Dog shooter get's justice from victim


PDA






CentralTexas
September 9, 2004, 07:03 PM
Dog Wiggles Paw Free to Shoot Florida Man

Associated Press

PENSACOLA, Fla. - A man who tried to shoot seven puppies was shot
himself when one of the dogs put its paw on the revolver's trigger.

Jerry Allen Bradford, 37, was charged with felony animal cruelty, the
Escambia County Sheriff's Office said Wednesday. He was being treated
at a hospital for a gunshot wound to his wrist.

Bradford said he decided to shoot the 3-month-old shepherd-mix dogs
in the head because he couldn't find them a home, according to the
sheriff's office.

On Monday, Bradford was holding two puppies - one in his arms and
another in his left hand - when the dog in his hand wiggled and put
its paw on the trigger of the .38-caliber revolver. The gun then
discharged, the sheriff's report said.

Deputies found three of the puppies in a shallow grave outside
Bradford's home, said sheriff's Sgt. Ted Roy.
The other four appeared to be in good health and were taken by
Escambia County Animal Control, which planned to make them available
for adoption.

CT

If you enjoyed reading about "Dog shooter get's justice from victim" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Rebel Gunman HK
September 9, 2004, 07:08 PM
GOOD!!!!:evil:

R.H. Lee
September 9, 2004, 07:16 PM
So now he'll be a criminal defendant in a felony case. What does a .38 do to a wrist at point blank range? What a cretin.

Drizzt
September 9, 2004, 07:21 PM
When interviewed, the dog said "I was lookin for the man who shot my paw....."

ZeroX
September 9, 2004, 07:21 PM
Poor puppies... :(

And how hard is it to find homes for puppies? You put an ad in the paper that says "Free Puppies!" and they're practically beating down your door.

FRIENDLY
September 9, 2004, 07:42 PM
The puppy should have aimed somewhat lower and stopped the troublesome breeding problem.

Preacherman
September 9, 2004, 07:46 PM
GOOD doggie! :D

boing
September 9, 2004, 11:17 PM
Not sure I see the difference between this guy euthanizing the dogs with a .38 to the head, and the state injecting them with poison after sitting in the local shelter for 3 days or a week or whatever. It's instant and painless, and I couldn't call it "cruelty" in the usual sense, even though the particulars of the statute apparently call out a different, more specific definition.

Not incidentally, I've been rescuing all sorts of animals from abuse and homelessness for years: dogs, cats, rats, ferrets, hedgehogs, turtles, birds, etc...to the point of personal bankruptcy, the virtual destruction of a $100k home, strained relationships with family, an imploding marriage, and a thousand other sacrifices large and small...trying to keep from having to do what this guy did.

If finding homes for animals is so easy, why are millions put down by shelters every year?

Of course, that doesn't mean I'm not glad he got shot. :p

WilderBill
September 9, 2004, 11:26 PM
Now, that sounds like a very clear case of self defense! ;)

White Horseradish
September 9, 2004, 11:56 PM
Well, on one hand I think that was better than drowning them in a sack. OTOH, this guy is a moron.

First, if he does not want his dog to have puppies he needs to either spay the dog or watch it better. Second, holding a small squirming animal in one hand and a gun in another is the height of idiocy. Where did the bullet go after it exited his wrist?

Go puppy.

GigaBuist
September 10, 2004, 01:21 AM
The guy's a moron for getting shot... and I love animals, especially dogs, but I don't see shooting them in the head as cruelty. Given is "gun safety" skills though I can't help but presume he was less than perfect with his weapon though.

My favorite dog of all time was put down by a family member with a gunshot to the head. Had an uncle do it (I was 17 I think). Dog was just too old and couldn't see anymore. Uncle didn't say much, except that it was instant and he didn't feel a thing. Would a vet have been better? Probably not honestly. Hoisted into a car to be manhandled by a stranger and injected with poison vs a quick shot to the back of the head in the backyard that you find comfortable?

I supposed puppies are another matter. The guy might be an idiot, but I don't think he was cruel.

Fingolfin
September 10, 2004, 01:29 AM
BAN PUPPIES NOW

Guns don't kill people, puppies kill people.

:cool:

stevelyn
September 10, 2004, 02:31 AM
The guy is an idiot for not excercising proper gun safety protocol, but euthanizing a dog with a bullet to the back of the head is not cruelty nor should it bring felony charges. It's far more humane than allowing them to starve or become feral and cause all sorts of other problems.

stealthmode
September 10, 2004, 02:57 AM
what a :cuss: bastage!!!!1

joe sixpack
September 10, 2004, 03:21 AM
My dad was always having to off whatever family pet we happened to
own. One year we were going to Panama to live, so he had our German
Shepard put to sleep, a couple years later one of our dogs ran down a
deer and killed it and the forest ranger complained, so there goes the dalmation mix...and so on.

Got so that we didn't want any more pets...

cheers, ab

Tharg
September 10, 2004, 03:30 AM
Heard this story all over the radio - Puppies bring out the worst in people (good and bad) rofl.

You think its easy to "get rid" of animals... then you try it.

