities in the province of Ontario.

Canadian-Californian dog expert Jean Donaldson explains that breed bans are over-inclusive and under-inclusive: they target great numbers of good dogs that will never harm anyone, and they utterly fail to deal with dangerous dogs of other breeds and types. Breed bans are irrational, in other words. Unjust. Profoundly stupid. Worthless.

Dr. Karen Overall nails it: "[Laws] banning breeds will not make you safer, and the illusion that they will do so is dangerous to humans and unfair to dogs."

Oh, Canada [sigh]. You know better than this. Your citizens deserve so much better than laws demonizing and banning their good dogs.

*************

"Enough with the bad and the ugly, already — where's the good?" you ask. "Where's the good?"

I'm happy to report that the good — City of Calgary Animal & Bylaw Services — is so good it deserves an entire post to itself. Calgary's Animal Services director Bill Bruce gave a series of seminars in California last week, and I went to the nearest one here in SoCal and was impressed to pieces. Stay tuned for more.

June 6, 2009

Actual dog experts[!] speak out against BSL

Hat tip to John Sibley for showcasing this terrific video on breed specific legislation. It should totally go viral, if you ask me.

Featured in the vid are Dr. Ian Dunbar, Jean Donaldson and Dr. Nicholas Dodman: experts on dog behavior and dog training, which is to say you will never hear them speak of "unpredictable" dogs that "turn on people" and must be banned. In a world where Google pundits* bring of the stupid, Dunbar, Donaldson and Dodman actually know what they're talking about.

"The biggest variable in a dog's demeanor is: how well was it socialized? How well was it trained?" [Ian Dunbar]


The video is the work of Drayton Michaels, "a 2007 graduate of the SFSPCA Academy for Dog Trainers. He has worked professionally with dogs since 2000. He owns and runs Urban Dawgs and Pit Bull Guru with his wife Vyolet, also a graduate of the Academy [source]."









*[What follows has much to do with dogs in general and BSL in particular. Seriously.] Writer and blogger Julian Sanchez took a recent look at pop philosophy and "the unhealthy illusion of knowing something":
On the one hand [...] a democracy can’t make ethics and political philosophy the exclusive province of cloistered academics. On the other hand, I look at the online public sphere and too often tend to find myself thinking: “Discourse at this level can’t possibly accomplish anything beyond giving people some simulation of justification for what they wanted to believe in the first place.” This is, needless to say, not a problem limited to philosophy. And I think it may contribute to the fragmentation and political polarization we see online, which are generally explained in sociological terms as an “echo chamber” effect or “groupthink.”

[T]here’s also the problem that the general glut of information and opinion makes it disconcertingly easy to kid yourself about how well you understand a particular topic. (My friend Michael Moynihan refers sarcastically to “Google pundits” who affect deep understanding after plucking a few talking points from a search—a sin I’m sure I’ve committed myself on occasion.) It’s something of a cliché, but the older I get, the more I find that learning more about an area where I once held a strong opinion will often mean realizing just how limited my own understanding is.
I like to imagine that the typical online breed-basher will wake up one morning, slap his forehead and exclaim, "What am I, nuts?! My entire experience with dogs consists of failing to housebreak that Labrador you hear barking nonstop in the backyard — and I'm telling Jean Donaldson and Ian frikkin' Dunbar they don't know what they're talking about...??!! Sheesh, I'm an idiot. I shall do penance by volunteering at the local animal shelter for the rest of my life."

If only ;~)

June 1, 2009

Cha-ching...!


BSL/BDL is money down the drain - but you knew that. Screen grab from the Best Friends BDL Calculator. [Click for big.]

Via Ken Foster, author, editor and friend to pit bulls, comes word about a neat little tool at Best Friends: the BDL [Breed Discriminatory Legislation] Fiscal Impact Counter. Here's a link to The High Costs of Breed Discriminatory Legislation, and here's the BDL Economic Impact Calculator itself. Be sure to check out the excellent article by Ledy VanKavage: All Bark and Fiscal Bite – Are Breed-Discriminatory Laws Effective? [pdf] [Do chickens have lips?]

