Exploiting Victims, Pitbull Style

I will be updating in the future about the story of Kevin, the little four year old boy brutally mauled by a vicious pitbull named Mickey, the insanity that followed, the lies perpetuated to further the canine world's bloodiest propaganda, and the outrageous culmination of what can only be described as an absolute abortion (and I hate using that word in an abstract sense, but it's the only one that 'fits') of justice.

However, it is so deep, so complex, and there is so much material to present, that that will be a while yet in coming.  dogsbite.org, Craven Desires, and affiliates in their extensive blogrolls have done a wonderful job thus far of covering the issue.  I am making this post before I go heavier because this one is more urgent.  It's imperative to warn people of scams immediately.

The Facebook group FOR THE LOVE OF KEVIN* is NOT a genuine victim support page.  I repeat; the Facebook group FOR THE LOVE OF KEVIN is a RUSE, designed to draw in people curious about the issue and perpetuate forth more pitbull apologia, silencing those that would call them out on it.  This would certainly not be the first time pit zealots have created identical victim pages for the purposes of disseminating misinformation to the general public (that's a whole other post in the making, believe-you-me), and disturbingly, it won't be the last.
 * https://www.facebook.com/welovekevinvincente

Quite telling is the fact that comments by victim advocates and those sensitive to the issue were aggressively stripped.  Despite claims that the page is not about pitbull advocacy, in a thread where victim advocates had only a handful of sensitive and to the point comments asking for a little discretion, the only comments that were allowed to remain where those of another commenter issuing forth post after post of pitbull propaganda--posts which had nothing to do with Kevin or anything else but breed advocacy.  The multitude of these off-topic posts remain untouched. The group's function is not following its stated form.

I will summarize with my personal FB post issued to warn people about the Facebook group FOR THE LOVE OF KEVIN *
*yes, I am purposely repeating the name of the group to boost it's relevance in search engines--I want to warn as many people as possible that the Facebook group FOR THE LOVE OF KEVIN is a ruse, a scam, and a gross exploitation of a family already too abused and misrepresented (when represented at all)

What's really going on at the For the Love of Kevin facebook group??
WARNING!!

I've been one of the biggest supporters of the Facebook For the Love of Kevin group. I have shared links to it all over the place, outside of Facebook, even. I have directed people there so they can learn the truth about what really happened, and so they can proffer assistance to a family who *really* needs and deserves it.

However, when a thinly veiled attempt at pitbull apologia started spamming a victim's page with pitbull propaganda... and I called her out on it, albeit POLITELY, my focus being on staying on topic and supporting Kevin and his family...
I was kicked from the group.

I would seriously reconsider what you share there, guys, and I'm starting to wonder just who the mod is there and what they're really up to. This is unbelievable. I'm beyond disgusted, and flabbergasted. I mean, have I missed something? Is it now the sane thing to do to post pictures of pitbulls and kids all over the page of a CHILD pitbull VICTIM? Is that classy now?

As an aside... can anyone here speak Spanish and get into contact with Kevin's mother? The only thing we have from her is translated bits from TV interviews. I'm wondering if the family is actually getting anything from these so-called support groups soliciting donations. I wouldn't donate a red cent more till we get to the bottom of this.

EDIT; it does not appear to be a direct kick, but that the mod was so obsessive and incensed about the thread they were deleting comments by me and others immediately upon submission, which gave the illusion of being blocked. The image was removed* but supplanted by childish accusations of hate--over issuing that pitbull victims often feel re-traumatized by the images of pitbulls and children (especially families who've had their own children savaged and even killed by these dogs, some of which were doppelgangers of the one in the photo in question). Concern for the emotional and mental well-being of the people who can empathize with KEVIN--who the page is s'posed to be about--the MOST=hate?

I really must've touched on a nerve. That sort of extremism comes from someone who's been unwillingly outed and has to cover their tracks, but has no real means of rebuttal other than going ad hominem at the truth-sayer.

*EDITEDITEDIT the image was not removed, just displaced further down the feed by a decent post of Kevin and Flor AND the puerile you-are-haters paragraph-long-rant (also a bit telling in a group where just about every update that is not about thinly veiled pit-a-ganda is rarely composed of more than a sentence or two)

Well, I may get kicked yet, since I piped in after a request for Kevin's family's contact info, wanting to be sure anything issued forth is ACTUALLY going to the family, and the group seems a bit shady to me...
I think we'll have a definitive answer in the group's recourse. Kick=they are a SCAM.