Some people have issues w/ the cost of spay/neutering. (the vets charge 5x as much for a (bring dog to office) dog then they do for a HOME VISIT for cows/horses)

This guy is an idiot because he had 3mo old germies (that aren't like... small at 3mo's old) w/ a gun in his hand. If he couldn't get rid of the dogs... than its better than a lot of alternatives i've seen. (let them roam till they starve/get called on by animal control/get shot by someone else ... sometimes not quite as instant...)

I raise dogs as extra income and i can tell you they don't always sell. I've never had to euthanize a puppy - but i've had to do it w/ stray's/older dogs that i didn't want to suffer any more. My motto is that its not a whole lot different than sending it to a shelter that not enough people go to (as evidenced by the money i bring in selling dogs) so it can sit there and then get euthanized.

EIther way - mix's are even harder to "move" since anyone looking (that hasn't already gone to a shelter) is not looking for a mix. They are looking for thier purebred....

I've taken much crap for shooting the cats around the house... for the same reason - if there isn't a market for dogs int he shelter - then cats are the red-headed-step children of animals - the number of cats that get euthanized by shelters each year is staggering. (could have something to do w/ the fact that they breed like RABBITS) People don't get thier animals spayed and then they have a litter of 8 of the lil rat )(*)*&*'s... and can't GIVE them away. (altho some do try. Selling bassets from one of my litters was a lady giving cats away free next to me)

Either way - a felony animal cruelty charge this is not. If he goes down then i prolly deserve to go down many more times than he. I live in the country... how it works. People that live in the city tend to get all wishy washy all the while never realizing how thier lifestyle effects "nature" and how many things they've killed driving to soccer practice and how much the city does to animals and things... but looooord alllll mighty can they get on a trip about how bad someone else is for euthanizing an animal.

grrrr can you tell this story irritates me? rofl

btw... the guy is still an idiot... <rofl>

J/Tharg!

only1asterisk
September 10, 2004, 03:51 AM
The guy shouldn't have tryied to carry 2 dogs and a gun. Felony animal cruelty this is not. Simply killing an animal isn't cruel. If he was torturing them fine, but just putting down excess animals is hardly the same.

David

CentralTexas
September 10, 2004, 10:02 AM
"I raise dogs as extra income and I can tell you they don't always sell. "

My local shelter here kills 50-100 dogs a DAY sometimes and we have people breeding them for profit??? Plenty of purebreds are being killed there also. I have 3 purebreds from the shelter.

For those that must have purebreds that' s like "well we would adopt but we only want a white child" you do realize purebreds have more health issues from inbreeding right?

Problem #2 -folks that claim they can't afford Spay & Neuter? Then you can't afford normal vet fees every year either- you shouldn't be allowed to have pets.

Problem #3 - I don't want my dog getting lazy/fat whatever if he/she is fixed-
well your understanding of nature & your immaturity make you a bad candidate for a pet owner IMHO also.

Still waiting for proof of claims that the Humane Society makes threats to kill animals....

Felony may be a bit strong for this case, maybe a tactic to get a plea agreement accepted. More than likely another DA that will do anything but the right thing for votes. If the guy doesn't get smacked though what prevents the next guy from saying sure i gassed my dog in the garage/oven, that's what they do downtown right?


CT

Tall Man
September 10, 2004, 10:31 AM
I would like to adopt a "race-rescue" Greyhound, but my present circumstances won't allow me to accommodate a dog at this time. For the moment, my cheerful - and neutered - cat provides a pleasant compantion to come home to.

I'm glad that I've not yet been in a situation that required me to dispatch an animal. That said, I hope I wouldn't hesitate, if only to minimize or eliminate the suffering of the animal. Mr. Bradford's gun handling was sloppy, but his underlying intent was not criminal, IMO.

Although it may not bear direct comparisons here, doesn't anyone remember the lesson of Old Yeller?

For those that must have purebreds, that's like "Well, we would adopt, but we only want a white child." You do realize purebreds have more health issues from inbreeding, right?
Thanks for the ad hominem, CenTex. There's so much that's wrong with your suggestions here that I don't know where to begin. :rolleyes:

TM

mec
September 10, 2004, 10:45 AM
If the guy gets a good lawyer or even a so-so lawyer instead of copping a plea, the animal cruelty charges will not stick. Austin, Texas is a liberoid enclave and even speaking disrespectfully to a dog can land you in court.

2nd Amendment
September 10, 2004, 11:20 AM
The fool is incompetent, both in his gun handling and in caring for whatever dog spawned these mutts. That being said I've put a lot of animals down over the years with a rnd to the back of the head. It's quick, effective and at least as painless as any injection. The guy needs slapped upside the head...repeatedly...but not for cruelty to animals.

Diggler
September 10, 2004, 11:48 AM
Bottom line...

IT IS AN ANIMAL.

Not a person, nothing. I personally wouldn't shoot puppies, but that's just me. How close are we to getting felony animal cruelty charges brought against us every time we are successful hunting?? What is the difference between a dog and a deer... or better yet a coyote? <answer = none>. People happen to like dogs, but not coyotes or possums. It's just an animal.

Now if he was shooting them in the hind legs or whatnot, just to watch them yelp and squirm, that's different. But shooting a dog in the head is not animal cruelty.

About breeding purebreds for sale, that's called "fulfilling a market demand." There are people for whatever reason that want a purebred. I have a chocolate lab, with papers, because I knew that for the most part I would be getting a dog with certain characteristics. I didn't feel like playing Russian roulette with choosing a mutt when I have children around. Don't blame the people who are intentionally breeding quality dogs. Blame the people who don't care to spay their dogs.