January 31, 2009

Ingrid Newkirk hopes your dog gets cancer

Not just Ingrid Newkirk, and not just any cancer, either.

Ingrid Newkirk of PETA and R. Rex Parris, the Mayor of Lancaster, California, both hope your dogs get bone sarcoma. Bone cancer, for crissakes! It's the law. Move out of town, minority scum, or we'll kill your Rottweilers and your pit bulls! Ingrid says: I love this law! Let's kill all the pit bulls!

This just in: when you slap a mandatory spay/neuter law on a breed like the Rottweiler [and in 2009, what society hacks off body parts as punishment?], you are sentencing dogs to death by cancer. Don't believe me? Here's the PubMed abstract. Excerpt:
Risk for bone sarcoma was significantly influenced by age at gonadectomy. Male and female [Rottweilers] that underwent gonadectomy before 1 year of age had an approximate one in four lifetime risk for bone sarcoma and were significantly more likely to develop bone sarcoma than dogs that were sexually intact.
What part of these findings don't Ingrid Newkirk and Mayor R. Rex Parris understand?

Seriously, people — bone cancer. One in four Rotties will suffer from it, if spayed or neutered before a year of age. [Other large breeds are also at risk.] Lancaster wants them all "fixed" before they're four months old.

It should be glaringly obvious by now that Newkirk, the so-called "animal rights" pooh-bah, doesn't give a rat's patoot about dogs. She wants them gone from our lives, one breed at a time or in bunches, by lingering deaths or quick ones, by stealth or by whatever canine version of Jim Crow she can espouse.

And Mayor R. Rex Parris doesn't give a rat's patoot about his law-abiding fellow citizens. He's happy as a clam to impose a death sentence on their dogs and subject families to the anguish of losing a friendly companion to confiscation or cancer. Maybe you shouldn't have let your tattoo show when you took the dog for a walk, eh? Maybe your son shouldn't have dressed like a normal middle-school student the last time he was in the front yard playing with your new Rott mix, eh? That'll teach you. Lancaster doesn't want your kind.

And for the record: When Newkirk says, among other truthinesses, "Pits and pit mixes are responsible for more attacks than other dogs - not just fatal attacks, but ones in which an eye or limb or self-confidence is lost for life," she's lying through her teeth. She's talking out of her elbow. She has no verifiable studies — because there aren't any — to back up her rant o' crazy. Don't take my word for it: pick up the phone, you folks who call yourselves journalists, and run Newkirk's nutty quotes by the real experts at the CDC and the AVMA.


What sort of mayor writes a bad law with the intention of wielding it selectively against people he doesn't like? What sort of person tells lies in order to have good dogs taken from their families and put to death?

[And why, oh why is anyone still listening to PETA?]

"Dogs deserve justice" — the irony, it burns!


Related:
PETA wants to kill my dogs -- and yours
Dogs white people like

December 7, 2008

Truth on trial

Banned Aid needs help, right now, this week, this minute. It's horrifying that some people, some judges, for God's sake, could look at urban legend on one side and peer-reviewed articles by AVMA and CDC experts on the other, and conclude that the truth about dogs must be, you know, somewhere in the middle. But there you are.

Please read. Please donate.

Breed specific legislation doesn't prevent dog bites and it doesn't prevent dog bite fatalities. It never has, and it never will. As a local Australian Government Minister complained back in 2006, "If I keep expanding the restricted breed list, we will have no dogs left in New South Wales."

And here's the issue: whenever the media, the courts and the city councils buy into the "safe breed"/"dangerous breed" fallacy, the general public is the biggest loser.

Instead of being informed and reminded about the importance of socialization and training and proper care and supervision of all dogs, parents are encouraged to think their families will be magically inoculated against dog bites if they simply buy a "safe breed."

