Sunday, May 10, 2009

Prevent the Deed VS Punish the Deed


I'd say that is pretty straight forward. The definition of prevent is to cause not to do something, to cause not to happen, or not to made or done. So this catch line lends itself to saving lives, not pit/bully lives, but children and the elderly, people. A noble cause in my book, preventing others from being victims of pit bulls and the bully breeds.


Again straight forward. The definition of punish is to prescribe a form of suffering in penalty for an "offense". The definition of offense is the act of attacking. This catch line says let someone get attacked or killed FIRST then punish the owner of the attacking dog. So those who use this catch line condone children, and people in general, being mauled or killed FIRST, and even then they don't want to blame the pit/bully. Oh no, so many comments on the daily stories of pit attacks blame the victims, infants even. What kind of people want to allow this suffering and death over that of a breed of dog?

One would hope these "pit nutters" would be the first to want change. They would be the first to want to stop the maulings and killings. But they aren't. They want to continue to feed the public misinformation so that the overabundance of pits can be shoved out the door to the ignorant. Save those pits is their battle cry. I say that the cost of saving the pits is not worth the cost of the failures.

Now enters "No Kill". It's bad enough that the pits in the shelters have no history to them but to adopt them out to less than the most experienced dog handlers is immoral. It must be stopped. People lives are at stake. The question should not be how to save the pits but rather how to save our children. That is the moral question that needs to be asked.


Penny Melko said...


How can I reach you offline? It's about the planned solar/wind farms going up in the Mojave Desert.


Colleen Lynn said...

Another fallacy with the "Punish the Deed" mantra is that in the vast majority of cases, prosecutors cannot punish a dog owner effectively after a serious or fatal attack. Our legal system is set up to effectively punish a human-on-human attack. The system, for many reasons, breaks down considerably when an animal attacks a human and then a human is held to blame. Furthermore, most U.S. states allow "1-3" free bites prior to felony prosecution, if felony prosecution is allowable at all. In the instance of pit bull attacks, this may mean 2 individuals are seriously injured or maimed prior to any criminal prosecution charges outside of a small fine.

If the attack occurs "on owner property" (at least 70% of all dog attacks occur on dog owner property), the situation is far worse. It may be impossible to hold the dog owner criminally liable. One of the most horrific examples is the fatal attack of 21-year old Jennifer Lowe. The pit bulls, owned by Charles Smallwood, had been declared "dangerous" prior to the attack. Additionally, Knox County Animal Control had paid Smallwood's home 5 visits leading up to the attack. On the day of Jennifer's death, Smallwood had left her alone in his home with his dogs. The pit bulls ripped the young woman apart.

No charges were filed primarily due to the fact that the attack happened "on owner property."

Just recently, the State of Nebraska voted on a so-called tough dangerous dog law:

"Under Legislative Bill 494, the owner of a dog previously declared dangerous could face up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine if the dog attacked a person and caused serious injury. The bill won first-round approval, 40-0, although some senators questioned whether sending owners to prison would be excessively harsh."

This law would only apply if the dog had already seriously injured or killed a human being. Clearly, the sponsor of the bill, State Sen. Beau McCoy, was strong-armed by the aggressive dog lobby.

PREVENT THE DEED, Regulate the Breed.

HonestyHelps said...

Cowgirl, you can't reach me offline. You can post here although I fail to see what the wind farms have to do with my venue. Besides I probably am in favor of wind farms.

HonestyHelps said...

The law does not keep people from being attacked and fails to avenge those who have had a life altering experience of an attack by a pit. When working with Senator Soto on making cockfighting a felony in CA, other Senators said they didn't feel right sending a man to jail for life over a "rooster". CA has a three strikes law. No regards for the fact that if a three strikes offender means someone who doesn't learn a lesson. Plus they overlooked the drugs, illegal gambling (CA has legal gambling and should defend a legal business) and postitution. I would say someone who has been to prison twice already and is still breaking the law like this is not going because of a rooster. But the Senator, "pit bull" that she is, kept on until she did make it a felony.

Anonymous said...

And No Kill people are not only handing out KNOWN vicious dogs, they are adopting out pit bulls to be chained outdoors.

