Unless you live in a very deep hole, you’ve no doubt seen or heard all the hullabaloo about the poor misunderstood dog, Mickey, and the mean nasty 4 year old, Kevin, who was mauled – nearly to death – by Mickey. At least that’s the way the animal rights cuckoo birds are telling it. Kevin shouldn’t have taken the dog’s bone and the babysitter should have been watching Kevin closer. Right?
Wrong.
Lets go back a bit and do a brief coverage of things based on official reports and not things found on Facebook. A lady, and the boy – Kevin – in her care, go to a neighbor’s house for a play date with other kids. The neighbor has a dog named Mickey, who is chained up 24/7 because six months or so ago it killed a puppy.
Kevin and the other kids were playing in the back yard, while being watched by the sitter and other adults that were there. Kevin unknowingly came within reach of the chain that Mickey was on. He had his back to the dog, and the dog, unprovoked, tackled and mauled Kevin.
Kevin did nothing more than get within the 12 foot radius of the dog. He was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Kevin was rushed to the hospital where the nurses and doctors state he was so horribly disfigured they could barely stand to look. The whole right side of his face was hanging off and he’d lost so much blood he was in shock. He’s had several surgeries, a feeding tube and a breathing tube, and will have to have more surgeries for years to come.
Fast forward to now and you find that there is a campaign by animal rights activists to keep Mickey from being euthanized, a fund started in order to raise money for Mickey’s legal fees and Mickey has, somehow, hired a lawyer.
You’ll also find that there are double and triple the number of people who support the dog and its behavior, fighting to keep it from being euthanized, than there are who support the child and his family.
More money has been sent in the dog’s defense than to help Kevin’s mom, a single mother with no family, pay for the surgeries he’s had or the hundreds more he’ll need.
It’s rather disgusting really. Disgusting and sick.
I do not understand – and I will never understand – why anyone values an animal’s life over a human’s life. Many have said it’s not about valuing the dog’s life over Kevin’s, I disagree, but even if that were the case the dog’s life is, obviously, still valued more. Keeping the dog alive puts people at risk and wanting to keep him alive means you don’t mind that the hundreds or thousands of people he’ll come into contact with will be at risk.
Truthfully, the dog should have been euthanized after it killed a puppy, but it wasn’t. It was put on a chain – where it only made the dog more aggressive.
Some have said that they don’t value animal life more than human life, but value animal life more than I do. Color me confused on that one. I don’t value animal life, why? Because I think euthanizing a dog is a better alternative than forcing it to live life on a chain?
You may have heard of Tillikum, the killer whale that killed the Seaworld trainer in 2010. Many were dumbfounded and confused by this horrific accident at the proverbial hands of such a “gentle giant”. What people didn’t realize, because it was covered up, Tillikum had already killed twice before.
As a result of the last incident, Tillikum is now kept in isolation (most of the time) from other whales and isn’t allowed in the water when people are. He is tended and cared for from platforms and gates and the only physical contact he has is with the pressure washers the trainers use to pet and massage him. He is still used for breeding purposes – even though he, clearly, is aggressive – and has sired 21 offspring, 11 are still alive and all are in captivity.
No one wants to say it, but he is kept in isolation and denied any contact, rather than freed or euthanized, because his sperm is worth millions. He’s successfully sired more ‘cows’ than any other in captivity.
It makes no sense to me why people feel keeping an animal in (almost) complete isolation is a more desirable option than euthanization. I’m cruel and don’t love animals because I’d rather seen one dead than held in isolation? How is what they’re putting Tillikum through *not* cruel? How is it okay to keep him alive but deny him any sort of physical contact?
It’s the same with Mickey. What’s going to happen to him if he isn’t euthanized? Is he going to go back to a chain? Is he going to have to be kept in isolation away from other animals? Away from human contact?
Mickey’s attorney, John Schill, states that Mickey is the victim in all this – which is perverse and sick. He, and others, say Kevin provoked the dog. I guess that means he had it coming…? He wants the dog put into some rehabilitation program and then into a home that doesn’t have children.
That’s all well and good, but how successful has dog rehabilitation, with a dog this violent, been in the past? And putting him in a home without children doesn’t mean he won’t attack children in the area or even the adult whose care they are in. Dogs have turned on and killed their owners before. It’s nothing new.
One person, who later claimed they were joking said: 
Joking, or otherwise, about euthanizing the babysitter is one thing. What confounds me about this comment is the fact that the blame is being displaced from the dog – because it was chained – to the babysitter.
Clearly, people who want to blame the sitter do not have children. You can’t possibly watch a child 24/7 and never take your eyes off of them. Which, is moot anyway when the report shows that she and other adults were watching him when it took place. A person is no match for a dog on the attack. A dog moves much faster.
No one places blame on the dog. I’m not sure I do either. I know I wouldn’t be very happy if I was forced to wear a collar and only given a 12 foot radius to move around every day. Keeping dogs chained make them more aggressive. Who can blame them? If blame is to be placed on a person, it should be placed on the owners of the dog for not eradicating him from the face of the earth after his first kill.