UPDATE; scam status confirmed.  Other Kevin supporters/victim advocates had the same experience, reading through no less than 20 other accounts of shady behavior and experiences between supporters and the group.  These harassed and silenced voices belong to kind and generous people with their own painful tragedies, who pointed out that images of pitbulls and children are often re-traumatizing and ignite flashbacks, panic attacks, night terrors, anxiety, and PTSD.  (And these flashbacks aren't the stuff of band-aids and soap--we're talking degloved (i.e. traumatically 'skinned'--what happened to KEVIN'S FACE) and/or severed body parts, exposed bone, dangling eyes, crushed bones/skulls, spines ripped out, decapitations...) 

...When confronted with the question of where their focus was, what's more important... Kevin, or a dog breed's reputation... they kicked and/or removed commenting ability from anyone sensitive to the pitbull issue (i.e.--Kevin's peers, fellow victims).  In doing so, it is crystal clear where the group's priorities are... and are not. 

They favor alienating those that help Kevin most to coddle and promote dangerously misleading conceptions about dog behavior and biology (of which, fighting breed dogs have a unique physiology--dog behaviorist and animal professional Alexandra Semyonova describes these scientific and universal traits most succintly in her books and (is quoted) exerpts on dogsbite.org and affiliated blogs). 

So, before you open your pocketbook to the FOR THE LOVE OF KEVIN Facebook group, remember that Kevin is NOT priority numero uno.  I recommend trying to contact the Vicente family directly if so inclined.  Unfortunately I do not yet have the means/info to do so.

like battered woman's syndrome... but with more denial and recklessness!

Wow... a day after I write about Kevin, Sport, and horrific pitbull attacks that result in blame, contempt, or apathy for the victims and a perverse, grossly disproportionate frenzy of favor for violent and unpredictable animals...

...comes a gruesome attack on the very sort of cold, ignorant, and/or immature human-specific-sadist that regularly advertises for the breed.  Her rhetoric is typical zealot propaganda tripe such as:

"[posting] on Facebook ... 'There's not [sic] such thing as a dangerous dog. Just a dangerous owner.'
"Another status was accompanied by a picture of a dog with its bottom in the air, reading: ‘To everyone who thinks that pitbulls are mean - you can kiss my hiney.’"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2577329/Woman-22-left-skull-exposed-horrific-mauling-suspected-pitbull-terrier-disused-quarry.html

Here we have a typical 'holier than thou' animal advocate that fails to address any of the REAL and RELEVANT issues of the breed, while sanctimoniously ignoring or mocking those possessing any real depth of investigation and/or experience about the issue, asserting how allegedly ignorant BSL advocates/pitbull realists are.  Among the universal attributes that emerge with type of person is an angry refusal to read ANYTHING that does not sync with what they want to believe (celebrity sound-bites and surface drivel from sites that *benefit* from advocating the breed). i.e. confirmation bias
Another trait is a propensity to wax on about how 'close-minded' and uneducated a safety advocate is.

So now, one (with a second victim as collateral, I might add) of those staunchly stubborn 'breed ambassadors' has had her chosen breed rip her scalp off and deeply lacerate her face.

will she still insist it is only bad owners that are the problem?
Will she sacrifice her personal character on the altar of pitbull advocacy?

The most disturbing thing is... she just might.
It's happened before. 
No, I'm not kidding.


http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=8605264

Bill Lesinki knew his friend's pitbull since its puppyhood.  Still, that penultimately meant nothing--despite claims that properly socialized pitbulls are no more dangerous than other dogs, or that they *must* be trained/abused to attack, Monster the pitbull attacked someone he was very familiar with, and had no prior incidents of aggression with this man.

"I was just in shock that the dog did this because I was just playing with the dog prior to him biting me - about five minutes prior to that," he said.

Lesinski was visiting his neighbor and, after playing with his pit bull, stopped to take a closer look at his neighbor's stereo.

"I bent over, crouched down to look at the subwoofer, when the dog lunged forward and grabbed me by the face and ripped the front of my face off," he said.

Lesinski's nose was torn off. He was taken to one hospital where doctors tried treating him. But by the time he was transferred to Northwestern Memorial, it was too late for plastic surgeons to re-attach it.

"Basically, I'm going to have to be like this for the next 9-12 months because of ... procedure after procedure that needs to be performed," he said.