More cruelty to dog, public by No Kill. Because "someone saw a picture."

Anonymous said...

The offline wind thing info solicit sounds not ok, if you get my drift?

HonestyHelps said...

My site meter says that this posting is in Hardy, Nebraska. So how does that relate to Mojave? Besides I believe in wind farms and support them. And no, I have no intentions of putting myself in jeopardy by going offline, especially to someone who has filled my blog with inappropriate postings off the subject.

Anonymous said...

i take it that you are in favor of BSL and of banning pits?
what about the breeds that were bred to be aggressive towards humans, like the Boerbels, Fila's, Presa's, etc?
Do you think that those dogs should be banned as well?

HonestyHelps said...

Anon, any breed bred for fighting other dogs or animals or aggression toward humans fall under the catagory of "pit bull" in my book. That does not include smaller breds that kill rats, etc. You won't lose your life or a limb to those small breeds. I don't take the time to deal with minor details such as the names of the breeds. Pit is just an all encompassing name to describe dangerous breeds. I don't have time to list each one when talking about them. But yes indeed I am for either regulation or banning of all the breeds you have mentioned. Personally I would rather see them extinct but I will settle for BSL. At one point, until recently actually, I wanted to own a pit, I love their big smiles. I did have a pit mix that was the love of my life. But I found DogsBite, started doing research and discovered how ignorant I was about the "pits". Yeah, I knew a little but I was a fool because I too thought they could be "raised" right. I no longer think that. Once I started researching and became aware of how much damage they are doing, I felt so foolish for my ignorance, especially since I have decades of dealing with dogs. And the majority of those rescues were pits. Only problem was that no one wanted them and most of them, I had to euthanize. I have picked up fighting pits and found them to be most friendly. Only when another dog came around, did I see the viciousness and it scared me. The needle didn't go in quick enough in my opinion.

I see the shelters full of pits and pit mixes. Keep in mind that I am in LA and the problem is overwhelming there. Our local shelter has at least a 70% population of pits/pit mix. I have seen the pits that killed people at the shelter and they would have killed me if they could have. I have seen "good" pits who have turned into vicious beasts.

So with all of that, I have no choice than to support BSL. When one "breed", which includes all those you mentioned, is doing well over 50% of the damage then it is only good and common sense to do something about it. I do value human life over than of any animal.

Anonymous said...

well, you are incorrect in clumping all "fighting" dogs as pits.....fila's, presa's, etc are Mastiffs, there are NOT pits...infact, BSL has been in place where i live for 20 years, and it has not stopped any dog fighting whatsoever, it has caused innocent dogs that are NOT pits (such as american bulldogs, presa's, boxers, etc. because the animal control officers have NO clue what a pit looks like) to be killed.

I have been in rescue for many years, i have been a vet tech and i am also a dog trainer/behaviorist and i have treated pits in the vet's office and i have trained pits too...and there are two other breeds that are not pits, that also get discriminated against, the american staffordshire terriers, and the bull staff terriers.
You might want to get to know the different breeds, and do familiarize yourself with them, because categorizing a "fighting" dog as a pit, isn't fighters will use any form of dog.....back in the 70's, the dobermans were considered the dangerous dog and the dog to "watch out" for, and now, they are allowed to be adopted out, as well as German Shepherds.
I know what is and the overall theme of the site is obviously a very anti-pit one, which i obviously don't agree with, since i've work with them many times, and yes i have seen them get into scuffles, and i have seen other breeds get into scuffles over what people think is "nothing", but the reality of it is, that dogs just don't get into fights or scuffles with each other over nothing, there are cues and certain body language that most humans aren't trained to pick up, but dogs pick them up very quickly and sometimes the slightest thing can trigger ANY dog off.
infact, i was working with a great dane and a rottie, and the great dane was the one that was initiating the attacks on the rottie, and the rottie was the more submissive one.
Anyways, regulating any breed doesn't solve the problem, there needs to be a dangerous dog law/ordinance put into place instead of banning a particular breed of dog, whether it be a pit or a little lap dog.

and, i am part of that coalition in miami that is trying to get rid of the BSL ban....i did happen to see your friends posting about our directors, just thought you'd like to know.