I wish with all my heart that politicians and the media could be held liable for lulling parents into this false sense of security. Whenever a child winds up in an emergency room with an injury caused by a "safe breed" — and this happens tens of thousands of times each month in North America — proponents of BSL are complicit and should be held accountable.

As it happens, such a concept may be beginning to dawn on members of the press. When a Wal-Mart worker was trampled to death last week by eager shoppers, David Carr of the NY Times held a mirror to the media:
The willingness of people to walk over another human being to get at the right price tag raises the question of how they got that way in the first place. But in the search for the usual suspects and parceling of blame, the news media should include themselves.

Just a few days ago, the same newspaper writers and television anchors who are now wearily shaking their heads at the collective bankruptcy of our mass consumer culture were cheering all of it on.
Gawker thinks the NYT is blowing smoke:
Of course, it was just Wednesday that the Times was mythologizing gluttonous consumerism, and not long ago that it literally serenaded the frenzied crowds chomping at the bit for their iPhones. And the holiday edition of high-end-consumption porn rag T Magazine is due in the next week or two, right? It's true that Black Friday is a stupid, fake idea, but media cheerleading of crazed consumerism is here to stay. If an unfolding economic depression wasn't enough to stop rabid consumers from breaking down doors to buy LCD television sets, a single death isn't going to reform desperate newspapers.
No surprise there: 60,000 hospitalizations from dog bites each year still haven't transformed hysterical calls for BSL into editorials demanding that people take the time to socialize and train their new puppies. This doesn't mean the day won't come: just that we shouldn't stand idly by while the truth about dogs is, well, trampled underfoot. Please: donate.


In related news, the blogging world was saddened to learn of the tragically early death of Doris Dungey, an expert economist who wrote under the name Tanta. She died in November at the age of 47, of cancer.
Tanta used her extensive knowledge of the loan industry to comment, castigate and above all instruct. Her fans ranged from the Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, an Op-Ed columnist for The New York Times who cited her in his blog, to analysts at the Federal Reserve, who cited her in a paper on “Understanding the Securitization of Subprime Mortgage Credit.”
You may be wondering what this sad news has to do with dogs, pit bulls or breed specific legislation. This:
Tanta liked to chew on the follies of regulators, the idiocies of lenders and — a particular favorite — clueless reporters, which according to her was just about all of them. She did not approve, she once wrote, of “parading one’s ignorance about mortgages in an article full of high-minded tut-tutting over ignorance about mortgages.”
Consider that the average business reporter knows quite a bit more about mortgages than the typical reporter knows about dogs, and you'll get an idea of the frustration some of us feel whenever a journalist is sent [or stays home] to write about dogs, let alone a controversial type of dog like the pit bull.

But also consider this: during her lifetime Tanta's blog came to be recognized as a "crucial source of prescient analysis," according to the New York Times. A hopeful sign, perhaps, that someday the press may grant a dog blogger [or two or twenty] a bit more recognition. Yes, I'm a dreamer.

November 22, 2008

Indifference to the truth is worse than lying: BSL and the curse of false equivalencies

The truth is not "somewhere in the middle."

Here is the truth about breed-specific legislation, from veterinary animal behaviorist Dr. Karen Overall: "Breed specific laws are not based in science. [Laws] banning breeds will not make you safer, and the illusion that they will do so is dangerous to humans and unfair to dogs."

The facts back her up. So why are various city councils so determined to ignore the science? Because it's easier to imagine that the truth is somewhere in the middle. It requires less courage and a lot less work. Russell Baker — quoted by the late, great Molly Ivins back in 1987, so help me, and things haven't gotten better — explains how "balance" works. Boldface is mine:
In the classic example, a refugee from Nazi Germany who appears on television saying monstrous things are happening in his homeland must be followed by a Nazi spokesman saying Adolf Hitler is the greatest boon to humanity since pasteurized milk. Real objectivity would require not only hard work by news people to determine which report was accurate, but also a willingness to put up with the abuse certain to follow publication of an objectively formed judgment. To escape the hard work or the abuse, if one man says Hitler is an ogre, we instantly give you another to say Hitler is a prince. A man says the rockets won't work? We give you another who says they will.

