Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Nutters and No Kill'ers Aren't the Brightest Ones on The Block

Just ran across another pit nutter blog and seems she doesn't understand why someone who has worked all their lives to stop the euthanasia in shelters for time and space is exposing "No Kill". She gave a link to my blog (not the brightest thing to do considering she doesn't like what I have to say) and I can thank her for that because it brings more people here for a correct education.

Well, let me explain to you. There is a huge difference between stopping euthanasia for time and space and "No Kill". First note the use of capital letters. "No Kill" is a man's personal agenda, an evil program that when adopted means that animals are in jeopardy of even more suffering than normal. Example is the Philly shelter. The Whino bragged on Philly and his hand picked management staff, that is until he got wind of possible cruelty/neglect charges. Then, like the snake he is, he turned on his own people in order to save his ass. If you don't know about Philly, then do a search on this blog for the postings.

"No Kill" and "no kill" are not one in the same. "No Kill" means crate 'em, and stack 'em. In the hallways, in the lobbies of the shelters, in ventilation ducts (i.e. Doug Rae in Indy), in other words, overcrowding. Do I need to explain what that accomplishes? "No Kill" is the darling of hoarders and hoarding is reported to be on the rise, wonder why? Shelters are being forced by this movement into pushing the animals out the door, not into taking the time to do better adoptions, but setting up the adopting family and the adopted pet for failure.

Animal People News is reporting that after a decade of focusing on adoptions (No Kill) that we are going backwards. Euthanasia is going up, impounds are going up. "No Kill" is taking the focus off spay/neuter, contrary to what you may think. Cities and counties are forced by these crazed "No Kill'ers" to spend money instead on medical, expansion, lengthy stays and leaving less money for spay/neuter.

The Hayden Act in California, the worse piece of legislation ever, demands that shelters release animals to anyone who CLAIMS to be a rescue and they don't have to be a 501c3. So when a hoarder wants to take animals out, they invoke the Hayden and out the door they go with the animals. Another point about the Hayden is how it has killed more adoptable animals than before it's passage. Here's how it works. Fluffy is at the end of it's time but Spike comes in and there's no more room. Fluffy loses because his time is up so Spike can move in. Now Spike is a nasty pit bull but can he be put down, no. He's allowed to take up kennel space until his time is up and of course, he ain't adoptable. So now two dogs have lost their lives instead of one. Before the Hayden, Spike would have been put down and Fluffy could enjoy continuing to look for a forever home. Keep in mind that in the vast majority of shelters, they will not kennel another dog with a pit bull. Fluffy had roommates and took less space.

To this misguided blogger, there's a difference between "No Kill" and no kill. No kill is a noble goal that we all strive for. "No Kill" is one small man's quest to be popular. "No Kill" preys on the gullible, relies on people following blindly, relies on intimidation to silence the non profit rescues who would speak against it, and overall, contributes to the suffering of shelter animals. If you rely on donations, you don't need the Whino attacking and calling you an "animal murderer" like he does. Just because a rescue calls itself no kill doesn't mean that they are "No Kill".

Can some shelters be a true no kill? Yes, they can. I have visited some. I know of one that very rarely euthanizes for time and space, a lovely shelter, lots of volunteers, sitting right in town, an attractive building. I could not find one staff nor one volunteer who knew the Whino's name. And what I loved when I got to these small shelters is that no one has ever heard of Winograd, much less follows his program. Why can they be no kill? Several factors. Usually has to do with the spirit of the community and the size of that community. Getting into the larger communties such as LA, Indy, Philly presents quite a different story. There are no close community ties, people are struggling just to survive.

What these smaller shelters in these close communties have shown me is that they are quite capable of figuring out what to do without the Whino's input. I've said all along that the Whino is not bringing anything new to the table. We've known how to be no kill for decades. But you don't just wake up one morning and say "Stop the Killing". It takes work and the "No Kill'ers" are lazy.

The only way that "No Kill" makes sense to me is if I look at it from the prospective of being a breeder. That's why the breeders love this movement. "No Kill" says there is no pet overpopulation thus giving credibility to more breeding. Of course, we know the pit nutters love this program because it says that pit bulls get a "bad rap". Just go to almost any breeding forum or pit fighting forum and see how they push the Whino. Do some research on those organizations that push the Whino, the very people that we fight against the most part. Plus it takes away the guilt from the public about their role in all of this.