And I love my dog, but he is NOT a human child, and dogs or other animals should never be compared to one.

R.H. Lee
September 10, 2004, 12:37 PM
Bradford said he decided to "shoot the dogs in the head". Deputies found three dead puppies "in a shallow grave". The article did not say whether the three were killed cleanly with a shot to the head, or otherwise. Maybe the condition of the three dead puppies prompted the felony charge.

Diggler
September 10, 2004, 01:59 PM
I don't think it should matter whether they actually died cleanly. Sometimes a deer is shot and is wounded, it may die or may not. If he intentionally tortured an animal, dog or not, I have no problem with charging animal cruelty. However, if he intended to shoot one in the head and pulled the shot, I wouldn't say that is animal cruelty. Just a bad mistake, hopefully with a quick follow-up shot right after.

It's all about intent.

CentralTexas
September 10, 2004, 02:50 PM
It's animal cruelty as there were other options than killing them, no due diligence on his part.

As to the part about them being "animals" you may remeber your junior high science classes where you learned that animals are also human.
I see no difference in killing a retarded child and an adult dog with that logic.
But hey I live in Austin where just by that virtue we are all liberal whackos, have you been here in the last 5 years??????
CT

Diggler
September 10, 2004, 03:10 PM
you may remeber your junior high science classes where you learned that animals are also human.OKAAAAAYYY...

I was dissecting frogs and fetal pigs in high school, and received a B.S. in Biology and no where did I ever hear that.

A human is a human, no matter if he/she is retarded or not. It is not our place to put values on human life based on mental capacity.

A dog is just an animal. In many parts of the world, "It's What's For Dinner."

Goet
September 10, 2004, 03:15 PM
As to the part about them being "animals" you may remeber your junior high science classes where you learned that animals are also human.

HUH?

CentralTexas
September 10, 2004, 03:59 PM
Geez, major mistakes when making a point tend to make one look stupid.
I meant to say the reverse, that humans are also animals....
CT

CentralTexas
September 10, 2004, 04:08 PM
You said-

"A human is a human, no matter if he/she is retarded or not. It is not our place to put values on human life based on mental capacity."

But that is what makes us the top animal on the planet- our mental capacity. That's where you are making your judgment to kill a lower animal- that they aren't as smart as we are.

Why isn't it our place? We do it every day, medical personnel, bean counters at HMO's etc., individual states argue if brain death or heart stoppage is death. Enlisted military are for the majority not college grads like officers, who gets to go out and fight the enemy & die and who stays in the rear???


CT

Tamara
September 10, 2004, 04:09 PM
It takes a special outlook on life to have a state law that makes shooting domestic canines (chattel property) a felony while shooting Bambi is still a sport.

Too many Yankees and Californians are apparently allowed to move to Florida and vote.

The teenage-girl-ification of America moves apace. :rolleyes:

k say
September 10, 2004, 05:06 PM
com on boy ---> some things just meant to be

R.H. Lee
September 10, 2004, 05:13 PM
Too many Yankees and Californians are apparently allowed to move to Florida and vote.
:confused: Why would we leave God's country to move to a humid bug infested place that gets levelled by hurricanes every year??? No offense to Floridians, I'm sure it's a LOVELY place, it just doesn't compare to California's beaches, deserts, mountains and climate. :cool:

Diggler
September 10, 2004, 05:33 PM
But that is what makes us the top animal on the planet- our mental capacity. That's where you are making your judgement to kill a lower animal- that they aren't as smart as we are.That's not where I'm making my judgement. There is a distinct line between humans and animals.

I defer to Denis Leary's song, "Save This."

Well, on that note I'm going to go eat some chops from the boar my 10 year old killed himself, pet my dog and not feel one bit hypocritical about it.

:D

Malice
September 10, 2004, 05:55 PM
Some of you may be missing the point of the animal cruelty charges. The dogs were not stray. They were not old. They were in "good health." They were not rabid.

Shooting healthy and happy puppies is different from shooting your old hound that got into a skit with a racoon and developed rabies.

Bottom line is, he should have given them to a shelter. At least that way they would have had a CHANCE to be picked up by a loving and carefull owner who deserved to own an animal.

Diggler
September 10, 2004, 06:31 PM
Does the law differentiate between an old hound bitten by a rabid raccoon or a healthy one?

BTW, I don't want to give the impression that I am not compassionate towards animals or would treat them badly. I hunt, but do everything I can to ensure a quick, humane kill. If a domestic animal needs put down, I will do what needs to be done. But animals do not have the same rights as people. And I definitely don't agree with the police confiscating his firearms because of this.

Bad judgement? Yes. Unneccessary? Yes/Probably. Would I have done anything like this? Definitely not. Criminal? Not to me.

Sawdust
September 10, 2004, 07:00 PM
Uh, Tamara, how about a little slack with that wide brush with which you are painting Californians? :scrutiny:

Sawdust

444
September 10, 2004, 08:55 PM
When I read this, I was really sorry that the bullet hit his wrist and not his head.

campbellcj
September 11, 2004, 02:06 AM
A lot of great posts above. I am definitely not a PETA "animals are people too" fanatic, but in my view the case for the prosecution could very easily stick by showing that the (dumba$$ defendant) bred the puppies with the premeditated knowledge that they most likely would not be adopted. He knowingly did not practice common-sense animal birth control and went ahead and had puppies that he had no intention of keeping on his property long-term if they did not magically disappear to new homes. (Much easier said than done; BTDT.)