The public may not learn much about these fairly sensitive matters, but neither does it get another excuse to denounce the media for unfairness and lack of objectivity. In brief, society is teeming with people who become furious if told what the score is.
And here is Ivins herself [both quotes from her book Who Let the Dogs In?]:
The American press has always had a tendency to assume that the truth must lie exactly halfway between any two opposing points of view. Thus, if the press presents the man who says Hitler is an ogre and the man who says Hitler is a prince, it believes it has done the full measure of its journalistic duty.

This tendency has been aggravated in recent years by a noticeable trend to substitute people who speak from a right-wing ideological perspective for those who know something about a given subject. Thus, we see, night after night, on MacNeil/Lehrer or Nightline, people who don't know jack about Iran or Nicaragua or arms control, but who are ready to tear up the pea patch in defense of the proposition that Ronald Reagan is a Great Leader beset by comsymps. They have nothing to offer in the way of facts or insight; they are presented as a way of keeping the networks from being charged with bias by people who are replete with bias and resistant to fact. The justification for putting them on the air is that "they represent a point of view."

The odd thing about these television discussions designed to "get all sides of the issue" is that they do not feature a spectrum of people with different views on reality: Rather, they frequently give us a face-off between those who see reality and those who have missed it entirely. In the name of objectivity, we are getting fantasyland.
Now imagine a city council meeting, which shouldn't be too much of a leap. Members of the city council are 1) debating whether to ban certain dogs based not on their behavior or temperament but on their physical appearance, and 2) turning their backs on the concerns of law-abiding citizens whose good dogs have never harmed or threatened to harm anyone.

There are two opposing points of view.
  • Strongly opposed to breed bans are the real experts at the CDC; the AVMA; the authors of A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention; and virtually every competent dog-trainer, veterinary animal behaviorist and humane organization in North America.

  • In favor of breed banning: someone who quotes an odd "study" lacking citations and footnotes and filled with misspellings, misstatements and some of the nuttiest dog behavior analysis since Thurber's mother.

And the city council, if it is sufficiently replete with bias and resistant to fact [not all of them are, thank God], will pat itself on the back for its "balance" and cast its deciding vote in favor of those who have missed reality entirely.

"We create our own reality," as the man said. The truth is somewhere in the middle! So we ignore science, we fill law-abiding citizens with anguish, and when we feel like it, we confiscate and kill their good dogs.

*************

Those who like to keep their bullshit detectors honed might want to check out the links in the Vagabond Scholar's posts on Faulty Argument Patterns and False Equivalencies. H/T to Batocchio for the Molly Ivins lead.

[Universal B.S. Detector Watch from Gizmodo.]

November 11, 2008

Blog love: Worms & Germs

How can you not love a blog with posts like Stupid things done with bats and Woman pecked by magpie loses leg and Cleaning up raccoon latrines? Worms & Germs is one creepy fascinating website. Smart, too: it's brought to us by the Ontario Veterinary College's Centre for Public Health and Zoonoses and the City of Hamilton Public Health Department, and the focus of the blog is zoonotic diseases. [Check out their Resources page.]

Today the W&G post is about dog bites. Excerpt:
A study was recently published in the Veterinary Record (O'Sullivan et al, 2008, volume 163) describing 234 dog bites in people in Ireland. Dog owners and victims of dog bites were interviewed to characterize the incidents. Bites were divided into 2 categories: bites to the dogs' owner(s) and bites to someone who didn't own the dog. Here are some parts of the study that I found interesting:

*A large number of dog breeds were involved. The breeds most commonly involved in bites were also the most common breeds in the country, indicating that higher bite numbers for certain breeds were a reflection of the breed popularity, not a breed-associated propensity to bite.
Read the rest of the post here. Weird trivia: "24% of owners and 22% of non-owners were bitten on a Wednesday." Unreal. Forget BSL -- Ireland needs to ban Hump Day.