Under "No Kill" let's have that litter and when they get big enough to start being a problem, take them to the no kill shelter. You can tell the kids that they won't be killed, they will find homes because there are plenty, and it will be a happy ending. Don't believe it? Check Rancho Cucamonga where their surrenders are higher than the entire county which has a much higher population. They were duped by "No Kill". The Whino told Rancho to build it and they will come, speaking of volunteers. Didn't happen, in fact, their volunteer hours went down. That meant they had to spend more money, taking away from spay/neuter, to hire more staff.

So my remark to this pit nutter/"No Kill"er" is that in my opinion you are the problem, not the solution.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Maybe we can begin instead to promote the idea of "No Suffering" -- no allowing animals to be abandoned to the streets because they have been turned away by a shelter, no letting animals languish in cages until they are no longer psychologically able to be companions, or worse, until they pass away alone and in pain, and no condemning animals to a life without proper human interaction (e.g, on a chain) because their behavior makes them unsuitable to be true companion animals. Isn't this a better standard to strive for, quality of life vs. quantity?

HonestyHelps said...

Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!! That is what I mean. I have always said that we should concern ourselves with QUALITY OF LIFE, NOT QUANTITY. "No Kill'er"s reminded me of Frankenstein, "They're alive"!! But what kind of life is the question.

I hurt each and every time that a healthy animal has to euthanized. I feel the pain, my life is full of this pain. I want it to go away but not at the cost of knowing that an animal will go to live at the end of a chain or thrown in the backyard and only sees a human when it gets food, if it is lucky enough to get that. I've said it many times, THERE ARE FAR WORSE THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN TO ANIMALS THAN EUTHANASIA IN THE SHELTER.

Anonymous said...

I think I know who you are talking bout here, part of the Indy Pit crew gang in Indianapolis. And yeah, you are right, she is definitely clueless.

Nichole said...

I linked to your blog because I'm not hiding behind the anonymity of the internet. I believe people are smart enough to make decision for themselves. Same reason I'm choosing to comment here.

I'm not "No Kill". Do I believe that we should try and find homes for all adoptable animals, absolutely. Do I believe that some animals need to be humanely euthanized - yep. I've made the difficult decision twice in the past year to euthanize a dog that wasn't safe. I've also sat with a dog that was humanely euthanized because of severe pain that wasn't treatable.

What I still don't understand is why I'm a "pit nutter". Why are pit bulls exempt from being saved? I demand to know your credentials that you are smarter than the AVMA, HSUS, Best Friends, AKC and all the other animal organizations that support the efforts of pit rescuers.

How many pit bulls have you come across - outside of the insane shelter environment? As an Indy Pit Crew volunteer, I've had my hands on HUNDREDS of pit bulls in the past few years. Never bitten, never scratched, never growled at. These are dogs in HIGH RISK communities who have been chained out, never trained, not neutered - and yet, are STILL appropriate towards people.

I respect different opinions, and believe that everyone in animal welfare is working towards the same goal - saving animals. But in your case - all animals except pit bulls.

And to the person who said that I'm "clueless" - I can almost guarantee I hear more about the animal welfare failings than you do. Our people are on the front lines in every community, dealing with dog fighting and the very seediest underbelly of animal cruelty. This is well beyond what you see in the shelters.

I choose to look for the positive and try hard to IMPROVE things rather than sitting on blogger, anonymously bashing people.

HonestyHelps said...

Let me set you straight right now, you do not demand anything of me. You questioned my motives and I gave you your answers.

You don't understand how it all works obviously. Judging from your picture you are too young to know why these organizations take their stance. You always have to question any organization that takes donations when it comes to their policies on BSL. Many years ago the HSUS came out against "No Kill". When their donations fell dramatically, they backstepped. Same with pits. You think that the breeders and dogmen don't contribute money to those organizations against BSL??? Write a check, make a call, and have your competitors put out of business is how it works. These organizations want to continue their good works and as soon as they bust the real dogmen, the professionals, those donations will stop. But let them use the dogmen's money to do the good deeds they do. I understand their reasoning in this. Easy to see why breeders would contribute to those against BSL.

And yes, indeed you are no kill. Your examples are behavior and medical as reasons for your euthanizations. What do you think of euthanizing for time and space? If you can't see why this needs to be done, then you support overcrowding, disease, lingering death in a cage, that is "No Kill".