There are approx 5 MILLION dogs euthanized in the US alone every year. Getting shot like this idiot is not the real problem -- the real problem is that pet owners are not responsible about ownership and breeding.

I'm not sure about a head shot, but a nice gut or groin shot would've been good kennel justice for this guy.

submin
September 11, 2004, 02:51 AM
I'm not sure about a head shot, but a nice gut or groin shot would've been good kennel justice for this guy.

Some of you people scare me.

Horsesense
September 11, 2004, 02:53 AM
Something tells me that he was holding the dog, with his hand under the pups chin and the gun to the back of the dogs head, I don’t think I would admit doing that myself.


As for the animal cruelty charges, follow the money! The local Gub'ment wants to get a shelter to deal with all the dogs and cats that people are too week and simple minded to put down. Surprise Surprise! Another government money pit is created and in a effort to keep the animal shelter open, the bunny huggers (who are making a living by working at the shelter) do some arm twisting down at the city hall and all of a sudden the DA is pressing charges against anyone who dose not obediently take his $$ and unwanted dog to be killed in a sanctioned killing facility, oops I meant to say shelter.

444
September 11, 2004, 02:58 AM
"I'm not sure about a head shot, but a nice gut or groin shot would've been good kennel justice for this guy."

Ok, you are right. He would suffer more.

Geech
September 11, 2004, 03:02 AM
Some of you people scare me.

This whole thread is disturbing.

dustind
September 11, 2004, 05:07 AM
444: How do you feel about hunters or the human society killing millions of animals?

This thread is more disturbing than storm front could ever be.

Tharg
September 11, 2004, 07:40 AM
I raise dogs as extra income and can tell you they don't always sell.

Yes i said this - and i can tell you that i've yet to have HAD to euthanize a dog cause it didn't sell - but i'm not stupid enough to know that it can't happen.

There ain't much difference in sending it to a shelter (to maybe get bought - yes ... maybe) or get euthanized there by other people living off donations/state funds... or doing it myself. Because someone is too chicken)(*&) to do it themselves might be looked at ... as should be whole lot of self-accountablility issues in the US of A.

*I* know that even should a puppy of mine hit 3 months old or better that it usually can be given away or sold very cheaply to someone wanting to breed a purbred who doesn't want to wait for a puppie puppie to grow up. (its how we aquired our Mastiffs - and we LOVE our mastiffs... they have the run of the house)

who is right? i don't know - don't particularly believe the mentally ill should be given a free pass either.... but then thats inhumane right? <bleh> This country slips faster and faster into the morass of the few spending to keep the majority comfortable... i don't know i could pass that "sentence" on to a mental state school person... my inherent proclivities prolly wouldn't let me be the decider of that. But when it comes to an animal that i know i can't or won't provide a home for, its MUCH better in my eyes to send it on to heaven (all dogs go there ya know...) than it is to let it suffer for however long before the same end happens.

Yes - your local shelter does that... because people let thier dogs run loose, people get a pet and then move to someplace they can't keep the pet - so they do what they think is "right" and dump it somewhere (its got a chance now right???) or they take it to a shelter so they feel better about thier decision to aquire a pet - and try not to feel guilty about thier decision to move someplace where they can't keep the pet. Or plain decide they don't want to be responsible for the pet after they aquire it. (its too much hassle to have a pit bull in an apartment... whaaa... didn't know it was gonna be such a pain... ) Back to that whole accountablility thing.

Yes - i know purebreds have more issues. Ask any breeder... (duh) Mutts will have loads of puppies and nurse all of em almost perfectly. Sure wish i had that problem w/ my animals. Still - people want and are willing to pay for papers... This day and age... i don't ask a lot of questions on a legal activity that makes me money to support my family. Bet you don't eat hamburgers either... those poor cows.... raised to be killed.... how many per day you think get slaughtered so you can have a big mac? Least i'm raising mine to make someone happy.... the man who said you can't buy happiness never bought a puppy. <heh>

Can't afford spay and neuter. - I think most of the people who would say this don't think they are gonna have a problem keeping sparky in the back yard w/ her finding someone to mate with. SO it would be a non issue... untill sparky digs/climbs out and gets knocked up... Yes - still thier fault... all our pet dogs up till we started breeding are spay'd / neutered. You have to in the country.... cause our dogs roam.

Country life - so as to put it in perspective for one who doesn't know... means that there ain't a shelter around the corner, that roaming dogs that don't go home at night get a warning shot... and if they come back get a killing shot... there isn't any "pet control" to call (and they'd laugh at you if there was one) It means that animals are animals, and ya don't necessarily WANT to do what you should do, but we here don't have them there fancy places to clean our consciences with, we take care of it ourselves.

Sorry if this seemed attacking - but if there is one thing i'm tired of - its people that think they are morally better than me - because they push the issue off to someone else. I'd understand if the idiot was torturing the pups... but he was doing it the best way he knew how - and got hung up on being (un)safe w/ his weapons. For this he's criminal? Nopers.