W&G now has a sibling-blog devoted to horses: EquID Blog. Thanks to Drs. Scott Weese and Maureen Anderson for coordinating these often cringe-inducing and always informative websites.

October 25, 2008

Come down off that ledge, Selma!


B-Rock's birth cert. Click for big.

Selma, as we both know, you can't cure stupid. For instance, there will always be people who are convinced that Barack Obama is an Arab terrorist. Along similar lines, there will always be people convinced that "pit bulls" pose a unique threat [and by "pit bulls" these poor souls mean all dogs of maybe two dozen breeds, and mongrels that resemble one of those breeds]. Gosh, there's even a
highly aggressive behaviour unique to pit bulls, not exhibited by any other type or breed of dog
which is, um, about as truthful and accurate as Barack Obama's "birth certificate" from Kenyatown, Kenya, shown at the top of this post.

Furthermore,
pit bulls have a tendency to be unpredictable and [...] even apparently docile pit bulls may attack without warning or provocation.
Sweet Jebus. Nope, you can't cure stupid. The Ontario [Canada] Court of Appeals decision [the one stating that a ban on "pit bulls" will somehow protect Canadians from dog bites] is total, absolute, unadulterated batshit craziness. But change will come. Judicial batshitocity will eventually be revealed for the ignorant, bigoted nonsense it is, and "pit bulls" will survive their detractors. Remember the Netherlands...!

From the mixed-up files of the court of FUBAR —

Salem Village, Massachusetts, 1692: nineteen convicted witches are executed; at least four women accused of witchcraft die in prison; a four-year-old girl is accused of witchcraft and imprisoned for eight months; an elderly man is pressed to death; and two dogs are executed — hanged — as suspected accomplices of witches. Witchcraft hysteria comes to a screeching halt when the governor's wife is rumored to be a witch and the governor says, "You people? Are insane. Go home."

Fast forward to 2008 -- Salem is the Wicca capital of the known universe. Witch City.

Washington, D.C., 1857: Chief Justice Roger Taney rules that once and future slave Dred Scott is shit out of luck, since he has no standing to sue for his freedom in federal court.
[U]nder the terms of the U.S. Constitution, blacks were not — and never could be — citizens of the United States. At the time of the Constitution's ratification, Taney wrote, blacks were "regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights that the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his own benefit."
Fast forward to 2008: the black guy is going to win the election for president. Also: pit bulls will survive.

West Coast of the U.S., 1942: Civilian Exclusion Order No. 346 states that all people of Japanese ancestry, whether citizens or non-citizens, are to report to assembly centers, where they will live until being moved to permanent "Relocation Centers." The L.A. Times editorializes:
A viper is nonetheless a viper whenever the egg is hatched - so a Japanese American, born of Japanese parents - grows up to be a Japanese, not an American.
Fast-forward to 2008: the L.A. Times has endorsed Obama for the presidency, Muslim dad [and Kenyatown birth cert] notwithstanding.

Pit bulls will survive the Ontario nightmare. Pit bulls will survive because the culture of fear and ignorance is circling the drain, and because more and more smart, principled people own pit bulls and know them and love them. C'mon inside now, Selma -- we'll have some tea, hug the dogs, take yoga breaths and look at FrogDog's puppy photos.

[Huge, huge thanks to Selma -- Caveat -- for her tireless efforts on behalf of justice and basic sanity north of the border. Elle a besoin d’être consolée.]