Little girl, I have been doing pits for decades. I was raised where pits were not considered pets, they were fighting dogs only. I know the real truth about the lies of culling for human aggression. You don't kill something you have money invested in, you just pass it along to unsuspecting families. And hundreds of pits is nothing compared to my hands on experience with them. Yeah, it's easy to fall for their big smiles and wiggle butts. But they were designed for one thing, killing. You need to learn that or you'll end up being a victim one day.

I believe in saving the lives of innocent children over the lives of pit bulls. I don't put animal life above that of a human, especially the innocent lives of children.

You're nothing more that a child when it comes to this issue. You have let yourself be dupped into this issue by the dogmen and breeders. They are using you and the likes of you as pawns. They provide the propaganda and you fall for it. Do you like having dog fighters as your puppetmaster? That is exactly what is happening. They see the stupidity that comes from the humane community of "saving them all" and have taken advantage of it.

Continued

HonestyHelps said...

Pits are an accident waiting to happen. If you're lucky you never have a problem. Many aren't that lucky. The problem is that pits have to function in normal society and they can't do that. You want to chalk it off to irresponsible owners and that is not the case. The breed has been distorted with the backyard breeding to the point where they are now the biggest danger you have if you want to walk your dog down the street. They are known to bust into people's homes and kill babies. If you don't believe it, then go to my other blog and read the news reports of how these attacks happen. You do nothing more than spew forth the propaganda of the dogmen/breeders rather than try to reach out for the truth.

There's nothing positive with your outlook at this issue, you are the problem. You are the ones causing the problem to become worse because you are in denial about pits and what they do. Since the beginning of this year, they are killing at the rate of one person every 9 days. No other breeds can come close to this record, never have come close to this record.

Stay in denial, claim the victims of your denial, it's your life and everyone around you if you think that pits can be pets. Go to the pit bull forums where you belong. See all their unrecorded attacks. These are pit bull lovers that are being attacked, they claim to be responsible. Pits aren't in the shelters because of pit haters, they are there because of pit lovers. Pits are being overbred not from pit haters, but from pit lovers. The pits that attack are raised by pit lovers, not pit haters. You are going after the wrong people when you go after the pit haters, you need to be going after the pit lovers such as yourself.

You are what I called you, own up to it.

Nina said...

OK, first I need to state some FACTS. Indy Pit Crew does NOT blame the victims of dog bites. They blame the dogs and the owners. Indy Pit Crew believes, that a responsible owner with an unstable dog is going to SEE the warning signs before the dog hurts another person or animal. If the owner chooses to ignore those warning signals and allow their dog to hurt another human or animal, they are to blame. They KNEW they had a problem and they did nothing to protect the citizens around them. Then, when an incident occurs, they choose the (yet again) irresponsible route of blaming their dog, its breed, the victim, or anything else they can use to deflect the responsibility from themselves. NOT all Pit Bulls are unstable and a danger to the public. NOT all Pit Bull owners are as irresponsible as those who allow their dogs to hurt another human or animal. Indy Pit Crew believes this based on EXPERIENCE. More importantly, Indy Pit Crew believes that ALL responsible owners spay and neuter their dogs. That's why they have worked to provide FREE spay/neuter surguries to Pit Bulls since 2005. In fact, their program has facilitated the sterilization of more than 500 Pit Bulls every year since 2006. Indy Pit Crew ADDRESSES the overpopulation problem that causes shelters to be crowded and euthanize for space.
They also work to EDUCATE owners on proper socialization, exercise, training, containment and treatment so that FEWER dogs are allowed at large or abused- THIS is not only to better the lives of the pets and owners but also REDUCE dog bites.
Indy Pit Crew also works to give young thugs an alternative to fighting their dogs or training them to be mean by providing training tips and encouraging pride of ownership so that they will value their dog more...again, this not only enriches the lives of the dogs & the owners but also serves to further protect the public.
Indy Pit Crew does NOT advocate the NO KILL philosophy. Just ask any of the NO KILL advocates in Indy...they despise Indy Pit Crew for their STRICT standards of judgement of what a correctly behaved dog is. (IE: not aggressive, unpredictable or unstable)
Like many organizations, Indy Pit Crew understands that the overpopulation problem we have in Indy forces the euthanasia for space in the city shelter.
Indy Pit Crew has NEVER condoned the stacking of dogs and cats in inhumane conditions simply for the purpose of housing them to say that they are being "saved".
Indy Pit Crew believes that there are MANY worse things in life than for an animal to be humanely put to death because there are no humane options for the animal to live. What Indy Pit Crew DOES support is the practice of thinking outside the box and looking for alternative options for dogs who are stable and well behaved but don't have space set aside for them. Indy Pit Crew supports shelters who, rather than immediately euthanizing animals for space, looks into other housing options (foster, transfer, etc..). Again, ask ANY of the local shelters about Indy Pit Crew's stand on NOT housing aggressive, unadoptable, unstable or unhealthy dogs.
So....you may continue to insult Indy Pit Crew by calling them "Indy Bit Crew" but you should know that your characterization of Indy Pit Crew is FALSE. They have NEVER once stood up in defense of a biting dog's behavior or an owner's action.
They do, however, stand up in defense of the STABLE, BEHAVED and RESPONSIBLY owned dogs who are "lumped" into the same aggressive category due to their phenotype alone.

