Brian Travis invaded by bureaucrats

[FTL_Ian]

Ian... my point WRT the Sprowl is that he isn't the thug. He's just a jerk. The cops are the thugs. Flooding his cell phone with sms msgs with the explicit intent to run up his phone bill and aggravate him is not constructive. The liberty movement requires that the rest of them understand that freedom is better. We have to convince them not to aggress. At least against us. You can't do that by being vindictive. By going to people's homes and protesting. The public will just recoil and make all our lives and goals harder. Just take a look at the equinesite.net thread. "They" are already against the Travis family as I said they would be. The evidence has not been properly gathered and presented so they will all jump to the conclusion that Brian was abusing the horses and bitching about loosing them.

I never said stay quiet. I said don't make it personal. Don't be doing things that could make you look the aggressor. Be the victim. Sprowl is in much the same role as Mikaela and during your incident I don't recall you ever egging on people personally harass her. Why should this guy be different? He fucked up. Let the world know it. Ostracism is a public matter. Build a case that the guy can't be trusted and let the evidence convince people that the wrong doers are Sprowl and the police and not the Travis family. Trying to jam a gun in his hand so he notices it is almost always going to fail to get you what you want. Acting emotionally to an emotional situation will get us nowhere.

First, you're wrong about Sprowl.  On your own blog you have pointed out he's an ex-cop.  Besides that he IS a thug, because he's giving the orders in this case, whereas Mikaela was just a busybody neighbor/bureaucrat. 

Also, I never said the explicit intent of txt messaging him was to run up his bill, besides, it might just be a company phone.  I just suggested it would be a bonus.  Anything that wastes this man's time and money is a bonus.

Finally, Sprowl didn't just "fuck up".  This was no accident.  He fucked up the first time by messing with Brian's family, then he did worse by coming back and stealing their horses.  He didn't make any effort to speak to media then, nor is he now.  He got some heat from the activists then, as he should have, and must be expecting more and willing to deal with it.  I think if anything the heat should be cranked up on this douche.

[KBCraig]

The guy in the suit and the gray stupid hat is the Prosecutor from Charlie and Jesse's hat trials.

Lt. Reams?

He sure didn't want to admit who he was.

I got the distinct feeling that nobody there felt righteous about what they were doing, except for Steve Sprowl and (possibly) Dr. George. Animal lovers who are rescuing abused horses tend to be proud of what they're doing. I think the whole bunch knew they were up to no good.

[Velma]

BTW Velma (who's too cheeken to post herself) is a former horse owner. She asks what is the procedure for going over Sprowl's head. Maybe that would be a good tool for us to get behind as a group.

Thanks a lot Coffee......call me cheeken...

[bile]

First, you're wrong about Sprowl.  On your own blog you have pointed out he's an ex-cop.  Besides that he IS a thug, because he's giving the orders in this case, whereas Mikaela was just a busybody neighbor/bureaucrat. 

A thug is a "A person who treats others violently and roughly, especially for hire." If he's giving the orders he's not the thug, the cops are. If he has no arrest power and can not act without the police he's no more a thug than any other bureaucrat who's just "doing their job" and involves the boys in blue. He was a thug. He wants to be a thug now... but he's not allowed to act like those who actually invaded the Travis property and took the horses.

Finally, Sprowl didn't just "fuck up".  This was no accident.  He fucked up the first time by messing with Brian's family, then he did worse by coming back and stealing their horses.  He didn't make any effort to speak to media then, nor is he now.  He got some heat from the activists then, as he should have, and must be expecting more and willing to deal with it.  I think if anything the heat should be cranked up on this douche.

Fucked up as in he probably underestimated the response. He fucked up by not sharing his side and refusing to do so now giving us the ability to shine him in a negative light.

If you really think that sending text messages actually accomplishes anything feel free. I'm just telling you that emotionally charged responses don't get you very far and are likely to set you back. Attack the system, attack the position, attack the professional man, don't attack the personal man when he has not clearly aggressed by the standards of the statist community. You make him look the victim and that's our role. It was just some advice from experience in similar situtations. No reason to be all hyped up.

What do you mean turn up the heat? You've advocated protests at his home which many would consider fairly serious given you'd implicitly be involving his family. And do you advise similar actions against the CPD officers, farmers and vets involved?

[Jared]

just want to point out that the video being passed around does not really explain why the horses were taken...that is, what the excuse was..i think the video would be much more effective if that were explained in a little more detail, and at the beginning of the video rather then the end. otherwise, i think most people will just assume that the spca must have had a good reason for taking the animals.

[FTL_Ian]

I think the activists should do what they feel is right.  In the case of a protest or news crew outside his home, I think his family has a right to know what a slimeball their father/husband is and what he really does for a living, in case they didn't already know.

I wouldn't suggest a home targeted activist response for the others except perhaps the police chief.

If you really think that sending text messages actually accomplishes anything feel free. I'm just telling you that emotionally charged responses don't get you very far and are likely to set you back. Attack the system, attack the position, attack the professional man, don't attack the personal man

Are you saying that text messages are ineffective but a voicemail is?  One could suggest that any form of communication from upset individuals will show him that:

1.  We're paying attention
2.  We're upset
3.  We're active

He may eventually decide he doesn't wish to engage in thuggery anymore and retire to Florida.   