Related:

Ohio

Child killed by dog in Ontario, Canada

Other BSL posts

September 30, 2008

CDOC sues L.A. over mandatory spay/neuter

Concerned Dog Owners of California is suing the City of Los Angeles in Superior Court. CDOC attorneys have asked that the city be enjoined from enforcing its spay/neuter law, which was brought to you by the same nitwits responsible for AB 1634. [The L.A. law is virtually identical to the first version of AB1634, in fact, though AB 1634 backers falsely claimed the assembly bill was "based on" Santa Cruz law.] The hearing will be on October 2.
On September 9th, attorneys acting for Concerned Dog Owners of California and funded through CDOC ACTION filed for a preliminary injunction against the City of Los Angeles asking that the City be enjoined from Enforcing any and all provisions of Los Angeles City Ordinance No. 179615; Enforcing any and all provisions of Los Angeles City Municipal Code Section 53.15.2(b); Mandating the spay/neuter of any and all owned dogs and cats within Los Angeles City.

CDOC is suing the City of Los Angeles in Superior Court. In its filing the brief points out that the City Controller's own numbers, which assumes a much lower rate of dog ownership than the national average, says there are 500,000 unlicensed dogs in Los Angeles which would be subject to immediate sterilization on 10/1/08. Animal Services own records show that in 2007 there were 580 adoptable dogs euthanized in the City of Los Angeles, a city of 3,800,000 people. While we are all working toward a time when no adoptable dogs are euthanized, that number hardly justifies the wholesale sterilization of the dogs in the City of Los Angeles.

CDOC will continue to work on programs to encourage voluntary spay and neuter of dogs when the time is appropriate as determined by owners and their veterinarians. [Source.]
From the link above:
The City Council was provided with health studies that detailed quite clearly the damage to dogs long-term physical and mental health with early spay and neuter. The City was not able to counter with any studies of their own.
The City was not able to counter with any studies of their own because the law was written by stupid people who don't know anything about dogs.

Good on ya, CDOC. To donate to the cause, visit this link -- and spread the word.

[H/T LA Animal Watch.]

September 20, 2008

The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Science that is BSL

Christina Ridge carries her search and rescue dog Doc after he cut his front paw on glass during search and rescue efforts in downtown Galveston, Texas. Photo by L. M. Otero for the L.A. Times.

Yes, that's a search and rescue pit bull. No, he wasn't bred to fight or "bred to kill" — he was bred to be blue, the color du jour. He was bred to be a companion.

A handful of articles on [human] genes and [human] race were published as Ontario prepared for its latest debate on breed specific legislation. Dogs aren't people — but prejudice is cruel and stupid whether it is directed at a human or a non-human animal, and as I read the articles on race and genetics my thoughts kept drifting to the anti-science that is BSL. How can anyone, in 2008 for crissakes, rationalize killing a dog by citing vagaries of appearance? "Breed specific" is a misnomer, after all: BSL condemns not only certain pedigreed dogs but also cross-breds and mixed breed dogs — friendly dogs that have never harmed or threatened to harm anyone — because of their coat color or the shape of their head. This is bigotry, not science.

"No fact in human history is more pervasive than our tendency to prejudge, fear, despise, persecute, and fight each other based on even the shallowest observable differences. It's simply reckless to feed that fire."


The reality of BSL, the cruelty and stupidity and utter uselessness of it, has become apparent to those who've seen its failures in their own neighborhoods. Caveat quoted this editorial:
An Ontario Court of Appeal is hearing arguments this week that literally are a matter of life and death. However, because these aren't human lives, many people might not even know it's going on.

That, however, doesn't lessen its importance.

The case in question is an effort to have the Ontario government's 2005 legislation that forbids the owning, breeding or selling of pit bulls overturned.
[...]
Maybe the Liberal government doesn't care about legislation that is immoral and ineffective because it's not as if a lot of voters care.