Compassion for animals is intimately connected with goodness of character; and it may be confidently asserted that he who is cruel to animals cannot be a good man.
--Arthur Schopenhauer

Yer right - i've the compassion to know that a well placed bullet is better than months of starvation and scavaging to die of hunger or to be caught and sent to a shelter to sit in a small cage till it is either adopted or euthanized or shot while its trying to scavenge a morsel to eat. The animals that live on this ranch would argue w/ you till you are blue in the face that we aren't bad people. All 8 dogs in the house would lick you till ya drowned proving it. :)

J/Tharg

abaddon
September 11, 2004, 11:17 AM
He should have just put them in a box and hooked it up to the back of his car. They'd just go to sleep.

Horsesense
September 11, 2004, 12:51 PM
It amazes me that even on a board where most of the participants have their eyes open to the truth of the brain washing the sheeple receive at the hands of the media concerning guns, the majority are blind to the secular humanist, feminist touchy feeley brain washing they themselves have received regarding dogs and cats.


Fifty years ago, you would have been the oddball.

Could the dogs have had hip displace? The article doesn't say but you have been conditioned to assume that man is wrong and animals are being oppressed. Have you ever had said "I wish that abortion doctor had cut off his finger instead of dismembering a baby"? Bah bah that would go against our training!, some would say.

I will go out on a limb and speculate that the poor guy, who is being charged with animal cruelty, felt compelled to make the putting down as painless and stress free as possible and ended up shooting himself, because he was holding the dog and shot threw its head and into his wrist. People make up stories to cover up doing dumb things all the time only this poor saps story got him in trouble. I can see it now; the ER Dr. inquires how he got shot and, not wanting to admit that he shot himself, he said that the dog done it. The Dr. calls the Police and reports the valiant struggle the puppy put up and the cruelty of the man. The guy got himself arrested and made the national headlines. The Dr most likely delighted in causing pain while the treated to wound.

You think I reading my own bias into my theory? Yes I am, but can you see that you are doing the same?

seeker_two
September 11, 2004, 02:22 PM
Sometimes God just makes it all work out.... :D


The guy should be punished for animal cruelty. Maybe 100 hours community service in the local animal shelter....teaching gun safety. :p

And, whoever adopts this puppy should get jail time if they name it anything BUT "Shooter".... :cool:

Tharg
September 11, 2004, 03:30 PM
ROFL - shooter...

definitely.

Its funny tho. Because this got lots of radio time - I don't know about TV time - there will be a whole bunch of people who want to adopt THESE remaining pups... out of the blue.

Never mind these same people could have picked up a dog at the shelter if they were such "humanists"

But they will tell the story in the future to someone how they "saved" a dog who was about to be put to death by getting shot! (gasp, awwwww)

I too defer to Dennis Leary. "and what are you? - I'm an otter - and what do you do? - i swim on my back and do cute lil human things w/ my hands!!! - your free to go."

"and what are you? - i'm a cow - get on the truck - but i'm an animal i have rights - yer a f09*)(**& baseball mitt get on the truck"

J/Tharg!

CentralTexas
September 11, 2004, 04:01 PM
Ironic name.
You said-
"As for the animal cruelty charges, follow the money! The local Gub'ment wants to get a shelter to deal with all the dogs and cats that people are too week and simple minded to put down. Surprise Surprise!Another government money pit is created and in a effort to keep the animal shelter open, the bunny huggers (who are making a living by working at the shelter) do some arm twisting down at the city hall and all of a sudden the DA is pressing charges against anyone who dose not obediently take his $$ and unwanted dog to be killed in a sanctioned killing facility, oops I meant to say shelter."
1-
The local Gub'ment wants to get a shelter to deal with all the dogs and cats that people are too week and simple minded to put down.Surprise Surprise!

Uh, are you saying you prefer irresponsible overbreeders to kill their surplus OR the local govt not have a shelter? I don't think either of those options make sense...

2-the bunny huggers (who are making a living by working at the shelter)
It's obvious you don't realize the majority of folks at shelters are just employees that need a job. Heve you ever dealt with shelters???? Some do like animals but I have yet to see them manned by "bunny huggers". I wish they were then a better job might get done at most Govt shelters...

3-do some arm twisting down at the city hall and all of a sudden the DA is pressing charges against anyone who dose not obediently take his $$ and unwanted dog to be killed in a sanctioned killing facility, oops I meant to say shelter."

WHere to begin? Yes sometimes people pressure a DA to take action & sometimes they do. Here in Austin the ONE animal cruelty cop doesn't have a clue and seems not to care. FEW cases are ever filed etc., I doubt with the exception of a few places it's any different where you are.
Sanctioned killing facility is right, our society places a dollar value on pets.
I see losers here faced with a $100 vet bill choose a $30 euth- no killing their pet. Couldn't do without cable TV for a month could we...
AAAAACKKK!!!!
CT

CentralTexas
September 11, 2004, 04:10 PM
this guy. Argue we don't know if the dogs were defective etc., How it's humane to kill dogs that are healthy etc.