He will need at least six surgeries to reconstruct his face which could rack up $200,000 in medical bills. Lesinski just started his own towing business and does not have insurance.

Still, he continues to regurgitate the tired 'it's not the dogs, it's the owners' deflection.  (I wonder what his long-time friend feels about that, since it implies he is a 'bad owner'...)


http://sruv-pitbulls.blogspot.com/2013/06/kansas-to-kalamazoo.html

Sorena and Justin Frostad are another example of how irrational and disturbing pitbull worship can be.  They took the ill advice of pitbull apologists and figured they could introduce their newborn, Ariona, to their pitbulls (in much the same fashion as one would do with other dogs).  They held their child close to the fence so that the dogs could sniff her and familiarize themselves with her scent.

With any other non-fighting breed this would be a perfectly reasonable course of action.  Unfortunately, one of their dogs acted out it's violent genetic heritage and suddenly snapped out--THROUGH the fence--and severed their 2-DAY-old daughter's leg.

"The parents of the mauled Coffeyville infant, Sorena and Justin Frostad, spoke with members of the press several days after the attack. During the interview they refused to answer questions about the pit bulls, and made no mention of the loss of their daughter's leg. In fact, they appeared not to acknowledge the lifelong repercussions of their daughter's missing limb, and their responsibility for the loss."

Even more disturbing is the mother's own written response, which insinuates that, since neither the breed nor herself is at fault, the severing of her baby's girl's leg was nothing more than an 'accident'... and that being the case, there is no cause--according to that un-logic--to stop her from exposing her daughter to pitbulls in the future.  Why else find it so absolutely crucial to continue being a part of the bloody cycle of propaganda and violence?

As a baby, Ariona won't remember the attack or the loss of her leg, but her future is riddled with guaranteed hardships and agony.  How will she feel about pitbulls in the future?  It would stand to reason that, quite reasonably, she would at the very least be compelled to avoid them.  Yet, there's a disturbing possibility she might not...


http://tbo.com/sun-city-center/fundraiser-set-for-amputee-in-sun-city-center-20131113/

Vaughan Chambers was savaged by a pitbull when she was 10 years old.  The dog clamped down to the bone and ripped away the overlaying skin and muscle.  She immediately received 286 stitches and ultimately wound up enduring more than 20 surgeries to save her leg. 
Still, that was all in vain. 

The problems persisted throughout her life, and at 39 years old, her lower left leg died and was immediately amputated below the knee. The prosthetic to replace it, alone, cost $14,800. Financial devastation is the promise of her initial encounter with pitbulls, just as it is for every pitbull attack survivor.

Despite all this, she is a fierce activist for pitbull propaganda.




http://blog.dogsbite.org/2011/08/2011-fatality-pregnant-pacifica-woman.html

Darla Nappora was a member of BADRAP, perhaps the largest organization manufacturing pitbull falsehoods in the name of deifying the breed.  Her own pitbulls killed her, and thusly also terminated the life of her unborn child.  Yet, when it is so obvious that such a fatal mauling is without rhyme or reason, her widower STILL continued to advocate for the breed that savagely killed his wife and unborn child.  Greg claimed his wife's death was nothing more than a "freak accident". 

"They are the most loving animals I have ever had in my life. Whatever happened right now was not the breed's fault," said Napora, who found his wife dead when he returned to the couple's Pacifica home from his construction job with plans to take her to lunch Thursday. "It was just a freak accident."

He even had the dog who ripped Darla's throat out buried with her, and made a spectacle of asserting he forgave the animal.



http://blog.dogsbite.org/2013/12/2013-dog-bite-fatality-valencia-county-woman-killed-by-pit-bull.html

Last year, Michal Nelson was killed by one of the family pets when she entered its pen to break up ice in the dog's water-bowl.  Her body--upon which the dog was perched--was discovered by one of her children.  Like Darla, the pitbull had ripped out Michal's neck.

Boyfriend Nicholas Hare excused, diminished, and dismissed her death, and was far more concerned with the loss of her killer and its peers; (emphasis added here)

Nicholas Hare
This something that came completely out of left field.
I mean, it was her time...
As horrible and tragic as it was, it was…
It's really hard to lose five family members in one day basically [referring to four pit bulls authorities euthanized due to their aggression and his girlfriend{'s death}], because they were our children for years and years.