Six or seven months ago, when the dog killed a puppy, it should have been rewarded with a bullet in the head. Not punished to a life on a chain. The death of an animal isn’t cruel when human life is at stake or when the alternative is living life on a chain. Besides, dogs on chains have killed many times before.
The Humane Society website states that approximately 3-4 million dogs and cats are euthanized each year. Why is the whole world focused on this dog and saving it? Why are they so quick to send money to defend a dog that has a history of attack and killing when perfectly innocent dogs – that have harmed no one and just want to be loved – are killed daily?
What’s interesting is that in many cases it’s the same people who say the dog isn’t to blame that want to blame guns when a shooting takes place. An inanimate object is at fault when used for murder, but it’s the fault of the person watching the kid when a dog attacks?
That’s equivalent to blaming teachers for students getting shot. How does that make sense?
I was just reading an article about a man who shot his neighbor’s dog when it came onto his property. The comments on the article are filled with people outraged at the man’s behavior. Which I can understand. He could have handled the situation much better. I’m not saying I think he was right. However, the number of people who want to shoot him, is not only… stifling, it’s dumbfounding.
It’s dumbfounding because an idiot shoots a dog and everyone wants him to pay, but an idiot goes and shoots a group of innocent movie goers or children, everyone wants wants the gun to pay.
I can’t possibly imagine what would happen if a group of children were to kill a dog. I can guess though… The same people who say “Think about the poor innocent children” when talking about banning guns would be saying “Those sick and twisted children should pay for what they did!”
Those that defend the dog say that dogs are a product of their environment. I tend to agree, but when the pro-gunners make that same assertion for a kid that takes his mom’s guns and shoots up a school, they’re made to feel like heartless people who don’t care for the safety of children.
When did this world get so upside down? I mean, I know it’s been coming for awhile, but this is so far past upside down it’s almost right back up again.
There is something, clearly, mentally wrong and unstable about a people who are okay with the murder of innocent babies or simultaneously fight against the euthanization of vicious dogs and for the euthanization of elderly people or people with illnesses.
The dog has representation and several thousand dollars raised for its defense. The attorney should do the case pro bono and send the money to pay for the boys surgeries. If not, the family of the boy should sue the dog in civil court for duress and the cost of medical bills.
My thoughts, love and prayers are with Kevin and his mother.
In the meantime, maybe Michael Vick is interested in adopting a dog that’s in need of a home…
Life of a Nut, Shell 
Where’s Moses when you need him?
“When an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the ox shall not be liable. But if the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has been warned but has not kept it in, and it kills a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death.” (Exodus 21:28-29)
Biblical ethics 101: People are more important than animals. Animals who kill people should be killed. People who let animals kill people are guilty of murder, and therefore should also be killed.
The sort of response this story has gotten is part and parcel with our culture’s suicidal rebellion against every aspect of God’s authority. Every perversion, from twisting God’s design for sex to valuing Mickey over Kevin, is an attempt to destroy God (which is impossible) by destroying the closest thing at hand: God’s image…man.
May He have mercy on us!
LikeLike
Great reply! You have a good head on your shoulders! I was thinking about that exact verse! As much as I love animals, people are way more important. My dog (Sherlock) is not vicious at all, but he ever mauled an innocent person, we would put him down immediately!
LikeLike
“It’s dumbfounding because an idiot shoots a dog and everyone wants him to pay, but an idiot goes and shoots a group of innocent movie goers or children, everyone wants wants the gun to pay.”
I am lost to your logic here. We want the person who used the gun to pay. Guns don’t kill people. People (Americans mostly) kill people with guns and by the foolishness that makes people think that pit breeds are family dogs.
People kill people with guns/pits by introducing them into their homes and communities and using them for protection. It is useless to blame the gun/pit for being a tool of destruction, they are just fulfilling the purpose they were designed for.
Guns aren’t designed for protection anymore than pit bulls are. They are both designed to kill something. If they were meant to protect, America would be the safest country in the world. Armor is protection.
Gun supporters and pit supporters have everything in common:
“Pit bulls don’t kill people, bad owners kill people.”
“I have a fundamental right to own a pit for protection, keep your laws off my pits.”
“You can have my pit when you take it from my cold, dead hands.”
“If everyone owned a pit bull, we would all be safer.”
“The only way to beat a bad owner with a pit is a good owner with a pit.”
“Too bad the kid was killed, he shouldn’t have been left alone at home with a pit. It’s the owners fault.”
Two groups. Same logic.
LikeLike
Yes, you’re clearly lost on the logic. Plus you must not have read the entire post and you’re one of those that want to blame guns. What I said was:
“If blame is to be placed on a person, it should be placed on the OWNERS of the dog for not eradicating him from the face of the earth after his first kill.”