HonestyHelps said...

You really believe that shit you wrote?? How many "responsible" owners have never seen aggression from their pit until it takes their face off? Happens all the time. That's just your way of pushing the irresponsible owner myth. You think that every pit that attacks is owned by an irresponsible owner and that is not true.

You're doing nothing more than rolling the dice and hoping to win when you adopt out a pit bull. The cost of success is not worth the cost of failure when it comes to pits. One life of an innocent child is not worth it. Do all pits need to be killed - no. But they need to only go to the most experience person and hopefully to one that lives on a deserted island alone. These dogs have to function in society and it is obvious they can't from the attacks they do. Leading people to think that pits are nanny dogs is immoral. Leading people to think that altering makes a difference is immoral. Drinking the koolaid of Karen Delise is foolishness. Do your reseach on her, find out that she is a gun for hire. Find out that her bullshit is being used by the dogmen, she's their darling now. Hell, just find out her credentials, she has none other than being a vet tech.

Reading between your lines, yep, you are "No Killer's" at heart. You want shelters to push the animals out the door, that is what you meant by shelters finding other ways. This means to hoarders, dogmen, whatever are allowed to take animals.

By the way, I have never used the term "bit crew", have never seen it either. I probably will start using that now. Thanks for the tip.

Anonymous said...

I'm still waiting to hear what your credentials are, by the way. Since you seem to know so much about how unqualified anyone who disagrees with your stances is.

It's obvious that you must have copious amounts of experiences and expertise with the breed, since you are privy to all of this information and have seen first hand "all the time" happenings, such as seeing most responsible owners have their dogs turn on them and bite their faces off, and knowing dogs who bust into people's homes and eat their babies.

So please, enlighten us.

Nichole said...

First off, Indy Pit Crew isn't a rescue. However, the rescues we do work with don't believe in pushing any dog out the door to any family at any cost. We believe in finding the right match for a family. This would be why some dogs can spend a long time looking for a family. A dog who is highly excitable probably isn't a good match for a family with small children. Doesn't matter the breed.

I questioned your motives because I misunderstood the subtitle of your blog. I thought you were AGAINST euthanizing for time and space, which is an ideal in line with No-Kill. I didn't realize you were FOR it. My mistake. That's a new position that I haven't heard from anyone in animal welfare. It's HUMANS fault that these animals are homeless. Shouldn't we bear the burden of figuring out solutions rather than just killing them all because we are too lazy to correct our own behaviors?

FYI, People who are interested in intelligent discourse don't have to resort to name calling. (By the way, thanks for the "young" comment - glad my beauty routine is working!)

HonestyHelps said...

You'll wait even longer for my credentials because I don't feel a need to answer to you. Let's just say that 50 years of experience, 50 years of working in the humane community should be enough for you. When you are around that long, you'll understand. I had a sanctuary before you were even born, long before people even heard of such a thing. I was spay/neutering before anyone knew what it was, much less doing it. Go to www.pitattacksbystate.blogspot.com and read about the attacks. Find the common threads in those stories. Open your eyes. They recall baby cribs over a death or two, but they won't recall pits when they are killing in droves. Where is the difference? Death by pitocide is horrible and no person should have to die that way.