HonestyHelps said...

And just what did you hope to accomplish by commenting on this blog? Let me tell you something, you are barking up the wrong tree. I have been working with dogs much longer than you and I have seen the pits in action. I have seen their victims. You are so in denial about these dogs, it is pitiful.

Are you unaware of all that they do? Do your research for a change. But then again, you will only believe what you want to believe, not what the evidence shows. Pit is a name given to any dog capable of and bred for killing. A Jack Russell terrier can't easily maim or kill anyone but a pit can. And for your information, dobbies and rottie were in more numbers during those times than the pits were. It's a stupid comparison. In relation to the pit population, their attacks are in disportionate numbers. Their numbers in shelters are also disportionate to their population as pets.

These dogs ARE NOT pet material, dogs are supposed to be man's best friend, yet they are killing and maiming humans in record numbers. The pits of today are not the pits of a hundred years ago. And denying this is only causing more suffering for both the dogs and humans.

When you consider that they are being euthanized in the shelters in disportionate numbers and the abuse that they suffer from dog fighters and wanna be dog fighters, it makes absolutely no sense that you would be against BSL. And who is to blame for all this - YOU!!! You have their blood on your hands because you are failing to help them with BSL.

Look at the facts in cities that have bans and BSL. It plainly shows that they euthanize fewer pits than those without BSL. For this reason alone, you should support BSL.

Thanks goodness I have several friends in Miami that are fighting against you. Some are pit victims. As long as you stay in denial about these dangerous dogs, the abuse, maulings, killings, and euthanasia will continue. Your agenda is to blame for the suffering of these dogs and the suffering they cause. You bear the burden of guilt, not me. And people like you only tend to convince me that we need bans, not regulation. The sport they were bred to do is illegal and the breed needs to be the same.

HonestyHelps said...

Here's a report issued only last month. Course I already know how you will explain it, Miami Anon, and that will be the lame excuse of misidentification.

It says that over 50% of their cases are from pits/pit mixes. There were 30 breeds that caused injuries but one breed alone was responsible for over 50% of those injuries - the pit/mixes.

You need to pay attention to these reports because they come from impartial and unbiased sources, unlike your sources such as the NCRC, a front to sell books and make money from gullible people such as yourself. And go back and re-read the CDC report, it plainly shows pits are the leader in fatalies. I see the pit nutters referring to the CDC report to back their arguments when most of that report is taken from the news media, and then turn around and condemn for doing the same. You rely on an uninformed public to swallow your contorted "truths". You take advantage of the unsuspecting public. I think all of you are nothing but a bunch of idiotic, immoral and unethical fools. I can't wait until you have to move to Mexico to own your precious killer dogs.

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

sounds like anne shields has paid you a visit.

i love it when the idiots show up talking about dobermans. wow, talk about gullibility and media hype! go here
to check out karen delise's own stats.

during the 70's pits killed 6, dobies killed 1
during the 80's pits killed 45, dovies killed 8
during the 90's, pit killed 37, dobies killed 4

care to revise your ignorant statement?

HonestyHelps said...

Craven, these fools are experts at only seeing what they want to see. Even their own "experts" are overlooked in their "research" if that "expert" isn't going along with their agenda. All they've managed to do on this blog is convince me to work harder on the issue and to solicit my friends to do the same. They don't have enough sense to realize that THEY themselves are their own worst enemies, not us. Their rantings is enough to convince anyone, knowledgeable or not, that owners of pits are just as dangerous as their wiggle butt dogs.

There is no doubt that we need to be PRO-ACTIVE with the pit issue, not RE-ACTIVE as they want to be. If this same reasoning were applied to other issues, they would be yelling their heads off to be re-active. We pass laws to PROTECT people, laws like wearing a seat belt. We don't wait til the driver of a car is killed to tell him to wear a seat belt, do we? Then why do they want another person to be mauled or killed with their Punish the Deed. Punish the deed means someone has already had to suffer or die. Stupid, stupid logic. But then again what do you expect from pit owners, after all they are living with a pit, waiting for their opportunity to become the next headline.

Anonymous said...


