Monday, December 04, 2006

Gentlemen: Start your engines (and hang on to your balls!) The Tacoma, Washington Gonad Battle is ON! Quick update to the Testicle Wars: The American Kennel Club advises that the December 12 Tacoma City Council meeting will address the issue of mandatory spay neuter of all dogs in Tacoma, Washington. You're going to feel a little pressure Actually, you're gonna feel a LOT of pressure. Particularly in the vicinity of your Bill of Rights guaranteed protection of private property. The U.S. Constitution says the government cannot simply strip you of what you own. Like that quivering little chunk of your dog. You might feel a significant twinge around your WALLET, too, if -- for any reason whatsoever -- you don't want to have your dog(s) surgically sterilized. Bidding begins at $55 for an annual "intact animal license". And then you have to pay for a breeder's license (at a yet-to-be-determined additional cost). Yup. Even if you have no interest whatsoever in breeding your dogs. The idea is to make you pay until it hurts for the privilege of leaving your dog the way he or she was born. Cash strapped? Fixed income? Putting your kid through med school? Tough shit. The privilege of owning intact dogs apparently does not extended to people with a limited income. Ya gotta pay the piper in Tacoma Now there's a "liberal" idea: discriminate against the poor. Good going, Councilwoman Anderson! Excellent! Does being poor mean you aren't good enough to own certain [intact] dogs? Is that the idea? Cause I got a problem with that. I'm also wondering if the Gonad Nazis will be going door-to-door inspecting dogs for the presence of unlicensed balls in the nicer parts of town. Or will they mostly scrutinize dogs in the poorer neighborhoods of Councilwoman Anderson's new, improved and de-testicled Tacoma? I sure don't see them ringing doorbells and peering between legs in the high rent districts. Do you? Doling out testicles, one by one. . .

There's plenty more to dislike about the Tacoma proposal. For example:

Limit laws would be testicle-specific. Four balls per household. Two intact animals per customer only, please. If you're a little old lady for four elderly Pug dogs that happen to have their balls still attached to their bodies. . .you've got a problem. Or two out of your four dogs sure do.

By the way, will Tacoma foot the bill if your dog(s) don't make it out of surgery? Cause I really don't see that happening, either. One strike and you're out in Tacoma Dogs picked up stray will be surgically sterilized in Tacoma. Doesn't matter how they got loose. Even if you have invested in all the permits and whatnot. Your property rights will NOT apply. The dog that goes into the pound will NOT be the same dog that comes out. Now where have I heard that idea before? Was it. . .the Institute for Animal Rights Law's website? Or maybe Animal Farm Foundation? Cause their "Five Point Approach to Community Safety" is just about in lock step with Tacoma's master plan to rid the city of gonads. Is everybody on the same page? Hell, no. The most comprehensive source of funding for spay-neuter programs, Maddie's Fund, does not fund government-mandated programs. Maddie's Fund only does voluntary programs. So who's gonna pay for all that surgery? The tax-payers of the City of Tacoma? Cause someone sure is. What's the plan, Councilwoman Anderson? Inquiring minds want to know! Write the City of Tacoma a letter. The sooner the better. Folks, I believe the Tacoma City Council is waiting to hear from you on this matter. And don't forget to drop Julie "owning-an-intact-dog-is-no-longer-a-right" Anderson a note, too. I don't understand how or why Julie thinks that blowing off property rights guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution is no big deal, but she does. She needs to hear from people just like you:


pitbullEmily said...

f'ng A, if I may use that phrase which kind of seems appropriate.

or not depending on the outcome of the war

Mark said...

You know this is the same councilwoman (Julie Anderson) who's ex-spouse (Alred) was the cop who barged into a Tacoma home unannounced, held the owner and her guests for 1+ hour, refused to listen to her story of owning the home from a divorce and then saying as they left; "Never mind" Frunz vs. City of Tacoma.

Remember, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this case to be a frivolous defense by the City of Tacoma. Now, you know the council must approve all appeals, lawsuits, settlements.

So, you ask; what does this mean to us? Remember, the council took a oath of office to defend our constitutional rights. They all broke that oath if they approved this appeal. Imagine if they won?
A cop could break down your door in your home unannounced and hold you prisoner in your own home, anywhere, anytime. This is was occurs in Russia, not the USA.

So when you go to the council, remember the council and councilwoman Anderson tried to take away your civil liberties.

Maybe Anderson should study the Bill of Rights and recuse herself from any votes involving protecting her ex-spouse #2 (if your counting) TPD cop Alred.


Nick w/ 2 dogs said...

Wow. Here is a quote from their local paper:

[Council woman Anderson] "She knows it’s “an encroachment on people’s rights.” Even so, she insists tough regulations are “really necessary until we get the pet population under control.”

So again, they wants to encroach on people's rights. Mark noted the same issue (sic) in the Frunz case.

Pattern in Tacomma?

BlueDogState said...

For the uninitiated, here's a link to news coverage of this incident:

Anonymous said...

Thank you for finally voicing what people on the streets of Tacoma have been saying since the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Frunz v. City of Tacoma case was frivolous

What is that you say? That the City Council tried to take away your CIVIL LIBERTIES. That's right friends in Seattle and Tacoma.

Your council of educated idiots, wanted take away your rights.

Facts of the case: TPD cops barge into Frunz's home unannounced, guns drawn, handcuff the owner for one hour, find out she actually owns the house (imagine that), and then says: "Never mind" and leaves.

The entire city council should be recalled.

Why you ask? Because they took a fricken oath of office to protect the constitution of the United States and the State of Washington. Look it up!

Catcher; Councilwoman Anderson's ex-spouse was one of the cops in this case. So, I ask, did she influence this appeal for her ex-spouse?

I suggest she and her cronies study the constitution and resign from office!

Watch your balls out there, she and the council will snap them too.

FUBAR in North Tacoma; Democrat

Mark NE Tacoma said...

Great post. No one is going to neuter or spay my AKC labs. Their Pedigree goes back 20 years. I heard from a friend in Tacoma that the council and Yes Councilwoman Anderson is going to enforce a new provision to their previous plan soon. What is that I hear, too? Oh yes, her #3 spouse is now rumored on the outs. I guess he still has his balls.

Maryanne said...

Dog lovers unit. Councilwoman Anderson wants to take away your pets "choice." Ms. Plan Parenthood wants to tell you how to breed your dog. From the photo you have posted, some might imply she should not have been breed. Two can play at that game. She is not in line with the AKC and has no right to tell me how to raise my pet. Good grief. My pet has more manners, skill, intelligence (way more), and obedience training in her life than most politicians. So before you throw stones at pet owners, hear this -- Keep your own house and in order.

Robert T. said...

We have a LOSER in Councilwoman Anderson in Tacoma, Washington. She claims she has dog(s) - plural. No frickin way this woman who HATES dogs and dog owners has any pet. She is a hate monger for responsible pet owners. If she had her way she would outlaw dogs pooping anywhere even those that pick it up and our responsible dog owners. She would tax you for each time your dog went pee on city right of way. The insane things this woman says is unbelieveable. Maxism run amuck in Tacoma.

Vote NO to Anderson in August 2007.

Micki said...

Micki (N. Proctor) also voted NO to Anderson. Anyone that claims they have a dog, (Bullsh@t) and wants to take away my rights as a AKC pet owners lost my vote! She is the biggest pile of SH@t our city has seen in a long time.

Save the image, lose the pet, Anderson hates dog owners.