Look-
1- this loser doesn't spay or neuter
2-this caused more unwanted pets
3-was too lazy or cheap or both to find homes for them
4-too cheap to pay to have them killed (not that that was even a good option)
5-Anyone who can shoot puppies one after another is a serial killer in the making & I wouldn't want them around kids

Shooting a sick and dying farm dog is one thing but this was another....
CT

Tamara
September 11, 2004, 05:07 PM
Shooting a sick and dying farm dog is one thing but this was another....

No, it wasn't.

To put it in its simplest, ugliest, and most brutal terms:

The cute widdle puppies were his chattel property.
He shot them.
Too bad, so sad. Period.


I love my pets, but they are my property. If someone tries to damage them unlawfully, I'll deal with them as I may legally deal with someone trying to damage any other article of my property. If I want to dispose of them as I see fit, then I may be scum that should be shunned by my neighbours, but I am well within my rights vis a vis my chattel property.

If you want to redefine pets as citizens with rights as opposed to property, that's your problem. Move from TX to CA and work on extending the franchise to domestic livestock.


(What just kills me about this whole debate is that I'd wager that some of the folks I'm arguing against don't even have pets, while I have to crane my neck to the side to type this because Mittens is trying to eat my earlobe in a frenzy of affection... :rolleyes: )

R.H. Lee
September 11, 2004, 05:39 PM
I have no argument that your animals are your chattel property, and you do have a right to kill them if you want. However, just because something is not illegal does not make it a good idea. None of us know why the subject knucklehead was charged. It may have been the manner of death he inflicted on the three puppies in the shallow grave. Or not. Typically DA's will bring the highest most serious charge possible, then negotiate downward from there. Anything for a conviction. And yes I do have pets. A 100 lb black lab (neutered) and a black cat (also neutered and saved from execution by his previous owners).

CentralTexas
September 11, 2004, 07:24 PM
from rescues, strays etc.

Women & Blacks were once property in the US. I'm hopeful that we are making progress on the others.....
Now before you say I am comparing women & blacks to dogs etc. I'm making a statement on our evolving mindset not a comparison. So please don't pull out the accusations of misogyny or racism.
CT

Tamara
September 11, 2004, 07:39 PM
Women & Blacks were once property in the US.

Oddly, us women and them black folks belong to the species h. sap. sap., a distinction not shared by kitties and puppies (nor cows). Is raising veal calves felony animal cruelty? How about de-beaking poultry? Should we be roundin' up them farmers and stripping their right to vote and own guns?

So, tell me, if it's illegal to kill a puppy, is it legal to kill a rattlesnake? If not, why not?

A boy is a puppy is a rat is a liver fluke is a streptococcus bacillus... :rolleyes:

Diggler
September 11, 2004, 07:49 PM
Because we only want to save the cute ones.

Nobody is trying to "save the house mouse" or "save the mosquitos".

If they inconvenince us or cause us discomfort, it's ok to kill them. Pretty hypocritical.

CentralTexas
September 11, 2004, 08:46 PM
"So please don't pull out the accusations of misogyny or racism."

So you still tried to make me out to be comparing animals and women/blacks.

I'll go slow with the concept "Americans once thought it was ok to own blacks"- that was wrong I think you may agree , I'm hoping as we progress as humanity we will also change our attitudes of well a dog is property so if I want to dogfight it or strangle it tough/big deal.

Diggler,
Don't call me a hypocrite, I truly practice do as little harm as possible short of living in a cave. No meat, leather carseats or clothing etc., I don't kill mice, snakes etc. if there is no immediate danger.
Yup, don't broadbrush me and I won't make fun of your lack of teeth or mobile home. ;) Yes that is a smart comment, so sue me....
CT

P.S. are we done with this dead horse yet?

Diggler
September 11, 2004, 09:30 PM
CT, that wasn't specific to you. That was a statement about the general lack of consistency in many animal rights activists' arguments. And no, I don't live in a mobile home and I do have all my teeth. How else would I be able to eat all those delicious medium rare steaks?

;)

I hope the dead horse you're referring to lived a long, peaceful life and died in its sleep... I don't want any Florida LEOs having to do an investigation...

glock23
September 11, 2004, 11:18 PM
i think i know who this dog killer is.they say he is from german decent,anyway this is the dog killer

2nd Amendment
September 12, 2004, 12:11 AM
Why would we want to change our attitude towards owning animals? Blacks and women were considered property at various points by various cultures and this was(and remains) wrong because they are human. That's it. That's the only reason. Dogs are not. Never will be. And thus our responsibility to them ends at not being overly cruel. Period. We will never change the attitude because animals ARE property.

At least until the day they are made, by decree of some lunatic court, human. I would not care to live in this world after that day.

Horsesense
September 12, 2004, 12:36 AM
The guy did nothing wrong, outside of unsafe gun handling. The dogs were his property; do property rights mean anything to you? If he was torturing them I would be all for punishing him but he was apparently taking precautions to make clean kills.

You say he should have been more responsible but he WAS taking responsibility for his property and disposing of animals that were literally a growing problem. From atop your high horse, you smugly proclaim that he should have had the dog fixed. To that I say it was his dog and if he didn’t want to do that than it was his right, as long as he took responsibility for the puppies.

You all set atop your high horse and pronounce what a free man should do with HIS property, in this case dogs, others are doing the same thing, the only difference is instead of dogs they proclaim that a free man can not own the gun of his choice.

How dose the old saying go "in for a penny, in for a pound?" just where do you get off messing with property rights on one side and standing up for gun rights on the other? Freedom can not be aggregated.