Not a service breed

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/leeds-dog-attack-emma-bennett-2913587

"Mum-of-four Emma Bennett, 27, was found unconscious at her home in Leeds with horrendous injuries to her head and face...

"Witnesses spoke of “crazy” scenes as up to 30 police officers, including an armed team, descended on the street in Leeds.

"Another shocked neighbor, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “I saw Emma in the back of the ambulance as ­paramedics were pounding on her heart. She was just floppy.”

"...it wanted to go for her whenever she was having a fit [epilepsy]."

 A fourth (or is it fifth?) person to be mauled during an epileptic seizure. She is younger than I am, with two more children than I have. This is why pit bull bans make sense. This is why pitbulls are grossly inappropriate for use as service dogs. They are too unstable to handle even a life of gentle love and care at home with the people who cherish and feed them. The last thing a community needs is to have such volatile animals roaming the community at large, forcing their way into venues as "service" dogs to interact with strangers and all sorts of stimuli they are not accustomed to. 

 If they are unsafe at home, under good care, where they feel safe, know a routine, have no fears, have no worries, no unmet needs... where on earth can they be a safe companion? 

This is why safety advocates protested bringing pitbulls into a school full of small children for more propaganda fluff, ostensibly under the guise of 'literacy'. And what makes these canine critters such excellent tools that aid literacy? What amazing quality is it that somehow is deeply transformative of a child's reading skills?
They "listen".
That's all.

Any other smaller, safer breed could "listen". Fanatics trumpet "any dog can bite" as if it were a legitimate and powerful counterpoint to gruesome and grievous pitbull attacks....*  well, then, "any dog can listen". Something that does not pose great risk of dismembering children without provocation. Any animal incapable of tearing children apart could be a substitute. Why not a "literacy hamster"? They can "listen". Even a pet rock made of dung would be more appropriate.
 (in itself a fallacy; yes, any dog can bite, but the end result is NOT the same. hell, even plants can 'bite'--venus flytrap--ergo, the ability to bite does NOT define equality or similarity with a specific animal or breed)

Many pitbull fanatics brag about how they skirt bans and ordinances by obfuscating their dog's breed or arbitrarily registered it as a service dog, in hopes of using the legal system to impose their will, and their dogs on the public.  Some are deluded enough to genuinely beleive these animals are great service dogs, on par with any other service animal.

A bloody and escalating history of violence would beg to differ.  Even discounting all attacks on humans and non-canine animals, the fact remains that these dogs have an undeniable neurosis for 'going game' on other dogs.  It's what they were bred for, excel at, and succumb to most frequently.  

REAL guide dogs, of time-tested temperament to excel in this line of work are frequently attacked by pitbulls.  Many do not survive.  These are animals that spent hundreds of hours being trained and earning experience in what they do.  Their testing was complex and lengthy--a hard-won prize, and they have no parallel.

By contrast, pitbull 'service dogs' are of the Cracker Jack variety; a person sends a paltry amount of money to register their dog as a service dog--with no training, no testing, no verification--slap a vest on their animal, mislead and falsely advertise the breed.  The result is in epileptics being caught unawares and grossly mauled--a few even unto death--because of the pitbull service dog farce.

A TRUE service/guide dog must be able to accompany their charge anywhere and everywhere--which means they will be out and about in the community, exposed to all sorts of environs, people, and animals.  It makes no sense to task a breed that cannot stand to be around other dogs/with a psychotic compulsion to kill other dogs with such circumstances that set them up to fail--and inflict a lot of collateral damage.

Dog breeds are tailor made for their tasks, their tasks are an element of conduct, and ergo, their behaviors are a product of their breeding.

Pitbulls were bred to spontaneously and unrelentingly tear other animals apart, and the rising death toll issues that they perceive humans to be in that category.  Their aggression is neurotic and generalized (NOT animal/dog specific).  If someone TRULY loved the breed/their pitbull, they would realistically manage their expectations for the dog and operate with a 'big picture' perspective allowing for the breed-specific tendencies of their animal. 

Pitbulls are a horrific mismatch with the task of being a service dog, as poor a pairing as expecting a teacup chihuahua to herd sheep, a pug to retrieve water fowl, a dachshund to race, a greyhound to pull arctic sled teams, or a Pomeranian to take down wild boars.  These are simple facts of reason, common sense, and biology. 