Lets kill all the dogs over 50 pounds and carry around pussy dogs.You guys are pathetic and you get your stats and info from the ambulance chasers at dogsbite. Is wild african dogs on this list, because if you ban everything else i'll just find something else to have, maybe a gator, jeckel, or perhaps a monkey that rips your face off. Talk about real problems like all the fucking crazy redneck serial killers and all the gangster niggers that fill up our jails and spend their lives as career crimanls or how about the worthless fucking spics that just add to our crime rates or better yet the taliban mop headed middle eastern fucks that bomb buildings. Craven what fuck ass ethinic background are you so i can add you to my list of pontential races i should ban.Come to think of it will just leave the chinesse alone, their smart people and really dont bother anyone.For the rest of you death is near if you smell like coon,look like a cracker, or speak like spic its death to the dangerous races! RSL!!!! race specific legislation coming to a city near you, so if i was you i would relocate quick before i come knocking on your door.

HonestyHelps said...

Anon, and by the way I do know who you are, you are SICK!!! But you're at least making more sense about the pits with your suggestion. Sorry to inform you of this, but on the 8 state bust of dog fighters, it was middle America that was busted, school teachers, football coaches, etc. You've now lower yourself to less than those you have mentioned. And I do intend to put your comment on a few blogs to show the typical owner of these dogs and how sick they truly are. You can't debate the issue so you resort to racism and name calling. What a fucking joke you people are. No wonder the pits are fucked up, look at what owns them and I ain't talking racially. You're losing the battle and you can't stand it. There are not words to describe what sort of people you are but you aren't good enough to lick the feet of a "nigger" or a "spic". And by the way I am reporting you for threatening to come to the door, that's illegal on the internet, fool.

Anonymous said...

you don't know who posted that last comment, because it wasn't me,, you DON'T know who posted that

HonestyHelps said...

The hell I don't, Anne. You guys are in for a lot of trouble. You've just ruined yourself in Miami, no body will listen to you now. I'm so lucky to have a genius on board who can track anyone on a computer. Can't believe you guys have set yourselves up this way, it's my lucky day!!!!

Anonymous said...

i didn't leave that comment, i wouldn't stoop that low to use that kind of language

HonestyHelps said...

I never said it was you, but you sent them the email with the link.

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

knock knock

looks like i touched a nerve. that's quite the tirade for someone so enlightened and non-judgemental.

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. John Adams December 1970

Anonymous said...


It's quite obvious the person above under "anonymous" was speaking sarcastically. It was clear that he was comparing your HATRED towards “PIT BULLS” to that of RACISTS and their hatred of other nationalities. I'm surprised you didn't pick that up. Then again, maybe I'm not. How could I ever expect an individual as ignorant as yourself to be able to pick up on underlying sarcasm. Forgive me for giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Let me first of all say that you're foolish if you think Anne believes that you know who posted that comment. I have an extensive background in computer programming and networking, and I can assure you that there is no way you can specifically locate the person's name or contact information. The absolute MOST you would have access to is their IP address and/or communication network, and that is sometimes untraceable. So please stop making yourself look even more un-educated. It really does nothing for your "Kill The Pits" campaign.

Secondly, you're even MORE foolish to think any member or friend associated with our organization would EVER post such a comment. While I see where that person must have been trying to go with his/her comments, I don't justify their comparisons. I can guarantee you that a member of our organization would compose a much better response and assert themselves in a dignified manner. I am a professional individual who happens to have a very "high ranked" position within the collegiate field, and I am the PROUD owner of 2 American Pit Bull Terriers. They are incapable of hurting anyone or anything and the only thing you should be fearful of when around them is the force in which they will jump on top of you to "lick you to death" when you arrive home after a long day of work.

You are a victim of the same STEREOTYPE that has gotten this loving breed the ridiculous reputation they now carry. Your assertions do nothing but discredit your already faltering views.

Thirdly, you know nothing about who we are or what we stand for. The accusations you have made are biased, false, and most importantly, UN-FOUNDED.

Anyone can use the county's Public Records Search and find the same results. What you should do is conduct some educated research. You want some real juice? Some real FELONS and individuals with criminal backgrounds?

