Hordes Herds of vicious animals around the world are attacking and killing people with increasing frequency. It was reported in today’s New York Times – the threat is real. These savage creatures often attack from behind and frequently single out disabled people as their victims.
In 16 cases, “the animal was deemed to have purposefully struck the victim,” the report states. In 5 other cases, people were crushed against walls or by gates shoved by the cattle. Ten of the attacks were by bulls, 6 by cows and 5 by “multiple cattle.” A third of the deaths were caused by animals that had been aggressive in the past.
All but one of the victims died from head or chest injuries; the last died after a cow knocked him down and a syringe in his pocket injected him with an antibiotic meant for the cow. In at least one case the animal attacked from behind, when the person wasn’t looking. Older men with arthritis and hearing aids have the highest risk of being injured by livestock, the report says, probably because they don’t hear the animals charging and can’t move fast enough to get out of the way.
It’s time to end the madness. People, we need Bovine Specific Legislation – and we need it now!
Did you know:
Along with the dozens of bovine-related fatalities that occur worldwide each year, many people are also severely injured – even permanently handicapped – by bovine attacks. The threat posed by these vicious animals is unacceptable. To deal with the threat we propose the following:
- Bovine creatures must be kept muzzled and leashed hobbled or safely confined in sturdy box stalls labeled with appropriate warning signs.
- All bovines must be spayed / neutered and those with a history of aggression should be immediately slaughtered euthanized.
- Bovines found roaming at large should be seized and slaughtered. (nom!)
- Bovines will heretofore be banned from all county fairs, 4H events, rodeos and pit barbecue promotions.
- Persons being caught with illegal bovines (intact animals, unlicensed animals and those without properly color-coded RFID ear tags) will be subject to fines and imprisonment.
Once we’ve successfully eliminated the terrible threat bovines present to society we must move on to outlaw properly legislate swimming pools, automobiles, bathtubs, roller skates, stiletto heels, hot dogs – and the gutless, gormless politicians who waste their time and our money as they focus on promulgating this kind of pointless, time and money wasting crap legislation rather than dealing with important – but potentially controversial – issues that might come back to bite them in the ass.
August 1, 2009 at 4:00 am
Back in December the HSUS bragged that a record number of animal “protection” laws had been passed in 2008. Their website states that; “The nation’s largest animal protection organization ushered in a whole new era of policies for animals by helping to pass 91 new animal protection laws this year, surpassing the previous record number of 86 new laws enacted in 2007.”
While we’re absolutely in favor of well-written legislation that improves the lives of animals — it is our opinion that the goal of the “protective” legislation pushed by HSUS lobbyist is to end all use of animals. HSUS lobbies for breed-specific legislation, limit laws, mandatory spay-neuter and overly restrictive breeding regulations designed to put hobby, show and working dog breeders out of business. While 2008 saw record numbers of these kinds of laws introduced at every level across the country, 2009 may be even worse. According to a press release just posted by United States Sportsmen’s Alliance:
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) couldn’t be happier with the formation of a new group of Congressmen that will promote its agenda.
On February 18, U.S. Representatives Jim Moran (D- VA) and Elton Gallegy (R- CA) announced the formation of a new Congressional Animal Protection Caucus. The goal of the group is to get like-minded members of Congress together and promote animal rights policy in Washington, D.C. through forums and briefings.
According to the Humane Society Legislative Fund (HSLF), the legislative wing of the HSUS, the new caucus will “take lawmaking for the animals to the next level.” HSLF went on to gush in its blog, “we could not be more excited about their leadership of this new organization of humane lawmakers.”
This group of legislators, also known as the “Creatures’ Caucus” appears to be operating under the false assumption that HSUS speaks for American pet owners. A press release published yesterday on Moran’s website prominently features this quote:
“The American public is united in its belief that all animals deserve humane treatment,” said Wayne Pacelle, President and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States. “The newly constituted Congressional Animal Protection Caucus will help better align our federal policies with public opinion, and we are excited to work closely with its leaders and with the entire Congress to combat cruelty and abuse.”
NEWSFLASH Representative Moran — the beliefs of the American public are in no way “united” with those of the HSUS. Most of us enjoy eating meat, drinking milk, wearing leather and wool and owning pets. Lots of us enjoy hunting and fishing. Many of us love “dangerous” breeds of dogs. And unlike the self-rightous a$$#*les at HSUS, we don’t feel entitled to force our social / religious / moral standards on other people.
Folks, this is something we all need to keep an eye on. Write to your senators and representatives and let them know that “Humane Wayne” and his vicious pack of mindless, mean-spirited monsters don’t speak for you. According to USSA:
As of press time, a full list of other U.S. Representatives joining the caucus was not available. However, the USSA will let sportsmen know as the names become available. Each member of the caucus should be contacted by constituents in their districts.
Don’t wait for that list to come out. Call or write NOW. We all need to make sure that we are the voice our elected representatives hear.
February 19, 2009 at 10:19 pm
I’ve had a nagging suspicion that an increasing number of dog-related laws were being passed across the country. Apparently (and unfortunately), I’m not crazy. Last month the HSUS reported that a record number of animal “protection” laws were passed in 2008. Their website brags that; “The nation’s largest animal protection organization ushered in a whole new era of policies for animals by helping to pass 91 new animal protection laws this year, surpassing the previous record number of 86 new laws enacted in 2007.”
But do we really need more laws? A post on “The Tyranny of Relativism” I read today at Never Yet Melted got me thinking, once again, on the function of culture in society (it’s an excellent piece BTW – go read it). As I commented there:
It’s that constellation of fixed values otherwise known as culture that gives us the security and cohesiveness that allows us to recognize and accept those whose values are different from ours.
