Friday, April 4, 2014

cultures of cover-up

The Justice Department is investigating General Motors for concealing information about a defect in their cars. GM recalled 2.6 million cobalts but did not fix the defect. Thirteen deaths have been linked to the defective car in more than a decade.

California Senator Boxer and Missouri Senator McCaskill grilled GM chief MARY BARRA about the company's unscrupulous practices. Rumor has it charges will filed.

“You have to realize how novel that is — the possible use of criminal liability because of safety violations,” said John C. Coffee, a Columbia law professor who is a specialist in white-collar crime and director of the university’s Center on Corporate Governance.

Yes John, we realize.


Thirteen people were killed by pit bulls since last november 8.

Also since last november 8:
One county decided they would no longer label dogs by breed.
Five states introduced bills that would prohibit cities from passing laws that "discriminate" against pit bulls.
Twenty one cities repealed or considered repealing their breed specific ordinances.

Canine Homicides

General Motors


Animal Uncontrol said...

Aw, come ON - those Cobalt crashes MUST have been the fault of a nearby pedestrian, right.

Them being Nanny Cars and all!

Anonymous said...

I am so glad you blogged about this! I left this comment at dogsbitedecatural.

"GM is going through the ringer, and they have 13 deaths for faulty starters in how many years? We now have that many deaths by dangerous dogs in 3 months, just for this year alone!"

I'm not trying to diminish the deaths caused by GM, but I think far more people will be/have been affected by pit bulls.

The places where pit bulls are banned have statistics to back them up that BSL works. Is it really that hard to work toward protecting the general public? Let's make a big deal about defective parts in a "select breed" of cars, but let's not look at a defective breed of dog.


Anonymous said...

So, basically, in order not to be unfair to pit bulls, we have to let them kill, maim, maul, and disfigure us and our pets, or take our chances. Because it is unfair to discriminate against them. Because they feel that discrimination so acutely. They cry at night over it. Because they want to be like other dogs.

I see.

The only thing pits are crying over is that they can't get to the kid or dog in the next yard fast enough. The only cruelty is stopping them from doing what they were bred to do and want to do. So how about we don't breed them anymore and problem solved. No more cruelty, no more wanting to be like other dogs, no more unfulfilled desire.

They will never be like other dogs. If they are so sentient and aware that it is possible to discriminate against them, then we can try them as dangerous felons and they can go to doggy jail.

Dayna said...

This is where our culture of Political Correctness has gotten us. It's not ok to discriminate against a effing BREED of DOG anymore. A DOG!!! Lord help us because we are literally going to the dogs, the pit bull dogs.

Anonymous said...

I am so tired of maulers and the wails of indignation from their supporters. Get rid of them. They are useless except for dog fighting. Everything else they can do, another breed of dog can do better. They are so foul that sometimes people from a distance don't realize they are witnessing a mauling because the dogs look like they're playing. Their tails are wagging and they look happy because they are happy. Even if the person they're mauling has fed them and been kind to them every moment of their lives. They aren't normal creatures.

Unheeded Warnings on FB said...

I posted about this on FB, and I think this is an excellent comparison to describe the pit problem. A meme showing this, and an organized effort to get this message to politicians, might help.

People have a hard time grasping the problem because too many are totally overcome with sentimentality towards, and worship of, dogs. Most people don't like pits, but are not bothered enough because they don't grasp the severity of the problem (until it hits home).

Politicians cater to the loudest in the crowd, especially if they can get a public "win" without and losses (deaths do not count, only loss of funding and votes). We MUST make them feel the loss of support when they back these extreme pit nutter measures.

I want to see this criminal penalty being charged on people like Kumpf- he is easily as culpable as GM.

Mom in Eugene said...

Anon says:
"If they are so sentient and aware that it is possible to discriminate against them, then we can try them as dangerous felons and they can go to doggy jail."

Nutters want to have it both ways- either pits KNOW they are hated, or they do not. Nutters rather toss their OWN human supporters in jail rather than restricting the dog that killed.

Couldn't agree more, it is an eternal frustration for a liberal like me, that this is so out of hand.

IMO- In its original, basic form, PC was actually helpful. No longer using ugly racist/gender slurs in daily language, and considering how the words you use impact others, *was* a real improvement.
Now PC has been perverted, and turned into a tool of censorship.

I am also frustrated that pit bullies have co-opted the language of racial equality and empowerment. It is disgusting to me to see pit bullies stealing the ideas, work, and sacrifice of generations of civil rights workers, just to pervert it in the service of fighting dogs.
IMO, anyone that compares the plight of dogs to the plight of any peoples, is a POS of the lowest level. This is morally repugnant, and completely disgraceful and inappropriate.