Tamara
September 12, 2004, 12:51 AM
So you still tried to make me out to be comparing animals and women/blacks.

You failed to answer the meat of my post:

If this guy is guilty of FELONY Animal Cruelty, is a beef or poultry farmer?

Does "Felony" really mean "something I find distasteful"? :confused:

CentralTexas
September 12, 2004, 03:30 AM
"Why would we want to change our attitude towards owning animals? "

Because the ones I see turned in at the local shelter are blinded and maimed in dog fights were people bet on them for fun. Where dogs backs are broken by drunk boyfriends who got mad the dog bit him for putting a cigarette out on it's back, etc. etc. etc. If you don't understand why I'm sorry for ya...


"At least until the day they are made, by decree of some lunatic court, human. I would not care to live in this world after that day."

I'm sure that was said in a friendly discussion just before the Civil War about slaves also. My point is animals don't have to be eaten, experimented on etc. and just in the last 10 years I've seen great growth in those areas. Views change & so do people, I realized years ago I could coexist with the other animals on the planet, someday I hope we all can.

"You all set atop your high horse and pronounce what a free man should do with HIS property"

Yet you say if he was torturing them it would be okay to punish him? Have you know respect for property rights high horse? They are his property to torture as he sees fit by your logic....

"You failed to answer the meat of my post:

If this guy is guilty of FELONY Animal Cruelty, is a beef or poultry farmer?"

Yes, if in violation of animal cruelty laws. You do understand that industry has regulations on killing animals for food production???
Maybe you thought he was going to eat the puppies?
:what: :what: :what:
CT

Matt G
September 12, 2004, 04:05 AM
Heh. For the --what? Fourth time in the last coupla weeks? --I completely agree with Tamara. This is a trend! :D

As I said on TFL (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1392625#post1392625), this is just silly-- it's okay when an agency euthanizes a puppy, but it's a felony when a private citizen humanely puts down his own dog?!?

Oh, that's right-- "they have a chance, if you'll just take them to a shelter."

The Los Angeles Department of Public Works reports that Los Angeles city and county shelters send 120,000 dog and cat carcasses to rendering plants annually, averaging 20.4 tons of homeless animal bodies disposed of each week.http://www.snapus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Turn_Key_Services

Oops. Guess not.

One shouldn't make an animal needlessly suffer, but if you can humanely put it down, I personally feel it's absolutely your right to do with your property as you wish. As my good friend Tamara said (and said again): They're NOT HUMAN.

Tharg
September 12, 2004, 05:25 AM
<<<blinded and maimed in dog fights (illegal) where dogs backs are broken by drunk boyfriends who got mad the dog bit him for putting a cig out on its back>>>
(huh? this tracked as a common occurance???) oh and of course - etc etc etc.... (hey - buddy - mr. high horse (dead or not) don't forget the people who can't take care of the pet cause it became a nuisance, or the person who had to move - and didn't think of his "charges" (property.. whatever) I know that you think your two examples are pretty common - but guess what - working w/ the people i've known/worked with - the two i've put out are not only common - but regular, where yours are not.

<<<I realized years ago i could coexist with the other animals on the planet.>>>
Guess what... the "other animals of the panet" don't give two bits if you don't hunt them or eat them. If you happen to be handy at the time - yer gonna be lunch. "coexist" is a term people made up to humanize the animals who could care less what you do, so long as it doesn't impact them... in which case they adapt or move on, there wasn't an animal conference one day that said "hey - those humans are pretty pushy... but i think we can co-exist"

Yer a vegan... figured... i was <-> this close to saying that on an earlier post... but it was just a feeling - now its a fact.. FINE - don't like the meat... sup to you. Homosapien is a omnivore. Veggies and Meat. setup that way. Some critters are herbivores - usually hunted by carnivores for food. Self decided victim, OBKB. Its a well proven concept that people/animals evolved/created/whatever for specific reasons. If we were meant to be vegitarians - we would have many many more molars.... Nature is your goal - get you a steak, since that is the path nature put out for you. Or do you support the vegitarianization of carnivores... since meat isn't necessary)

btw... if you partake in just about ANYTHING that would be considered normal in the US of A... you are upseting an animal somewhere... if you use cologne - the smell of it is not good to some critters. If you drive a car - the polution from said care isn't good for your "didn't get to make a decision in how dirty thier air is co-existing friend." Not to mention the materials used in making said car or vehicle which has surely ended some animals life somewhere in the line. the wood in your apartment, the steel in your cooking bits, in fact... i'd be willing to bet that your lifestyle as well as everyone about you has caused many animal deaths over the course of years. I guess you balance this out by not eating meat? No leather in yer car seat. (plastic wallet or leather? heh) Yes - Hypocrite. If you think living in the united states of america in a "normal" fasion (other than eating meat or having leather seats) doesn't effect the enviornment... (including said animals) then yes you are. You want to be one with nature and cause it no harm then do so... but until then its a wonderful sham so long as it doesn't effect the convenience aspects of your life.... (car/apartment/lights (light polution - discovery article)/garbage disposal/waste disposal/delivery of any product that requires distances of movement... I guess if it doesn't effect YOUR living - then its acceptable that your superior race should effect the lesser races as such. Oh wait... thats a description of me... and you... just we differ on our mindset.