Nicole, I do believe in euthanizing for time and space when it is necessary to prevent overcrowding, disease prevention, etc. I don't believe in pimping out animals and that is what is happening these days. Providing sanctuary for animals such as Vick's dogs when so many good dogs are dying in the shelters is immoral. Not understanding the dynamics of pit bull breeding and thinking all of them should have a chance is immoral too. I hope to see the day when there are so few dogs in the shelters that time can be spent helping the ones who have behavioral problems or sickness. Now the time and money being spent on dogs that can never be adopted could be put to much better use. Instead people such as yourself think that all dogs deserve a chance. Not at the expense of good ones and that is what is happening. Many of the offered solutions are bullshit such as "No Kill". One has to understand human nature as well as animal nature in order to make things work and "No Kill" neglects human nature. As long as you can speak then you can have a dog is their motto.

Remember Nicole, you attacked me first. I always tell people best not to fuck with me because I fuck back and I am a damn sight better at it than you will ever be.

HonestyHelps said...

My motto:

Man's best friend should not be killing his children. The pits are killing too many and they need to go.

cravendesires said...

i find the combination of pit bull advocacy + no kill more than a little bizarre. i mean either you care about the unnecessary killing of dogs and cats or you don't.

Anonymous said...

Pitocide, eh? So now you're qualified to create words as well? Interesting.

My name is "Anonymous," so clearly you have no frame of reference as to how old I am. Your "50 years" of experience cards you play so close to your chest and insinuating that you were doing things to help animals before I was born have no relevance. But that seems to be a common theme with you and your arguments.

And as a self proclaimed animal lover, and one who has worked in shelters and run a sanctuary and surely seen all of the mistreatment and abuse of animals that happens, it's appalling that you think that the dogs that Michael Vick fought, the ones who were not tortured until they died, do not deserve a second chance at life.

It is not the dogs who decided to start fighting other dogs for the sake of their owners making money, it is the human who is at fault. Why should those dogs be punished? If those dogs can be cleared for health and temperment/behavior, why shouldn't they be helped? Why is their situation any different than someone setting a border collie on fire, and people reaching out to help donate to the dogs vet bills, and offering to foster it?

Ditto Nichole, your constant name calling and obscenity dropping, not to mention your refusal to back up anything that you're saying, just makes you look bad. What's that? Pit bull advocates have more class and tact than someone anti- pitbull? Shocking.

Debra said...

I thought you said that your stance was "should all pits be put down- no"? So what's with your motto?

HonestyHelps said...

Deborah, I qualified that statement by saying they need to be on a deserted island with no other people.

As for Vick's dogs, they are taking up space when other dogs who could get homes are dying. What, do you support the unnecessary killing of dogs so an aggressive pit can live? What about the money spent on the Vick dogs, how much good could it have done for those dogs who deserve a good home?

You can't "clear" a pit bull. They remain unpredictable. That's the point. They aren't like other dogs. If a dog shows a pit it's stomach in submission, the pits tears it's guts out. Whereas other breeds will back off, fight done.

And please don't start with this holier than thou bit with me as if you have never called names before. Get it thru your thick heads, I am pissed, angry, and frustrated. I looked at the faces of the pit victims everyday and that is enough to piss anyone off except those, like yourself, who don't give a damn about what the pits are doing to people. I can't imagine a human being looking at all these victims and not being pissed. Only those with a mental illness would not be affected. What does that say about you and your kind?

Debra said...

It's Debra, thank you.

And this is what you said originally:

Do all pits need to be killed - no. But they need to only go to the most experience person and hopefully to one that lives on a deserted island alone.

This is what you just said:

Deborah, I qualified that statement by saying they need to be on a deserted island with no other people.

You don't even know what you're saying.

HonestyHelps said...

And you, Deborah, have a comprehension problem.

Anonymous said...

You can't "clear" a pit bull. They remain unpredictable. That's the point. They aren't like other dogs. If a dog shows a pit it's stomach in submission, the pits tears it's guts out. Whereas other breeds will back off, fight done.

Oh really? Well, with this wealth of knowledge that you have, why aren't you challenging those who are actually accredited to make these assessments? I'm pretty sure organizations such as Best Friends Animal Society, HSUS, AKC, and even your local humane society/shelters would not support, let alone spearhead efforts to change the public's perception of these dogs.

But surely you're the expert on this, and those organizations must all be incorrect.

Debra said...

How is that so? I just copied and pasted what you had written, on both accounts.

And since you can't spell my name correctly my friend, it is you with the comprehension problem.

Clearly we're not making any head way here. That's the downside of the internet: people like you are able to spew their nonsense.

HonestyHelps said...