Packhorse said...

The vast majority of people have no idea how often pits kill. They might think death by dog is a very rare occurrence, or that the pit bull problem was solved in the '80s--seemingly the last time pit bull attacks were frankly discussed in national media.

Anonymous said...

Seriously? Canine profiling? Did I just read that right on another site? You know, I could almost go for that being an animal lover - for some OTHER breeds, animals that I have respect for and have respect for human beings and have a sense of self preservation and have been bred as pets for so long now. But a pit? The breed is the profile. Calling it a pit bull IS the profile. They can never escape it with their genes! It s not a shepherd dog, it is not a guard dog, it is not a proper hunting dog. IT'S A MESS. They don't want to clean up the mess, they want to PRESERVE it. Like preserving vomit. Pit bulls are the equivalent of human spiritual vomit. Pit bulls are bad fruit from a bad tree. Best not to eat. Best not to bring home to your kids. Best to flush.

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

"IT'S A MESS. They don't want to clean up the mess, they want to PRESERVE it. Like preserving vomit. Pit bulls are the equivalent of human spiritual vomit."

oh yeah. like preserving vomit.

Anonymous said...

Interesting. The Eliza-Mae Mullane case with the demonized Alaskan Malamute named Nisha, it's been ruled an accident. But there was a second dog, identified in some sources as a unnamed terrier, and in others as unnamed collie-cross breed. Both animals were euthanized. One article goes on to say, "The Alaskan malamute and the collie cross are not among the breeds banned by the Dangerous Dogs Act." Has anybody ever seen a picture of the "other" dog? Why doesn't the other dog have a name like Nisha? Why the plastering of the malamute's pictures everywhere and none of the other dog? Didn't he only just get the malamute from a bar? Anybody know the full story? Could the terrier or collie/cross breed be on the - ahem - dangerous dogs list? Could the terrier be pit? Could the cross part of the "collie" be pit? Would love to know. the BBC report states:

"Her father wanted the potential danger of family dogs highlighted.

Eliza-Mae's mother Sharon John left her sleeping daughter in her pram in the living room while she put her son in a taxi for school, the hearing was told.

When she returned she found one of the family's pets had pushed its way into the room and Eliza-Mae was on the floor."

One of the family's pets? Really? They don't even know if it was the malamute? And what happened to the "dog ate my baby's head" Something smells here.

Anonymous said...

Here we go:

doesn't look like a collie to me. def looks like a terrier, and not a Yorkshire.

I think they framed the malamute. I think the baby's head was indeed bitten, and it was a pit that did it, and it was on the DDL.

When did they get the malamute? did they run out on the day of the attack and grab it to throw under the bus?

Perhaps that's why all the nonsense and repetition of "family dogs".

Anonymous said...

Barbara Boxer and Claire
Mcgaskill have friends in the dog breeding and dealing racket, and the media that is supposed to investigate these things.

Wealthy friends means special favors.

Especially when they are hooked up with the Farm lobby too. Lots of payola and private influence

Boxer and McGaskill's lawyer friends will be cashing in at the GM trough cha ching! So they send their legislator friends and media allies out to do the dirty.

CDC is another completely criminal government enterprise that joins right in (along with cashing in on their official decisions that pump their personal patent income) Since when should dog breeders be on board the CDC to protect their interests and get people killed?

Victims of fighting breeds, as long as these sleazy legislators use the government as personal banks for themselves and their friends and the media works for them, you are screwed.

Victims have to take care of themselves and that means being vocal and getting your story out there and naming names, and it means lawsuits, at every opportunity. Don't let the fighting dog lobby get away with it.

Anonymous said...

Remember all the window blinds hysteria and recalls? I don't think there were more than a couple of deaths, but Barbie Boxer's media friends raised hysteria with their lawyer connected legislator cousins and all the CDC type goons, and the pigs fed at the money trough.

Meanwhile the bodies thanks to the fighting dogs are piling up and the wounded and handicapped are increasing in communities all over the country.

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

i blogged the window blind danger in 2010.

Anonymous said...

There's a lawyer pit bill lobbyist working in Senator Menendez's office, thanks to dear psychiatrist daddy's big donations. She writes public policy. She works hand in hand with her cousins at the Wash Post, among other media, to quash any negative reports and to control the conversation on her hobby.

i think there was an extended piece done on her on this blog after one of her pits attacked another dog at a fair in Wash DC, and the cops had to shoot the dog. She got her cousin at the Wash Post to attack the cops and attack the victim.

These people are running the asylum through a government that doesn't represent the people, left or right.