This is how they will lick you to death

Some thoughts on another's FB post;

considering all the attacks (body parts torn off and reduced to insalvagable hamburger) and fatalities this year, this child got off 'light'. There's nothing 'light' about this. What this is... is tragic, and frustratingly preventable. This girl, along with hundreds of other grievously wounded/killed people (often children) is why I find the 'lick you to death' diversion/cop-out extremely offensive. Anyone who utters such words with seriousness behind them, automatically winds up on my $h*t list until they wise up, acquire a little bit of humanity/compassion, and grow a brain.

Many erroneously trust in the safety of proximity to the breed, fostered by the lick-you-to-death misconception... like this man... and he lost most of his tongue for it;  http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/23083854/man-loses-portion-of-his-tongue-in-dog-attack

Wholly deceived by the propaganda, and with the additional amelioration of years and years of non-aggression that lull people into a false sense of security... a friend of mine lost her child, to a dog named "Kissy Face" because she loved to lick "kiss" (hurk!) so much. Her two year old baby boy was decapitated by Kissy Face; and as she succumbed to the horror of the situation, she (Kissy) began mauling his lifeless body all over again.
http://blog.dogsbite.org/2013/12/video-mother-of-fatal-pit-bull-attack.html

The phrase 'lick you to death' is a blight upon the most innocent and helpless of humanity, and a tell-tale indicator of either gross ignorance or greatly deluded, pompous narcissism (lion-tamer complex).

Entreaty for re-evaluation

As I frequently do, I wrote a comment on a post and it just wouldn't quit. I end up writing so much stuff it's almost obscene to pass as a comment, and should be a post all its own. I was reading this today--> http://metisrebelunleashed.wordpress.com/2012/08/15/why-pit-bull-lovers-piss-me-off

And THIS is my response :B
(it's awaiting moderation on the blog itself, probably not visible yet)

Great write up, though a few points are off.... pitbulls need not be improperly trained/socialized or be abused to gruesomely maul someone out of the blue. They possess innate idiopathic aggression... which canNOT be tested for, predicted, trained out, or environmentally harnessed. It is NOT animal specific, man-biters were NOT culled and, if anything, pitbull fanatics today further pervert and contradict themselves by making such a false claim... all the while hysterically lobbying to free/save pitbulls that have savagely/fatally mauled people. That is certainly not culling "man-biters". As one of my betters put it;
[near-paraphrase/reworded in my syntax]
"They were bred to kill members of their own pack [ala dogfighting] and now that humans have been adopting them into their 'packs', the blood is flowing."

I strongly urge anyone and everyone, in furthering their reading about the truth of pitbulls, to use a source that is:

• --objective,
• --fair,
• --uses science, evidence, and logic (rather than knee-jerk emotional appeals and fluff),
• --proffers documents,
• --evidence (video, pictures, etc.), and
• --testimony of formally qualified/educated professionals like;

• ----scientists,
• ----animal control,
• ----law enforcement (who have to deal with these dogs day in and day out),
• ----formally educated animal behaviorists,
• ----surgeons,
• ----veterinarians, and
• ----third party sources that do not have a vested interest in pitbull perception either way.

I also encourage reading multiple sources. I can name several pro-pit sites off the top of my head at any given moment. I can do the same for safety advocacy/truth-telling/ information/awareness/BSL sites.
The best site I've found offering any of this is http://dogsbite.org/ (which reports not just on pitbull attacks, but *all* SERIOUS--no superficial little scratches or cutaneous nips, but penetrating wounds--dog attacks).

The blogs and links are worth more than a gander too; as the tragic and agonizing gauntlet of pitbull mauling increases in frequency, so too, are there an increasing number of blogs on the issue. There are personal accounts of attacks and experiences (Confessions of Pitbull Victims, for one), and yes, some heavy emotion... however, these are blogs, not formal news sites, and many of the authors have been personally--self or loved one--attacked (in multiple ways; often harassed, bullied, stalked, identities stolen, false reports filed, etc. by pitbull extremists--I'm not kidding... check out http://fatherofdax.tumblr.com/ for some stomach churning examples), or have lost a loved one.

True, the founder of dogsbite.org is a pitbull attack victim herself, but having personal experience with a matter does not necessarily invalidate the legitimacy of their work. Susan G. Komen's Walk for the Cure and MADD come to mind. If anything, personal experience can help someone serve a greater purpose. That which is emotive and that which is real can be filtered through viewing/posting of external news, videos, reports, etc., which can imbue a cause with substance.