Comparing the slavery of blacks to the ownership of dogs.. (arguing you don't want YOUR argument to be argued against doesn't stop it from happening) is ludicris. Yes the poeple of the time though blacks to be nothing more than animals/slaves. And the day a dog looks me in the eye and says "damn man... i'm yer best friend - but that S$&@ was STUPID" i will consider them canines who are to be loved, traded, sold, and bred as i see fit. (ok ok ok - the dog doesn't have to say those words... but he/she should say SOMETHING before i'm gonna consider it an equal) The Concept of owning black homo sapiens or owning any color canine is comparable to fermenting orange... er.. oranges... and fermenting red... erm apples... The day we "progress" so far as fido tells me he's gonna S&#& on my carpet and i better like it is the day I figure we HAVE gone topsy turvey and the clueless among us have won and its only a matter of time before someone realizes the giant got old and is ripe for a take down.

you know - scientists have proven that plants scream when cut... you might want to quit eating or you might be harming a different living thing... Pssst... don't mow yer lawn either you bad person. Gonna report you to PETP ... people for the ethical treatment of plants. Thier membership isn't very high - apparently they die off to quick since they don't eat any plants and are in cahootz w/ PETA... Last i heard they were processing dirt so as to make sure it didn't have any living microbes in it they might in-advertantly eat and cause harm to.... the diet isn't going mainstream i don't think.....(this last a joke ... just in case you think my /sarcasm is real....altho i HAVE read that plants do scream when cut....)

oh wait - plants DO live. where does life begin/end for you? If it grows does it not live? its ok to eat vegtables/mow the lawn/trim the bushes cause... erm... they can't BARK at you?

Just wondering where the line of your superiority ends, and enables you to tell the rest of the public where thiers SHOULD end... because of the way yours does.

J/Tharg!

LAK
September 12, 2004, 05:35 AM
CentralTexasYes, if in violation of animal cruelty laws. You do understand that industry has regulations on killing animals for food production???

And just what are the industry regulations on killing animals for food? What are their regulations for killing animals who are for whatever reason deemed unsuitable? And what are the regulations for persons outside of industry killing for food? Like hunters? What about animals that are classed as "pests" and vermin which are not intended for food, but are simply unwanted?

2nd Amendment
September 12, 2004, 11:53 AM
Because the ones I see turned in at the local shelter are blinded and maimed in dog fights were people bet on them for fun. Where dogs backs are broken by drunk boyfriends who got mad the dog bit him for putting a cigarette out on it's back, etc. etc. etc. If you don't understand why I'm sorry for ya...

These individual acts by specific persons do not alter the gulf between human and animal. They also do not taint the vast number of people who enjoy and care for the pets and livestock they have. These events are not a reason to try and arbitrarily alter the fact that these are lesser creatures which we have, by dint of either superior evolution or decision of God, the right to decide tha fate of.


I'm sure that was said in a friendly discussion just before the Civil War about slaves also.

Doesn't matter if it was or was not. Apples and oranges discussion. Slavery was a discussion of other humans. This is a discussion of animals. A lower, non-self-aware life form(s) unable to engage in most, if any, abstract thought or self-recognition. They are not US and, frankly, we are not THEM. We are animals only in the most simplistic sense: We are not minerals or plants. We share certain biological functions with them. Big whoop.

No, the only way this sort of change will happen is if we come to accept that we are somehow no better than them. The ultimate levelling of the standard of living. Why complain about a globalized Third World living standard when we're no different than animals in the field or trees, eh? It's a modernist(post-modernist?) bit of feel-good controlism and no, I can't imagine living in a world like that.

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

I like this little graphic: http://www.mikecaswell.com/awcountdown.gif

:)

CentralTexas
September 12, 2004, 12:20 PM
It's been stated I'm abnormal, a "Vegan" (is that a dirty word or just an insult?), learned new science facts.

I could go through each argument such as the old tired-
"No matter what you do, drive, breath, wear cologne" you harm animals or whatever other dreck the meat industry (follow the money trail) put's out
and point out that maybe YOU should not drive or have guns as there could be an accident involving a child ya know. Sarah Brady selling "How to Debate" tapes now?

It's simple, I am in great health as are the vast majority of non meat eaters. I do so for my view of what's ethical, I don't expect you to do the same. I can live without causing any unecessary pain or suffering and have a very happy life so I put out that effort. Don't like it? Fine! But don't go for the character assasination or you are superior crap.
If you would like to take this way off topic thread to the Round Table I'd be happy to just go into insult mode instead of rational debate.
CT

Tamara
September 12, 2004, 12:28 PM
a "Vegan" (is that a dirty word or just an insult?)

A Vegan is a vegetarian who does not use animal products at all. For example, your garden variety vegetarian is usually okay with eating a Krispy Kreme, but a Vegan (http://www.vegan.org/) wouldn't if it contained eggs or animal fat.

Since it's what you claim to be, I figured you'd like to know the term.

If you would like to take this way off topic thread to the Round Table I'd be happy to just go into insult mode instead of rational debate.

I'm closing this way off-topic thread. If you wish to re-open the debate in RT, feel free. "Insult mode", as you call it, is not welcome there, either.

If you enjoyed reading about "Dog shooter get's justice from victim" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!