Brian Travis invaded by bureaucrats

[AntonLee]

so an animal owner could last their dog daily for no reason just because they own it?

could they hook a car battery up to an animal just for grins because they own it?

could they burn the animal with a blowtorch because they own it?

the list goes on... really are things like that ok because you own the animal?

they could, and they can now as well with this great government control.  If the government control went away, would everyone start torturing their animals?

I think if someone sees abuse, real abuse, to an animal they should step in and do something about it.  Get a gun, go liberate the animal.  I think that if there's real abuse any arbitrator would take that into account if brought to one.  You could also, I dunno, take up a collection and pay off the person to not own animals anymore.

[BillKauffman]

I think if someone sees abuse, real abuse, to an animal they should step in and do something about it.  Get a gun, go liberate the animal.  I think that if there's real abuse any arbitrator would take that into account if brought to one.

Sounds like you are advocating some sort of private defense agencies.

If so, if in seeing "real abuse" - would you go to your defense agency and ask them to act on your behalf?

Otherwise it is just your judgement of what real abuse is vs. the "property owners" view. Are we not back at law of the jungle?

[AntonLee]

hey, if I go in there to "liberate" animals and I'm not sure of what type of "abuses" are actually happening, I might have private enforcers going into someone's house who's not doing anything wrong.  If the private security goes in and the guy is shearing his sheep or has a dog that won't stop whining, you know, non-abuses. . .

then I'd be up shit creek, so would a private security firm. . . I guess I better be damn sure that he was hurting an animal before I called the security. (modified) And private security would be damn sure to find out too, since it's their reputation on the line as well.

as opposed to calling the cops, having them come out and assume you're doing wrong, arrest you, take your stuff, fine you, and then when it's all over they'll never be held accountable.

[Kat Kanning]

so an animal owner could last their dog daily for no reason just because they own it?
could they hook a car battery up to an animal just for grins because they own it?
could they burn the animal with a blowtorch because they own it?
the list goes on... really are things like that ok because you own the animal?

1.  Do you know how the meat you eat is treated before it's killed, because I can assure you, it ain't humane.  Don't be so sure you're on some moral high ground.

2.  What you describe is awful.  Isn't there some way outside the government to stop it?  After all, you kill animals daily, torch them, put them in your mouth.  Do you want the government to stop you from doing this?

[Kat Kanning]

Some folks want freedom, till their pet peeves
come up, then= THERE OUGHT TO BE A LAW !

So what happens, a bunch of the same whiny ass
pet peeve folks get together and pass a law.

This is why freedom goes into the shitter.

Yeah, what he said!

[leetninja]

so an animal owner could last their dog daily for no reason just because they own it?
could they hook a car battery up to an animal just for grins because they own it?
could they burn the animal with a blowtorch because they own it?
the list goes on... really are things like that ok because you own the animal?

1.  Do you know how the meat you eat is treated before it's killed, because I can assure you, it ain't humane.  Don't be so sure you're on some moral high ground.

2.  What you describe is awful.  Isn't there some way outside the government to stop it?  After all, you kill animals daily, torch them, put them in your mouth.  Do you want the government to stop you from doing this?

im familiar with how the animals bred for human consumption are treated and im not a fan of that either.  obviously unless i were a vegetarian i wouldnt want the government or anyone else to take away the food that i eat.  i love my bbq too so no.  obviously not. 

maybe it is what i have been brainwashed into thinking by the gov or whoever, that the cows being killed daily, the pigs, and chickens, etc are all somehow "ok" to do that and that they are bred for that specific purpose?  i dont really know.  truly i think that in my mind, and many others' that if someone treated their pet the same way it would be frowned upon.  livestock versus domestic pet.  mans best friend.  whatever label belongs here ... personally if i ever see someone beating or torturing an animal - weather it is my "business" or not - weather i should or shouldnt - i will step in and try to end the abuse. 

there is a difference between abusing an animal and disciplinary action towards it.  if my dog chews a couch cushion and i catch him in the act i will yell at him and give him a whack on the butt - i wont pour gasoline on him and set him aflame just because he is my "property" and i should have some sort of right to do what i want.

this is all kind of off topic though.

the real issue here is that it appears as though Brian and Heidi did not neglact/abuse/whatever their animals and thus the animals should have never been seized and the kops and the govt and the SPCA and especially this dickhead Sprowl are all WAY out of line.

That said - Heidi and Brian have not really been posting here or made any comments or answered any relevant questions so ... really ... what are we to do?

[Kat Kanning]

leetninja, since you're so concerned about Heidi and Brian's property, are you going to their house Saturday to help them rebuild the shelters damaged in the recent storms?

[leetninja]

leetninja, since you're so concerned about Heidi and Brian's property, are you going to their house Saturday to help them rebuild the shelters damaged in the recent storms?

if i had known more than 24 hours in advance i wouldnt have minded helping out.  ill see if i can cancel my plans that i have tomorrow...