But we think people should care and we hope Clayton Ruby can force the government to take back its cruel and inhuman legislation and replace it with something that makes sense. He certainly has our support.
Proponents of BSL claim that extensive line-breeding has fixed specific behaviors in breeds of dogs — yet these same proponents contradict themselves by targeting mixed breed dogs in their killing sprees. BSL is irrational. It is a waste of time and money. It feeds the fires of prejudice, subjects law abiding citizens to needless anguish, and makes no one safer.

Testing Genes, Solving Little

A Dissenting Voice as the Genome Is Sifted to Fight Disease

Race, genes, and the future of medicine [also pullquote source]

September 15, 2008

Worthy cause? Check.

The forces of Good battle the forces of Evil today, as Caveat explains with this copy of an attorney's press release. The attorney is one of the good guys:
On March 23, 2007, Madam Justice Herman of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released her decision respecting our constitutional challenge to Ontario's pit bull legislation (Cochrane v. Attorney General of Ontario).

Substantial parts of the legislation were struck down. We saved the non-breed "pit bull terriers" but not the purebreds. We made it impossible for the Crown to prove its case with a piece of paper signed by a veterinarian.

But it was not enough. We appealed Justice Herman's decision to the Court of Appeal for Ontario (court file no. C47649). The Attorney General cross-appealed. Our appeals will be heard beginning Monday, September 15, 2008 at the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Osgoode Hall, 130 Queen Street West, Toronto beginning at 10:30 a.m. (courtroom to be determined). We have two days of hearings scheduled (September 15 and 16, 2008).
We all know that there is no science, not a shred, to support breed specific legislation. Michael Bryant and his henchmen drafted the usual suspects to create Ontario's ban: ignorance, hysteria and urban legend. Perhaps this time the testimony of experts will be considered. "Breed specific laws are not based in science. [Laws] banning breeds will not make you safer, and the illusion that they will do so is dangerous to humans and unfair to dogs."So says Dr. Karen Overall. So says every other expert on the subject. From their lips to the judge's ear.

Loins girded? Check.

Roasted turnips at the ready? Check.

Horses fed? Check.

Chariot in good working order? Check.

Rhymes memorized? Check.

Steely gaze practised? Check.

Battle plan drawn? Check.

Envoys out front? Check.

Then it's time to go and win one for the Nipper.
God speed, keep the faith, and kick some corrupt Roman government butt. Our thoughts are with you.

August 23, 2008

Wheel of Karma catches up with AB 1634

How many dogs and cats would be alive today if the people supporting this legislation had chosen to devote all that effort, all that time and all that money to actually, you know, saving pets?

Huge thanks to Laura over at Save Our Dogs and to all the other dog and cat folks who wore out phones, fax machines and shoe leather to help defeat a rotten bill. Wayne "I don’t want to see another dog or cat born" Pacelle's dream of pet extinction and PETA's goal of a "No-Birth Nation" derailed in California, yay us.

It should be obvious to anyone with enough neurons to make a synapse that politicians and people who kill over 90% of the animals they collect have no business making decisions about my dogs' health. My vets and I will make those decisions, thanks. 27 votes against Ab 1634, and only 5 votes in favor...! Looks like a mandate for sanity to me.

August 18, 2008

Yet another post in opposition to AB 1634, the Dead Pet Act

Two things. First, it's arrogant and offensive beyond words to suggest that people who don't have a few spare twenties on the money tree to pay for a spay or neuter are somehow less deserving of a pet's companionship than someone who can afford to help put the vet's kids through college. The latest version of AB 1634 screws the poor.

Removing body parts as a punishment reminds one of cultures where they cut off the hands of thieves. I thought we don’t do those things in America. [Laura S.]

Second: what Laura said. In at least two Scandinavian countries it is against the law to spay or neuter a dog without medical cause, and no, those countries don't have overflowing shelters.