Look up the actual 1989 Pit Bull Ban (which you are clearly in HIGH support of). Look at the individuals who passed the law. Take a piece of paper and grab a pen. Jot down their names. Then hop onto the internet (I know you'll want to log onto your little "BASH" Blog right away, but give it a break for just a moment).

Then go to your search engine of choice and put in each individuals name.

You will be most surprised to find ALL the criminal history each of these individuals have.

Their rap sheet consists of quite a few ACCOMPLISHMENTS. Some of which are:

- Money Laundering
- Extortion
- Racketeering
- Prostitution
- Drug Paraphernalia

The very founder of this ban, Joe Gersten, had to flee the country and migrate to Australia, after his right to practice law was denied and after all the negative press got around upon his allegations.

He was then granted the right to practice law in Australia. But guess what? Good ol' Gersten went back to his deceptive ways.

Anonymous said...

His license to practice law was revoked yet AGAIN in Australia for unruly practices. I guess he couldn't be a good boy in or out of this country.

Furthermore, I'm not sure if you heard about the Councilman, Aaron Rochester, in Iowa who was PROPOSING BSL IN THE ENTIRE STATE?

He claimed Pit Bulls were "vicious and unpredictable" and should be banned entirely.

How beautiful KARMA and IRONY are!

It was quite the SHOCK when Mr. Rochester's personal dog, a Labrador Retriever named Jake, bit his neighbor!!! Animal Services deemed the dog DANGEROUS. He claimed "Jake" was only protecting his daughter and was only being a "good watchdog."

The county required all dogs who bit or attacked on the FIRST incident to be euthanized upon the incident. Rochester pleaded for clemency, begging for his dog not to be put to sleep.

The verdict finally arrived.. JAKE WAS DEEMED VICIOUS.

Rochester said he will keep appealing the verdict until he can prove his dog is not a dangerous dog. It sounds like he's fighting OUR BATTLE NOW!

Poor Councilman! A VICTIM OF HIS OWN DEMISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's people like you Craven, and like this Councilman who get "BIT" by their own words and accusations.

I'll advise you of ONE thing.. be very careful how you involve yourself in this role of supporting the ban of Pit Bulls.

Be very AWARE of the repercussions of supporting the death of thousands of innocent animals.

You are carrying quite a heavy weight on your shoulders by continuing to defend the inhumane and savage killing of these family pets.

Remember that we must all take full responsibility for what we do, say, and represent.

It seems like your carrying a double-edged sword. Be careful not to cut yourself while swinging it so SWIFTLY.

Councilman Rochester's sword CUT RIGHT THROUGH HIM.

But each mistake is followed by a lesson. I hope Rochester learned his.

And I hope you study a little harder and learn the lesson before the consequence comes your way.

Good Day!

HonestyHelps said...

Boy, you guys are just not the brightest ones on the block are you? Who cares about the lab? Not me. Makes absolutely no different to me this happened and it proves nothing. Just you nutters grasping for straws. And excuse me, but YOU NUTTERS BEAR THE BLOOD OF ALL THOSE PITS IN SHELTERS THAT ARE BEING EUTHANIZED BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SENSE TO REALIZE THAT THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE THE FUCKING PITS IS WITH BSL. AND IF YOU WANT TO TALK WITH CRAVEN, GO TO HIS BLOG, DUMBASS.

HonestyHelps said...

And computer whiz, you need to go back to school if you don't know how to track shit on the computer.You don't even have the right blog, stupid, much less know anything else about a computer. And the closest you've been to a college is to drive by one. Your "organization" sent an email to another to do their "dirty work" and that has been traced, from Anne with love.

Let me mention this, using racist remarks like this commenter did has nothing to do with a "comparison", because all too many times you nutters let your real selves go in a fit of anger and let the world see that you are just a bunch of racist and that is why you have pits. You own these dangerous dogs because of your mental instability, i.e. racism. You need to be scared if you are a racist, yes indeed.

What difference does it make about this Gersten guy? The issue is whether the ban has worked. It's been on the books for twenty years. If Miami didn't like the ban, it would have been gone long before now. You nutters always try to take the focus off the real issue because you don't stand a chance in hell of winning the argument so you resort to other issues, name calling, threats, and of course the biggie, just plain lying.