[Kat Kanning]

 

[John Edward Mercier]

People have rights because we are sentient. We understand how the consequences of our behavior can cause pain to other humans. Animals can't understand consequences but they can feel pain.

Certainly animals are sentient (self-aware) and can understand consequences!    My dog barks outside the door because he knows it will open and as a consequence he can get inside where it's warm.   Without awareness of himself and the world around him (sentience) and the ability to learn (experience the consequences of his actions) he'd behave more like a houseplant - just sit out there and freeze to death.

Does a dog "know" that if it bites another dog or person that they will cause pain?

Just like human children... not until they're taught. A wolf will bite another in the pack to respond to unacceptable action... they know the bite is inflicting pain.

[erisian]

Although I proposed a similar scenario much earlier in this thread, upon further examination I'm more than happy to slice it with Occam's Razor.

It's far more likely that the vet really did feel there was a problem with the care of the horses, and called the SPCA as a result of his concerns.

That is certainly possible, but

• Sprowl's threat to get a warrant was empty. They needed a vet to assert probable cause in order to obtain a warrant. The easy way to do that would be to prejudice the local vet(s) against the Travises.
• Small town cop politics... The cop said he knew Brian well. Since they were not socially acquainted, it is reasonable to infer that the cops had their eye on Brian et al because of their "radical" tendencies, and he knew Brian "well" because he had run a background check on him.
• Cops and bullies like Sprowl always get their knickers in a twist when their authority is challenged, and usually go into vendetta mode.

[BillKauffman]

People have rights because we are sentient. We understand how the consequences of our behavior can cause pain to other humans. Animals can't understand consequences but they can feel pain.

Certainly animals are sentient (self-aware) and can understand consequences!    My dog barks outside the door because he knows it will open and as a consequence he can get inside where it's warm.   Without awareness of himself and the world around him (sentience) and the ability to learn (experience the consequences of his actions) he'd behave more like a houseplant - just sit out there and freeze to death.

Does a dog "know" that if it bites another dog or person that they will cause pain?

Just like human children... not until they're taught. A wolf will bite another in the pack to respond to unacceptable action... they know the bite is inflicting pain.

How do you know that they know?

A child at a certain age can understand how it feels to hurt another person because they can be hurt themselves by someone else.

But a wolf? I don't think so...

[Bald Eagle]

That said - Heidi and Brian have not really been posting here or made any comments or answered any relevant questions so ... really ... what are we to do?

Well, quite honestly, I would imagine that right now they are both pretty busy doing everything they can to defend themselves and recover their horses.  I'm sure that instead of hanging out on a forum, they are making phone calls, doing legal research, preparing things on their farm - for tomorrow's work party, as well as to protect the horses that weren't taken, etc.

Their time time is being taken up by neighbors, reporters, lawyers, bureaucrats, police, etc.

You're a _potential_ benefit to them, while they are facing _certain_ detriments.
If you had the choice of giving your attention to someone who might give you a backrub, and someone who was coming at you with a gun, I'd think your attention would be focused by necessity on the gun - a certain threat, not distracted by a potential, comparatively minor benefit.

So since Brian and Heidi are scrambling to do damage control and protect themselves from any future harm, I can't see how assuaging random unknown people on some forum about perceived problems would be high on their list of priorities.

Yes, I agree that there are some interesting questions that have been raised and that people are curious about the answers, but I think that at the present time, treatment and correction of any real or perceived problems is far more important than condemnation for any past problems, oversights, or errors if they indeed ever existed.

I'm going to hang together with Brian and Heidi.  If you want to go hang by yourself . . . the bureaucrats might someday fulfill that wish.

[John Edward Mercier]

People have rights because we are sentient. We understand how the consequences of our behavior can cause pain to other humans. Animals can't understand consequences but they can feel pain.

Certainly animals are sentient (self-aware) and can understand consequences!    My dog barks outside the door because he knows it will open and as a consequence he can get inside where it's warm.   Without awareness of himself and the world around him (sentience) and the ability to learn (experience the consequences of his actions) he'd behave more like a houseplant - just sit out there and freeze to death.

Does a dog "know" that if it bites another dog or person that they will cause pain?

Just like human children... not until they're taught. A wolf will bite another in the pack to respond to unacceptable action... they know the bite is inflicting pain.

How do you know that they know?

A child at a certain age can understand how it feels to hurt another person because they can be hurt themselves by someone else.

But a wolf? I don't think so...

You don't think at a certain time in their lives that a wolf has been bitten by another and felt pain?
You think after you hit a puppy with a newspaper that it runs the next time you grab the paper because its afraid it might feel good?

[Keyser Soce]

EquineSite.com discussion. I wonder how long before this "controversial topic" is wiped.
http://discus.equinesite.net/discus/messages/5/19055.html?1236698927

Not long. And look at this.

http://discus.equinesite.net/discus/messages/5/19139.html?1236877101

They'll probably remove the thread talking about threads which have been removed.