[FTL_Ian]

Finally, I wouldn't consider, "You ought to be ashamed." an emotionally charged response.  Seems like a statement of fact, to me.   

[bile]

I think the activists should do what they feel is right.

I disagree. I think activists should do what's most effective. They can do whatever they like but I'd rather them do things which make steps toward freedom. That's why I commented with my concerns and suggestions.

In the case of a protest or news crew outside his home, I think his family has a right to know what a slimeball their father/husband is and what he really does for a living, in case they didn't already know.

I wouldn't suggest a home targeted activist response for the others except perhaps the police chief.

I agree they should know but showing up to a persons private home for something related to the profession is historically seen as a no no. I don't see how it'd be a positive action to take. The business or police department is fine but taking it to one's home is another level which the public is generally not comfortable with.

Are you saying that text messages are ineffective but a voicemail is?  One could suggest that any form of communication from upset individuals will show him that:

1.  We're paying attention
2.  We're upset
3.  We're active

I didn't bring up voicemail but mentioned what means I did think would be more useful. If you are making statements in a unidirectional way such as SMS or straight to voicemail you pushing them away and being offensive rather than inviting and defensive. We always want to be perceived to be responding defensively so as to look the victim. We have to bigger than them and that goes for something as simple as semi aggressive SMSs.

He may eventually decide he doesn't wish to engage in thuggery anymore and retire to Florida.   

One can hope.

Finally, I wouldn't consider, "You ought to be ashamed." an emotionally charged response.  Seems like a statement of fact, to me.   

Knowing your voice and arguing style so well from listening to FTL I read "You ought to be ashamed." stated in the same tone you seem to use "Sir." Which is usually when you are a little worked up. Regardless, shame is an emotion and stating someone should do anything... let alone feel a particular way... is a sure way to put someone on the defensive and would seem to me an emotionally fueled comment.

He should feel shame. I just believe it'd be a hell of a lot more effective to attempt to get him to actually feel that way through showing him the flaws in his beliefs rather than trying to instruct him to what is appropriate.

[FTL_Ian]

Perhaps you can be the one to build a bridge with Steve Sprowl.  Let us know how it works out! 

[Friday]

just want to point out that the video being passed around does not really explain why the horses were taken...that is, what the excuse was..i think the video would be much more effective if that were explained in a little more detail, and at the beginning of the video rather then the end. otherwise, i think most people will just assume that the spca must have had a good reason for taking the animals.

I agree; after listening to FTL, watching the video, reading the Union Leader article, and reading this thread, I remain confused. 

Per the video, it seems that Brian was informed in some way that the reason his horses were taken was because he didn't fill out some sort of paperwork. What does that mean?  What did the search warrant say?  Were prior notices delivered by mail or in person, or did this incident come completely out of the blue?

Whether the horses were taken for paperwork reasons or alleged abuse reasons, why the hell does that entitle entrance into the family home??  Again, what does the search warrant say?

Has any information been provided as to if/how the Travises can/will get their horses back, or do they really have no idea?

Were any animals other than horses examined by the vet? For example, if the official reason for all this is alleged animal abuse, you'd think the vet would also take a look at the dogs, right?

[FTL_Ian]

According to Brian, they didn't even look at the horses that were walking about the property, as that would have apparently been too much work.

[bile]

As I understood it Brian claimed the warrant said that they were to secure all weapons on the property which would mean the house primarily. Could have been a sly way to get in the house but it doesn't seem like that was a target. They were just covering their ass. I don't believe they could have confiscated or used anything as evidence found in the house.

[FTL_Ian]

Cops can always confiscate "contraband", but they can't necessarily use the confiscated items against you.  If Miller had a grow op in his closet, they could have taken the plants, but not charged him, cause they weren't on the warrant.

[Peacemaker]

The guy in the suit and the gray stupid hat is the Prosecutor from Charlie and Jesse's hat trials.

Lt. Reams?

He sure didn't want to admit who he was.

I got the distinct feeling that nobody there felt righteous about what they were doing, except for Steve Sprowl and (possibly) Dr. George. Animal lovers who are rescuing abused horses tend to be proud of what they're doing. I think the whole bunch knew they were up to no good.

You're right about that!  The whole Bunch did look awfully guilty because they were (!) Up to No Good.   

I feel bad for the family and the scarred Horses and I look forward to their Speedy return.  I wonder what's next, I"m sure lots.

I"d love to see a visit to the SPCA, a protest in front, (big signs "SPCA are Horse Thieves!")a run at a Steve Interview?  The Press asked to cover the story?  Letters to the Editor are always good.  I also like the idea of visiting the Dirty Doctor's Office and letting his customers know the real deal on the "Good" Doctor; that he's a Snitch for Hire.


Legal wise, I'm not sure if I missed it,  but what's next?  Is there a hearing scheduled?

[Kat Kanning]

Apparently, no one's been charged with anything yet.