AB 1634, at this stage, is a last-gasp power play that has everything to do with political egos and nothing to do with pet health, pet populations or anything else that involves improving the lives and prospects of shelter animals. Nathan Winograd writes about the parties involved here. And once again, here is a repost of the definitive comment on AB 1634, from Christie Keith of Pet Connection:
The answer [to the problem of homeless cats and dogs] is not some bitterly divisive, hard to enforce, punitive legislation that doesn’t solve the problem in the first place and tramples on people’s dreams, goals, and relationship with their animals. The day I let a politician or animal control officer force me to perform a medical procedure on my dog or cat against my will be a cold day in hell. All my current pets are altered so it’s all hypothetical, but I would never, ever comply with this legislation. I find it profoundly offensive, and if you can find someone who loves animals more than I do, I have no idea who it is.

August 12, 2008

Midnight blogging frenzy, with an update on that giant inflatable poo

Remarkably, the giant poo story has nothing to do with California's AB 1634, the forced spay/neuter bill, but more about that shit later — first, the craptastic news from Washington. Just when you think they can't possibly screw things up much more than they already have:
The Bush administration is proposing to let federal agencies decide for themselves whether highways, dams, mines and other construction projects might harm endangered animals and plants, according to a draft of planned rule changes obtained by The Associated Press.

The proposed regulations, which do not require the approval of Congress, would reduce the mandatory, independent reviews that government scientists have been performing for 35 years.
Big hat tip to the most excellent Birdchick — and as Sharon says, it's no time for apathy. This proposal goes beyond stupid and beyond greedy and is barreling towards evil at a speed exponentially greater than that of a giant inflatable turd. Call your people in Washington and raise hell.

Nathan Winograd has written about the stench in Los Angeles, where Ed Boks and Judy Mancuso first put their heads together and came up with the disastrous AB 1634. Back on August 5 the Unleashed blog reported on "Workshops to explore "no-kill" policy at L.A. animal shelters":
The Los Angeles Department of Animal Services on Wednesday evening is holding the first of 11 scheduled workshops to look at how the city shelters can achieve a "no kill" policy. All meetings are open to the public.

Every municipal animal shelter wants to arrive at a "no-kill" policy. Essentially, that means that no healthy animals -- like the young pooches pictured above in the city's South L.A. shelter in January -- will be euthanized for lack of space. Being able to do that is a challenge.

The Humane L.A. Workshops will look at what is being done and what could be done better. "We want to get input from stakeholders in our community," says Animal Services general manager Ed Boks, who will attend the Wednesday workshop.
Depressing to think of the animals that might have been saved if Boks and Mancuso hadn't been so busy promoting the spectacularly divisive, impossible to enforce, medically risky and profoundly dishonest "Healthy Pets" Act. The rewritten version is nasty, brutish and short: there is no due process, no appeals process, anonymous complaints are accepted and there are no exemptions. No exemptions for working dogs. No exemptions for dogs whose health would be at risk. Three anonymous, unproven complaints and your dog is toast.

Gina and Christie at Pet Connection have done a yeoman's job fighting this awful legislation. Gina writes:

Forced spay-neuter kills more pets. That may seem counter-intuitive to many, but that’s the reality.

But much as I don’t want more pets to die as an unintended consequence of a piece of sound-bite legislation — and they have and will, everywhere these bills pass — I really don’t want what Lloyd Levine represents now to be what our government is all about.

Which is why as an an animal-lover and a citizen I’ll be calling and faxing today.

It's heartening to see that even the great Caveat up in Canada is spreading the word, as if she weren't busy enough fighting stupid Canadian politicians. All we can do is write the truth, and hope that enough people give veterinarians and other authentic experts more credence than they give a retired game-show host.

*************

In other news: it isn't everyday that you see a headline in the Telegraph with the words "giant inflatable turd," or a story that begins, "A house-sized dog poo has wreaked havoc after a storm picked it up," or a jibe about "American cultural imperialists busy spreading their crap culture" etc, etc. A really big hat tip to Moira at Dog Art Today for the scoop. ["Scoop"! OMG, I kill me.] Photo from Flickr.