DEBRA, who really gives a shit how your name is spelled or not spelled. Why did you ask me when you already had the answer - comprehension problem.

Anon, have you ever heard that money talks and bullshit walks? Well, those groups depend on donations and any group that depends on donations will sell their own mothers. They go with the money flow. I bet you condemn those organizations, except maybe Best Fiends (not misspelled DEBRA) otherwise. You are so clueless as to how all this works. And you told me a lot about yourself by mentioning the AKC.

HonestyHelps said...

Craven, the unnecessary killing of people and other pets by pitocide means nothing to these "saviors". They don't care how much damage is being done. They don't care that perfectly good dogs are dying in the shelters while aggressive pits are being given sanctuary. They don't care about all the other animals that pits killed everyday. They just flat don't give a damn. They are in their selfish world along with their "wiggle butts" and to hell with everyone else. They don't care about pits being abused because of the lack of BSL that can help stop it. For them to be against BSL is the same as them abusing pits. They won't care until it happens to one of them.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Honesty, I know these guys and they are indeed "clueless". What they can't grasp is that they will be the ones to bring about BSL with their denial and subsequent inactions. To continue to deny what the pits were bred to do only contributes to the problem. So rest assured that when BSL and bans happen, it is not the pit "haters" that bring it about, it is the pit "lovers" that will bring it about. Sitting with the proverbial thumb up the a** is what these guys do.

And by the way, I do own a pit. I have insurance on him, quite costly I might add, and he is always walked with a muzzle. He does have his Good Citizen rating but that doesn't mean I trust him. I trust no dog completely, especially a pit. People ask me if the muzzle is because he is aggressive. I tell them no but I want to make them feel comfortable out of respect for my fellow man. I walk my yard 3-4 times a day to make sure everything is secure. Sure, it costs more to make sure a pit is confined, 8 foot fencing is not cheap. But I am willing to pay that because I do consider myself a responsible pit owner. I am not in denial about my pit, I know they have been bred to now be unpredictable. I live alone and no children come to my house. If that were not the case, I would not have a pit. No way am I going to put a pit with children. I won't have another one once this one passes. Although he is a wonderful dog, I can't fully enjoy him because I know that they are unpredictable. I will miss him when he's gone and especially his snoring while lying on the pillow next to me. I can only hope that he will be with me a long time.

And I have no problems with your take on pits, absolutely none.

Anonymous said...

oh, WOW, and I thought I was all alone with muzzling my wonderful pit!! It's so good to know that someone else feels the same.

My baby goes to the office with me everyday but needless to say it makes my customers nervous, thus the muzzle. Now instead of people avoiding us, they first ask if the muzzle is because she's aggressive. When I explain it is to make them feel better about being around her, they love it and immediately start interacting with her. Course that is only for the best. It helps considerably for the socialization process because they don't avoid, they interact. These fools that walk the street without a muzzle thinking their pit can do no wrong are the ones that give pits a bad name. They know people are scared of pits. So why don't they show that they are responsible enough to realize that and use a muzzle. Mine wears her muzzle all day and it doesn't bother her in the least. I had to take out a second mortgage to get my fencing. I had the local pit rescue where I got her tell me to use an electric collar. First that collar is cruel in my opinion but I know it wouldn't stop her if she wanted to go. Pits don't feel pain on the same level as other dogs. But can you believe that they told me that? How many more did they tell only for them to find out it doesn't work for the pits? Plus it puts people in danger because it won't work for the pits.

I'm willing to do what it takes to keep my family, friends and neighbors safe. I think these people fighting doing these things are just lazy and definitely stupid. I support BSL completely. I don't support bans obviously because I don't want to lose my pit. But BSL is a good thing that any responsible pit owner should support. Unlike these kooks who haven't got enough sense about pits to come in out of a shower of rain. These types are what give pits a bad name, not people like you Honesty. I love your blog.

Anonymous said...

I see that this nutter has removed her posting about your blog, Honesty. Now she's trying to tell the world how wonderful she is instead. The "Savior" complex is alive and well on her posting. "I am college educated, well traveled, blah,blah,blah." But she still doesn't give a damn about humanity, people like Brenda Hill who have lost a limb to these horrid animals. You were right as usual, Honesty, and keep giving these nutters hell. That's where they deserve to go since they do nothing to stop the maulings and deaths. A thought, maybe the nutters are also in the casket business and that's why they love their pits provide business. That might explain why they do what they do.