This issue is so so deep and complex, ...trying to explain it all would turn this comment page into an ocean of text that would better fit into volumes. Though dogsbite and its blog companions (17 Barks, The Truth About Pitbulls, and Craven Desires, in particular) address and thoroughly DEBUNK the myriad myths and propaganda that has thoroughly penetrated our society in the last 30 years... pitbull advocacy has succeeded in laundering the breed's image, so deeply that it becomes taboo to utter anything but praise for these animals. Anything else often makes one a social pariah and object of scorn.

The myths and fabrications they thoroughly debunk;

__pitbulls attack because they weren't properly socialized

__pitbulls attack because they weren't properly trained not to (note the innate vs. environmental contradiction in those two)

__BSL doesn't work

__BSL is more costly than no-BSL

__pitbulls are only dog aggressive

__pitbulls were once nanny dogs

__pitbull is not a breed

__it's all in how you raise them

__its bad owners not bad dogs

__pitbulls are just like any other dog

__the media hates pitbulls and never covers attacks from other dogs

__people misidentify pitbulls all the time

__pitbulls must be abused, neglected, or provoked to attack

__spaying and neutering will prevent attacks

__pitbulls are great family pets

__pitbulls are loyal

__man-biters were culled

__pitbulls are [appropriate] service dogs

__people who are attacked are attacked because they are idiots/ignorant and couldn't read the dog's body language

(pitbulls are unique in that they do NOT warn before they attack--no growl, no rising hackles, no lifted lip, no flattened ears, no tensing stance and tail, etc.. Dogmen--those that breed for and participate in dog fighting--call this sort of warning indicator a 'tell', and purposely bred it out of the animals to give them the element of surprise. A common feature witnesses/victims that survive attacks notice is how sudden, and how absolutely quiet an attack strikes.

Dogsbite, 17 Barks, and Craven Desires have a couple of great exposes on the history of dogfighting and the emergence of the pitbull breed.)

__people who lobby for BSL are 'haters' (and granted, there are *some* who do hate the breed, though they are the minority AND they have suffered greatly, pets dismembered, people losing body parts, watching a loved one at the brink of death, or worse--faces torn off, limbs severed, decapitated, etc..) that "just don't like the way a dog looks"...

For most, this is NOT about hating a breed, but PROTECTING people--children comprise the majority of pitbull attack victims and most have not done anything to provoke the attack, many weren't even near the dog when it suddenly exploded like a rocket, crossing a great distance to rend and tear flesh (another attribute prized by dogmen--they call it 'scratching')--I personally actually think the animal is handsome in form,

...but I appreciate the dog the same way I can appreciate the beauty and strength of a tiger--from a distance. It does NOT belong in the living room, it does NOT belong in schools, it does NOT belong in backyards, it does NOT belong in a public park... you get the idea.

Pitbulls kill hundreds of other companion animals each year--and these perpetrators are just the socially integrated ones (i.e.pets), not counting the death toll caused by and within the dog-fighting circuit. They also kill and seriously injure livestock--animals as large as (surprise, surprise) bulls, horses, llamas, etc.. For small, family agricultural operations, this can represent a loss so large they lose the income to keep food on the table. Without BSL, they often have no legal recourse whatsoever, or that which is allotted is insultingly paltry.

I would like to add another point in how pitbull fanatics frenzied and fighting BSL actually works *against* the humane and compassion treatment of animals... the fact that continued integration makes it so so much easier to hide dog-fighting operations, enabling more growth in the illegal industry, and ergo greater animal suffering as a result.

Many can now boldly run in-sight by passing off the animals as domestic pets. They don't stand out among the neighbors anymore. To ban the breed would make the presence of pitbulls quite the giveaway. Limited in options and forced to sequester, dogmen would have a much more difficult time of operating--nonetheless expanding--their personal circuit.

Please note, a ban does not mean some form of canine Holocaust/genocide. Typically, banning requires spay/neuter of all existing animals, registering them, grandfathering existing pets from the ban, (so no..., no one is going to charge into another person's house, confiscate their animals, blow away their dogs with bazookas, round them up and gas them en masse, or whatever ridiculous scenario the fanatics concocted and are presenting now). Within fifteen years or so, these 'grandfathered' animals reach the end of their natural life and no more new pitbulls are to be acquired or created. For the interim, one must procure liability insurance, meet containment standards (these dogs are profoundly athletic and require more measures than merely fencing the average dog), have documented proof of vaccination, register their dog, and muzzle it in public.