Now if you want some more shit, see if you can figure out, Computer Whiz, how to get to Craven's blog. I'll make it simple for the simple minded. On the left of this blog you'll see Craven Desires, use the mouse (that funny dodad you can fit your hand on that moves around) and put it over Craven Desires and push the button. You do know what a button is, don't you?

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

that's a whole lot of words and STILL no one has addressed the stats from karen delise's book!

scurrilous amateur blogger said...

"...and I am the PROUD owner of 2 American Pit Bull Terriers."

i love it when this comment shows up and inevitably it always does!

Pride is, depending upon context, either a high sense of the worth of one's self or one's own or a pleasure taken in the contemplation of these things. One definition of pride in the first sense comes from Augustine: "the love of one's own excellence." [1] In this sense, the opposite of pride is humility.
Pride is sometimes viewed as excessive or as a vice, sometimes as proper or as a virtue. While some philosophies such as Aristotle consider pride a profound virtue, most world religions consider it a sin. The Roman Catholic Church lists pride as the most grave of the seven deadly sins.
According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, proud comes from late Old English prut, probably from Old French prud "brave, valiant" (11th century) (which became preux in French), from late Latin term prodis "useful", which is compared with the Latin prodesse "be of use".[2] The sense of "having a high opinion of oneself", not in French, may reflect the Anglo-Saxons' opinion of the Norman knights who called themselves "proud", like the French knights preux.[citation needed]
When viewed as a virtue, pride in one's appearance and abilities is known as virtuous pride, greatness of soul or magnanimity, but when viewed as a vice it is often termed vanity or vainglory. Pride can also manifest itself as a high opinion of one's nation (national pride) and ethnicity (ethnic pride).

HonestyHelps said...

Craven, you are wasting words on these fools. Can't you see that they are uneducated and have no possible hope of understanding your comment. I mean, they can't even understand how they are killing their own beloved animals with their mentality much less understand what you are saying. Keep it on a second grade level and then they can understand.

Anonymous said...

Don't be upset because I made you feel inferior. I know the level of language in my previous comment was a bit elevated for you, but stop using words like "idiot, dumbass, whizz, and nutter" to TRY and form a rebuttal. The truth of the matter is that you CAN'T refute my previous comment, because it put you in your place.

I don't expect to change your minds. You are all biased, ignorant and un-educated. That's clear from your response to my previous comment.

To be quite honest, I'm having a blast reading your responses. I'm so happy people like you don't own, or promote the American Pit Bull Terrier Breed. As a matter of fact, I think each and every one of you should be revoked of your right to own an animal.

Your form of expression brings me joy and laughter. Then again, it also bring me some sadness, to think that our country is composed of such idiocracy.

But you know what... you are right about ONE thing.

I agree with you when you said I’m an "idiot."

You know why?

Because I'm an idiot for taking the time to even read, evaluate, and respond to all of your insipid jargon.

You are all a very large waste of my time. Although you do serve ONE small purpose in this very colossal world.

Curious about what that purpose is?


Well, while this blog has served as my daily dosage of laughter for the last week, I have to say that this will be my last comment on here.

I can't fathom I'd waste more time on such a poorly executed blog.

Do any of you simpletons even have jobs?

You really should look into creating some better topics to discuss. Your next one could be....


Farewell my fellow brainless bloggers..

It's been FUN[NY]! :]

HonestyHelps said...

Anon, the one thing I don't feel is inferior. You nutters are all the same, you can't win the argument, so you resort to whatever you can, name calling, etc. It just makes my day to take out whatever frustrations I might have on the likes of people like you. I know that your days are limited and it is fun to fuck with you about it. I'm quite sure you don't get near the enjoyment out of this that I do. I laugh so much at you guys, better than anything on TV. It's sad at the same time, but at least I have the pleasure of knowing that you will pay a price for your ignorance. And it is also sad that you want the abuse of the pits to continue because I actually want it to stop. They may be dangerous dogs but they don't deserve the abuse. So I am working to stop the abuse of the dogs you defend while you work to keep it going. What fuckers you are for doing that.