What the relativists seem to have forgotten (or prefer to overlook) is that the unwritten rules and sanctions of culture are fluid and mutable. Allowances are made. Slights are remembered and often forgiven. But in a governmental or relativist system we are forced to endure rigid, compulsory laws and regulations. We can’t make allowances (that wouldn’t be fair, now – would it?) and transgressions are always punished but then supposed to be forgotten.
Though they may seem to be more rigid and restrictive at first glance; culture and ethics are much more fluid and adaptable than relativism and regulation.
Because they are fluid, mutable and forgiving, cultural mores are a much healthier way to guide general group behavior (i.e. things like excess barking, picking up poop and pet limits) than laws and regulations are. But if we don’t need more of them, why are increasing numbers of laws and regulations controlling life with our four-legged friends being promulgated? A thought-provoking answer comes from a piece written by Michael Brandow in today’s New York Yimes about the city’s poop-scooping law:
I believe that many dog “problems” are symptoms of other concerns that have little or nothing to do with dogs. Like rabies paranoia, these fears tend to be culturally based. Why did a large number of cities suddenly decide to get tough on dog owners after 2001? Just as anti-dog sentiment in the 1970s was a way to express anger over the urban crisis, believe it or not, the new wave of canine waste laws seems to be inspired by the threat of global terrorism. New attitudes on how far we have the right to go in dictating personal behavior, and to monitor compliance with laws, are leading to cleaner surfaces — but at what price? People are taking age-old grudges and dressing them as public safety issues. Suddenly the whole world is on orange alert for sidewalk bombs.
We’ve got all this unresolved stress related to abstract, diffuse, on-going pressures like “is there anything left in my 401K?” “did they really put melamine in Oreos?” and “will Al Queda bomb shopping malls?” Add in the fact that we have an enemy that is, for the most part, nameless and faceless — and even the Department of Homeland Securityadmits that the potential health risks of unresolved fear and stress may outweigh the benefits of government terrorist threat alerts. So, we cope by bitching about what a jerk our neighbor is and vote to pass a law that will make the ignorant b***ard get rid of his stoopid barking, crapping dog.
But do these laws regulating general group behavior really accomplish anything? Referring specifically to New York’s dog poop law Brandow writes:
You are never going to catch one in a thousand people, not even if you live in a police state. Believing otherwise is only going to give you high blood pressure. Worse, every time you dial 311 and complain, you are giving government yet another opportunity to point a finger at those terrible dog owners. This serves a political purpose, just as it did in the ’70s. It distracts from matters weightier than a few stray piles, and gets government off the hook on the real problems that seem beyond its grasp.
Breed specific legislation, limit laws, mandatory spay-neuter and similar regulations don’t really accomplish much — but, compared to important things like campaign finance reform or balanced budgets these kinds of laws are really easy to write, enact and then — conveniently — forget about. The legislators and lobbyists who “championed” the laws get their sound-bites. The wack-jobs at HSUS get another notch in their Naugahyde belts and life goes on. Well, that is, except for dogs and dog owners who are now forced to endure yet another set of rigid, compulsory (and often non-sensical) laws and regulations that complicate our lives without solving any problems.
In the current state of things, dog-related legislation mostly affects law-abiding citizens who license their pets, give them regular veterinary care and engage in other activities that put them in the system’s database. The irresponsible morons whose untrained, uninnoculated, unrestrained, unlicensed, unsocialized animals bark incessantly, have unwanted litters and attack the mailman fly under the radar until after they’ve committed the offenses these laws are designed to prevent.
Increased respect for and adherence to (gasp!) mainstream cultural mores would greatly reduce problems caused by things like noise and dog poop. The very un-sexy options of education and increased enforcement of existing laws could significantly mitigate issues related to animal suffering, but these kinds of actions don’t generally lead to newspaper and TV interviews. Unfortunately, increased enforcement results in media reports that arrests have gone up — which will, of course, be spun by the press to say that problems have gotten worse. And no politician wants to be associated with that kind of publicity.
So instead of dealing with our pet-related problems within a flexible, forgiving system of common-sense cultural mores – we regulate them in a completely rigid legal system. The politicians win. The lobbyists win. And dogs lose.
January 10, 2009 at 3:47 am
Complaints about canine misbehaviors, such as nuisance barking, are increasing across the country. This is a disturbing trend for responsible dog owners because, in a backlash effect, many cities, counties and states are passing increasingly restrictive laws affecting pet ownership. Spay and neuter laws, breed bans, pet limit laws and other restrictions are being passed in a landslide effect across the country.
Why is this happening? Partly because lazy journalists looking for an simple and sensational story to cover either fail to adequately research stories or mis-state facts and partly because animal rights groups (as opposed to animal welfare groups) who want to end pet ownership are pouring enormous amounts of money into supporting these efforts.
The sad irony is that dogs aren’t the problem – PEOPLE ARE. People who are, in most cases, already breaking EXISTING laws. We don’t need more laws, we need better law enforcement.
If your city, county, township or state is considering passing additional laws limiting your right to own and enjoy dogs, please go here: Where there is an excellent sample letter opposing pet limit laws. Make the right kind of noise and use Jim’s letter to let your legislators know that a majority of law-abiding pet owners refuse to be punished for the transgressions committed by an irresponsible minority.
If you have a neighbor who’s barking dogs annoy you, don’t call the police to report them. Make the right kind of noise. Instead of filing a complaint, politely explain to your neighbor that his dog’s excess barking is bothering you. If he doesn’t listen (or can’t hear you because of his dog’s barking) look into one of these nifty devices to solve the problem amicably.
If you have a dog – give it enough mental and physical stimulation to keep it from annoying your neighbors.
If you aren’t part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.
January 15, 2008 at 1:08 am