I think you said it perfectly when you asked: "how does this punish 'responsible owners'?" Responsible owners should already be taking at least half these measures! People crying about punishment and see responsibility as a considerable and 'wrong' imposition is akin to someone claiming speed limits, traffic lights, and auto insurance punishes responsible drivers. Responsible drivers should *already* be operating with respect to those parameters... and therefore, have to make no changes and are in no way inconvenienced as a result formal regulation.

The people that rail about punishment and responsibility and so forth... are those who are *not* being responsible. If they were, why would they have a problem with making that responsibility formal (and thusly giving recourse to those harmed by the irresponsible)?

Service Dog Insanity--a faux 'crime' against a faux 'service dog'

I often comment on articles/posts/status updates in an extremely lengthy fashion, especially when I've had some proverbial food for thought.  These meandering diatribes become expansive enough to warrant their own post, and here is one such example;

the post:
http://www.dogsbitedecatural.com/2014/02/tallahassee-fl-pit-bull-medical-service.html
long story short; a woman went to visit a patient in the hospital and bought her 'service' dog pitbull with her.  Hospital staff asked her to evacuate the dog, and did not acquiesce to her flimsy cries of service animal. 
(note; any dog can be masked as a service dog by paying a $60 fee to title it as such--no training, tests, conditioning, exams, or third party evaluation needed.  These animals are most often touted as 'emotional support dogs'...These kinds of "service dogs" are the equivalent of pulling a degree out of a Cracker Jack box. .)

my response:

how lovely that [the syndication] omits entirely what the dog's alleged purpose is. A venue can only be charged with a misdemeanor in denying access if the dog is a SPECIFIC KIND of service dog, i.e. guide dog.  Service dog =/=guide dog. There IS a difference. She's not blind, deaf, or significantly impaired physically (though mentally seems quite another story). Those are the qualifiers for unrestricted admission.

I bet you dollars to donuts this 'service dog' is nothing more than 'an emotional support dog' with no real training or purpose, just a vest slapped onto what obviously appears to be a former fighting dog (the docked ears) or a "rescue".  Pitbull fanatics brag--yes brag--about how they arbitrarily turn their companion animal into a service dog to skirt ordinances that inconvenience them. They derive great pleasure from their 'endeavor' and crow about 'beating the system'. (I think one of the recent posts on Craven Desires showcases an example of one such service-dog-joke nutter.)

Additionally, the hospital was right! The dog is yet another contagion whose purpose does not outweigh the risk. Not by a long shot. You've got the canine champion of most unpredictable, sudden, most frequent, and most brutal destruction trapped in a building with society's most vulnerable and helpless people.

The woman was not in any need of medical care. Putting her out was not harming her in any significant way. She was a VISITOR, not even family, and not a patient. Ergo, the hospital was not denying a patient critical medical care. If she's so unstable she can't handle bringing along a friend or family member to substitute as her emotional crutch for a little bit, just to see a sick friend in a controlled environment (not exactly a trying and nerve wracking ordeal), she's not really fit to be in that environ anyway.

I do not say this to denigrate, but more as an observation of mental fitness for certain environs. I say this as a person who knows what its like to have a little baggage and not feel safe outside the home without a companion close by (this phase has passed, obviously), but here's the thing: I didn't expect the world to rearrange itself according to my dysfunction.

This smacks of boredom and a persecution complex.

The hospital was right, PERIOD.

Capital Regional Medical Center of Tallahassee, if you EVER "apologize", I hope it is naught more than this; "We are sorry this woman was uncooperative and deeply distressed by our unwavering dedication to put patient safety first." I know where I'm goin' if I ever need medical care in Tallahassee.

Addendum;
Her demand for an apology smacks of entitlement, but I do want to note that there is an instance in which I might understand that desire... if they were inappropriately rude or excessively terse with her from the get-go about it. But that would be more about the staff's behavior than the service dog policy.

Notably, she evacuated the premises when the 'threat' of law enforcement was issued, which tells me she knew on some level she was in the wrong--otherwise, why would someone with the temerity to hit the presses over her non-incident not stand her ground and assert she is doing no wrong?

Now some might say, perhaps, that maybe she was afraid her dog would be shot (since pitbull fanatics hyper-fixate on the armed self-defense people must use against these animals). However, in such a small place (ricochet risk), with countless witnesses (discouraging 'bad behavior'), with great risk to self and others if a firearm is discharged (oxygen tanks, etc.), law enforcement would not discharge their weapon unless absolutely necessary... i.e. the dog is aggressive and threatening.