Animal Farm is here, now, and the pigs really do think they matter more than everyone else and will do anything to get what they want.

Anonymous said...

"Here we go:

doesn't look like a collie to me. def looks like a terrier, and not a Yorkshire.

I think they framed the malamute. I think the baby's head was indeed bitten, and it was a pit that did it, and it was on the DDL.

When did they get the malamute? did they run out on the day of the attack and grab it to throw under the bus?

Perhaps that's why all the nonsense and repetition of "family dogs"."

That all seems a bit far fetched. Had there been a pit bull type in the house it would have been reported. It's difficult to identify from the Mirror picture because we can't see the muzzle because of the head cone. Terriers were originally bred to hunt small mammals and it doesn't take a huge dog to seriously injure a newborn baby. A Jack Russell killed a baby not that long ago. Malamutes, while certainly not at Pit Bull levels, are highly prey driven and appear relatively highly in the fatal dog attack league table:

It's not only Pit Bulls that don't necessarily distinguish between that new squeely thing in the house and prey/and or a toy.

Regarding the Malamute the father apparently got it from a man in a pub some months before:

Dick Johnson said...

@anon 3:33 - you said "A Jack Russell killed a baby not that long ago" --

Actually, after looking at the picture of the attacking dog I'd have to say that, while there may have been some Jack Russell in it, that muscular head and reptilian stare were all pit bull. No way that was just a Jack Russell -

Anonymous said...

"A Jack Russell killed a baby not that long ago."

REALLY? Not that long ago? Do you have a link showing the date? I'd like to know what "not that long ago" is.

Dick Johnson said...

@anon it was a year or so ago. I remember seeing the picture of the supposed JRT and thinking it was a pit bull/cattle dog mix.

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

if i remember correctly, it was back east. it was about around 2008 and it was a jack russell and another dog.

Dick Johnson said...

@Dawn the one I'm thinking of was in the UK

Anonymous said...

I looked up the UK story, and the dog they have pictured may not even be the dog that killed the baby. But it does look like a cattle dog mix.

I have a hard time believing a Jack Russell's mouth would be big enough to bite a baby's head. Kind of like the mythical Pom that once bit a baby's head.

But anyway, the UK story that wasn't that long ago was November 2012.

Anonymous said...

I remember reading the name of the terrier/whatever it was in the Mullane household in one of the reports. So, it has been reported. I want to say it was named Ernie, but that is probably wrong.

According to reports, the baby was found beside Nisha. So, that is why Nisha got the blame. But, since both dogs were put down... I've heard different things about the involvement of the other dog.

I thought for a while the baby must have been in a crib and only a bigger dog could get her out of a crib, you know. But, if she was in a pram in the living room, then that changes the picture quite a bit. It sounds like whatever happened had to have happened very quickly.

I know one of the deaths blamed on a Jack Russell turned out to be the grandmother who killed the baby. That was a U.K. case from several years ago. It didn't come out right away.

Really tiny babies need a ton of supervision and I don't know why anyone has their dogs around such babies. Like the awful case of the father who fell asleep holding a three week old baby and dropped her on the floor and his Shiba Inus mistook her for a toy (which was fatal, obviously).

A lot of cases of deaths seem to involve recently acquired dogs.

In the Darla Napora case, the dog that killed her (the one her husband insisted they get), they'd only had for a few months. Her dog (a female pit bull), that she had for years, didn't participate in the attack and was found cowering in another room. Some nutter said that meant the dog was abused! Um, it means that dog saw her owner killed by a crazy male dog!

I think a lot of people are basically too stupid to know that a huge dog, even if it's gentle, is going to be a handful and maybe is not really a house dog.. especially if you have little kids.

I don't think pit bulls are house dogs either. They really aren't pets. But, case after case of them in a house proves they don't do well in that setting.

I came to the conclusion about the stupidity of people when reading about some of the biggest dogs in the world and they all had the caution that they might not do well in an apartment. Imagine that! A 150 pound dog doesn't do well cooped up in an apartment! And people have to be TOLD that.

Someone needs to invent a way to make fake dogs. Just a thing that looks however people want and doesn't do much of anything when its owner isn't around. And when the owner gets tired of it, they can turn it off and throw it in the closet. But, the thing being fake, doesn't bite or attack or have many needs. It just does tricks for its owner or poses looking tough or whatever the current style may be.

tropical storms said...

The difference between "race" which is a naturally occurring phenomena based on early migration and "breed" which is a purely contrived and caused phenomena is as different as daylight and dark. These dogs have been created and constantly refined through breeding to excel at one and only one task. Well the dog fighters did a great job of it, these dogs can do nothing well but attack and kill other animals including humans. Sterilize them out of existence, they and their one job are obsolete.