If she left for the possibility of mere police presence alone (which, if she is truly convinced she's in the right, would be the only reason to prematurely depart), that means, on some level, she knew that contentious dog behavior in that situation was high enough a possibility to warrant a scootch-away.

If her animal is truly a service dog, on par with other service dogs, it should possess the necessary congruency of temperament, documented background, and [what should be] extensive training to not be phased by a plethora of varying environments and people. If crowds, machines, different sights and smells, or even a mere stranger elicits canine hostility, the dog is definitely NOT FIT to be a service dog...

and most likely was never formally qualified by a reputable testing method in the first place. In some jurisdictions, turning your dog into a service dog is as easy as filing some papers, paying a fee, and slapping a vest on your dog.

That, in conjunction with her fixating on the dog aspect of the scenario, and not mentioning anything about the staff attitude toward her, leads me to believe this is a case of--pardon the vernacular--attention whoring, most likely eagerly exploited by the pitbull lobby as a publicity stunt to push their product.  That may sound conspiracy theory-esque, but when a single fight purse can go for tens of thousands of dollars, and this underground 'sport' nets billions of dollars, you can bet your buns there is high incentive to blind and distract the public from the dog's true purpose, so that they might be easily camouflaged in communities, thus expanding the range of the industry.

Motives Unveiled

http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2012.php
http://nj1015.com/roselle-pit-bull-owner-begs-cops-to-kill-it/?trackback=tsmclip

^Compilation of families betrayed by their dogs, that wound up having to beg authorities to use lethal force to end the attack. Among these, are normal, everyday folk, like you, like me, like anybody. ...Good to their pets, not thugs, not abusers, not "dog-men", not deviants, not hoarders, not delinquents,
...many even feel they are helping make the world a better place, buying into the social hype that makes martyrs of dangerous animals and villains of realists and accurate journalism.


Unable to support their dogma with evidence or logic, pitbull zealots frequently resort to spewing emotional accusations of animal hatred at victims and BSL supporters. (Many of which are advocating for legislation to protect their own cherished pets/livestock/animal preserves, but that point is lost to them--save but for pitbulls--in the minds of intensely biased and callous fanatics.) It is an last/only-resort appeal intended to shut down 'the enemy' in the hopes that they will be stigmatized and dismissed as negative bigots.  

It's time to stop avoiding the issue, time to stop mislabeling and obfuscating. This isn't about bigotry or breed hatred. This isn't about persecuting innocent animals. This isn't advocating a genocide of some form.  This isn't the next Holocaust, as much as pitbull fanatics would have you believe BSL means all pitbulls will be rounded up en masse, ripped from their homes, and slaughtered ASAP. 
(Actually, extremely moderate methods of BSL with successful results have occurred in many cities and other countries--they involve grandfathering existing pets from the ban, but prohibiting further breeding, mandatory registration, spay/neuter, vaccinations, approved containment structures tailored to the breed, and liability insurance, muzzles in public, and much harsher penalties for any infractions.) 
This is about taking an appropriate stance in regard to a dangerous animal, allowing the truth to shine, and adopting more appropriate attitudes and measures.

The breed really isn't appropriate as a domesticated pet. It's a powerful, unpredictable, and highly lethal animal that requires treading with caution and all the due respect of any large, wild apex predator. It is no more bigoted to remove these animals from living rooms and family parks than it is to separate those human realms from wild bears and mountain lions. Appreciating those animals from a safe distance does not equate hatred and bigotry but common sense and decency. It is exercising understanding due caution for the animal... the stance is one of prevention.

In a way... you could even say... it's about... "respecting the beast".
This particular beast is man-made and man-maintained. Tragically, it is also man-tortured. The best favor to the breed would be to cease aiding and abetting dog-men by camouflaging their operations in our communities, drastically deplete and hinder their range of operation, starve their industry dry by cutting the crap and eliminating the further proliferation of a breed so grossly perverted and inbred (a breeding method used to produce an exaggerated trait as quickly as possible) that all that encounter the animal--including the animal itself--often suffer a bloody price.  It would be kinder to gently let the genetic "freak-show" expire. This could happen in as little as 15 years, if implemented.

Remember; this is about LOVING our communities and ENDING this circus of canine SADISM, NOT hatred.