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

i'd love to add your comment to the experts :-)

Animal Uncontrol said...

"...they and their one job are obsolete."

Yo! Terrerizin the neighborhood iz JOB#1!

Anonymous said...

The Mullane woman ran out of the house screaming the dog ate my baby's head. The judge found it an accident where 'one of the family dogs' rushed in the door and past her, after the mother opened it, and knocked the baby out of the pram. Neighbors reported seeing the malamute wandering around the neighbourhood after with not a drop of blood on it. Why would she say it 'ate' the baby's head then? the collie terrier/cross/whatever is pictured being taken from the house with a cone around its head. why the cone? is it hiding blood? why put down a collie or a malamute for rushing in a door and an accident. he got the malamute from a pub he said only shortly before the incident.South Wales, dogfighting? or some suspected child abuse? Who knows. People in the area don't buy the story either. The immediate neighbors didn't even buy the story. Is there a better picture of "Ernie", or a link to an article where he was named as Ernie, and where he looks like an actual collie,...ok, then, maybe, but so far it makes no sense and reminds me of a Guy Ritchie movie.

Anonymous said...

Re the Mullane case: "The inquest did not conclude which dog had been responsible, but the inquest was told how neither pet had ever shown signs of aggression."

also check out a map of police corruption complaints by volume on the UK map. Wales rules.

Sorry, but something is not right here, as they literally raced to publicize the malamute.

Anyway, moral of the story here, when nutters gleefully say a malamute killed a child in the UK, Remind them we don't know that. That there is/was a terrier/collie cross named "Roxy" that is equally suspect.

Anonymous said...

O.k., the thing is not named Ernie. It's named Roxy. But, I guess all I meant was a name was given for the dog. I wasn't very confident that I'd remembered the name properly. But, here's a link:

And it does show the dog being led out with a cone over its head. I'd never seen that photo before (but I didn't read all of the articles).

Two dogs running around a small house with a pram in the middle of the floor and the mother outside and the father (wherever he was).. I can easily see that the pram could be overturned by one of the dogs and then the baby would be on the floor and.... well... I haven't read the inquest, so I don't know how that matches up to facts.

Since pit bulls are banned, it seems like there would have been charges brought against the owner of the dog just for the dog being in the house. Now, if the exact breed of the dog couldn't be easily determined (as in really couldn't.. not nutter couldn't) I guess that might complicate matters.

I think some confusion might be caused by neighbors just saying in interviews what they think the dog is. Such as I've read a neighbor calling Roxy a "small terrier". Well, in her opinion, maybe that is what Roxy looks like. Whereas Nisha was quite clearly a Malamute which is a much more distinctive type of dog.

Anonymous said...

To be fair, Malamutes and Huskies are fairly frequently involved in attacks on babies, toddlers, and young children (as well as cats and small dogs). They are highly prey-driven breeds and I would never have one around a child under 10 or 12. That said, they are never involved in off-property attacks on innocents (ie Klonda Richey) and those incidents are the only ones that I really think should influence which dogs are restricted.

Anonymous said...

Someone needs to give some free operations to some of the male maulers that run loose. They can use those fake inserts so the maulers' owners will never notice the difference until their backyard breeding operation screeches to a halt.

Anonymous said...

The Jack Russell incident which I vaguely remembered but didn't look up last night, turns out to have been 18 months ago now:

Regarding the "dog ate my baby's head" thing, I can't imagine the woman was in a good frame of mind at the time. Also the baby was airlifted to hospital, which I don't think would have happened had the injuries been obviously non-survivable. The term "accidental death" is one of several that can be ruled at inquest (the others being misadventure, unlawful killing, lawful killing, natural causes or an open verdict. In some circumstances a narrative verdict can be given, such as if the death was by natural causes but medical error contributed). A fatal dog bite would be regarded as accidental unless the dog was intentionally used as a weapon, because a dog isn't regarded as being able to form criminal intent like a person. Maybe a separate category for animal attacks would make more sense.

Regarding the law, I would favour returning to a system of dog licensing with stricter conditions on the larger breeds (such as mastiffs) and those which are known to require particular care and pose particular risks, like the sled dog breeds. Some breeds, such as all the pit bull types- not just APBT as currently (staffies are a big problem in the UK and American Bulldogs are increasingly so)- should be banned out right, and Presas could do with being added to that list. I also think that families should think twice before getting any dog with babies and very young children.

I don't disagree that there is corruption in the UK police: inappropriate surveillance of activists, lying at high level to cover up mistakes, some very disturbing links between some individual officers and criminals- but not over a dog.

Anonymous 3.33PM.

Anonymous said...

If the second dog was a true mongrel then they might not be able to determine what breeds it was made up of. The neighbour might just have had the impression that it had some terrier-ish and collie-ish traits.

Anonymous 3.33PM.

tropical storms said...

Something I've wondered for years, why have a working breed at all unless you have a proper job for that dog? It's a huge disservice to the dog who was specifically bred to need that job. Dogs who were bred to be more generalized in working traits still need a job. Breeds with a need to work require a suitable situation to be really happy dogs, human ego not withstanding.

Anonymous said...

^^two pit bulls break out of their own fenced yard into another fenced yard, then they go into a house and kill the three dogs that lived there... two little dogs and a lab. The dog owners come home to find their pets slaughtered and two maulers still in their house!

And to top it all off, some insane nutter is claiming the three dogs that were killed 'provoked' the mutants! First, no they didn't and we all know that. But second, are nutters not always going on about the rights of mutants to protect their home/territory/yard/bone? Well, these dogs were in their own house and the shitbulls broke in so how could anything they did be provocation?

I am not on FB... but OMG... that nutter. she is going to a nutter prize or something

Anonymous said...

story also reported here^^ (this is where i saw it)

Anonymous said...

Axtually I read aome interesting history on bo the APBT wich says that the APBT and the staffie are actually the same thing. The only difference is that the staffies name was changed because the AKC didn't want any connection to the name pit bull. Also the staffie os bred to a breed standard where as the APBT is bred along working lines so there is no breed standard as far as looks also to register the APBT you would have to go to the UKC or another breed registry wich is why they can be anywhere from 30 to 100 lbs. and still be registered from what I have seen.

On another note my family had a few sled dogs (a malamute and a siberian husky) when we where young kids. They where good dogs and could be trusted to pull us in a sled but sled dogs NEED a job and an outlet for there energy and they do have a high prey drive of you are bringing a baby home they must introduced slowly and carefully and they must understand that baby is a human and also a part of the family but thats really with any dog big or samll. Even my golden is not allowed to be around kids by himself even though he has never showed any aggression. My baby cousin came up and touched his bone and he wagged his tail and licked his face. There is NEVER an excuse for any dog to act in an aggressive manner toward any person or animal in my opinion. If my dog ever mauled a kid there would be no need animal control because he would be dead by the time they got here. My dog has also been attacked by a very small dog and he did not show any aggression what so ever. THAT is a stable, well tempered dog. Why can't these nutters get that through there thick skulls.

Staceyjwsolar said...

Have you ever heard of any other dog doing home invasion killings? I sure haven't, its PIT BULL THING.
Sled dogs are dangerous to small kids and other smaller animals, just not at the insane levels pits are. IRC, they are a large portion of the deaths in Canada, in part because they are more numerous, and because pits are banned in so many places.

Who knows which dog did the killing, or what kind that other dog was. I do think if it was a pit, there would be charges, but I don't live there so who knows. Babies that size are easy to hurt, even a small dog, or ferret, can do serious damage.

Tropical Storms-
I know it was rhetorical, but I will bite :)
I do know exactly why people buy working breed dogs, just to pen them up in apartments or back yards, bored: they see a dog that looks cool, they may be impressed by what the dog is supposed to do, and that is as far as it goes.

At *best*, they delude themselves into thinking that their lifestyle matches the dogs needs close enough. That they will walk/run/hike/play/etc with the dog all day, which will make up for the lack of a job. (The few that do this, or participate in agility /etc practicing daily, are RARE.)

Naturally, these types have no real care for the animal, outside of a sentimental, selfish, self serving, "love". They have even less care for their neighbors that bear the brunt of the dogs bored barking and other nuisance behaviors. I think it is pretty cruel to both the dog, and the neighborhood.

Meals on Wheels said...

I'm glad you covered this. I wish we could recall all the pit bulls and have the pit bull lobby replace their "switches", clearly they are misfiring.

KaD said...

Here is what I don't get. Lower courts are obligated to obey the rulings of a higher court. So why then is THIS ruling not being followed? U.S. SUPREME COURT, April 26, 1897, SENTELL v. NEW ORLEANS & C. R. CO.
Laws for the protection of domestic animals are regarded as having but a limited application to dogs and cats; and, regardless of statute, a ferocious dog is looked upon as hostis humani generis, and as having no right to his life which man is bound to respect.

Sputnik said...

I just ran into this. It describes perfectly what conversing with nutterism is all about:

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

gish gallop. perfect.

spectacular find sputnick.