“What’s interesting is that in many cases it’s the same people who say the dog isn’t to blame that want to blame guns when a shooting takes place. An inanimate object is at fault when used for murder, but it’s the fault of the person watching the kid when a dog attacks?”
The person at fault for the dog attacking/mauling/killing is the person who holding (as in keeping) the dog. Just as the person responsible for shooting someone is the person holding the gun.
You said:
“Guns aren’t designed for protection anymore than pit bulls are. They are both designed to kill something. If they were meant to protect, America would be the safest country in the world.”
That’s almost as backward as blaming an inanimate object. Guns are designed for protection – always have been. From the beginning that’s what they were designed for. Go back to the Revolutionary War – for instance – We were invaded by the British and we protected ourselves from that take over with GUNS.
The reason we’re not the safest country in the world has NOTHING to do with guns or dogs and everything to do with the mentality of the people who want to harm others. Just because someone uses a gun or dog or knife or whatever as their weapon of choice to hurt or kill someone doesn’t mean the gun/dog/knife/whatever is what actually killed them.
The difference, is a dog that has been shown and taught how to kill, can and will kill when left alone. A dog, left alone, could kill someone who walked up on it. A gun or knife, left alone, isn’t going to kill someone who walks up on it any more than it’s going to get up and go on a shooting spree.
The lack of logic in your thought process is dumbfounding.
“Pit bulls don’t kill people, bad owners kill people.” – Possibly, but pit bulls can act on their own. A gun cannot.
“I have a fundamental right to own a pit for protection, keep your laws off my pits.” – No one said you can’t own a pit, but if a pit goes nuts and kills, you will be held responsible.
“You can have my pit when you take it from my cold, dead hands.” – Which is a possibility as there are numerous cases where a pit turned on its owner and killed them.
“If everyone owned a pit bull, we would all be safer.” – No, not at all. As I said, pits can get out of their homes/yards and kill people without the owner knowing he is out or killing.
“The only way to beat a bad owner with a pit is a good owner with a pit.” – No. The only way to beat a bad owner with a pit is to take the dog away from him and not let him own any other dogs – ever. That or a person with a gun can handle the dog if it were to attack.
“Too bad the kid was killed, he shouldn’t have been left alone at home with a pit. It’s the owners fault.” – Yes, it is definitely the owner’s fault. If he has a dog that is capable of killing, a child should not be left alone with it. Just like a child shouldn’t be left alone with a loaded gun. However, the problem isn’t leaving the kid alone with a dog or a gun and the fact that someone leaves a kid home alone in the first place.
You say “Two groups. Same logic.” and I can see your attempt to make it so, but you fail miserably. A gun, left alone – untouched, will NOT EVER damage or harm anyone or anything. A dog, such as a pit, left alone – touched or untouched, CAN do damage.
Two groups, not even close to the same logic. A person who uses a gun to kill is at fault for killing. A person who raises an aggressive dog and doesn’t put it down once it has exhibited its aggression is at fault when and if that dog kills anyone or anything. Period.
LikeLike
“A gun, left alone – untouched, will NOT EVER damage or harm anyone or anything. A dog, such as a pit, left alone – touched or untouched, CAN do damage.”
Gun accidents (guns left untouched and lying around by careless owners) kill 500 kids a year. Gun violence, which is a clear result of easy access to firearms, killed in the ballpark of 200 Americans since you posted this article. (40-90 Americans die everyday as a result of gun violence.)
Pit breed dogs were responsible for 29 out of 31 DBRF’s last year. 17 of those victims were children. 5 of those kids were killed by their own family pets. One person is killed every 9 days by a pit this year.
There is a large number of people who seem to think that keeping a dangerous weapon or animal in their homes will never have any consequences. People kill people with guns. Pits kill people because their owners see a big sloppy grin on a dog and no nothing about the aggressive history of fighting breeds. Neither guns or pits have made America a safer place where we are free to walk the streets without fear.
LikeLike
“Gun accidents (guns left untouched and lying around by careless owners) kill 500 kids a year.”
Okay, that is just the most incredible statistic I have EVER heard. In previous studies, guns – left untouched – have never killed ANYONE and you’ve found a study where they’ve jumped up and killed 500 kids? Without anyone touching them? That’s pretty amazing seeing as an untouched gun can’t go off. I think, again, you’ve misspoken.
The 500 kids killed each year are because they were left “lying around by careless owners” where a child picked it up and hurt themselves or someone else. Again, it’s the owner of the gun at fault. Not the gun. A gun – untouched – can do ZERO damage.
“Gun violence, which is a clear result of easy access to firearms,
I’ll concede that the rate of gun violence is due to the readily available number of ILLEGAL firearms there are out there, but only in reference to gun violence. Remove the guns from the equation and you’re still left with violence. A lot more violence to boot. (See UK violence as well as AU)
“firearms have killed in the ballpark of 200 Americans since you posted this article. (40-90 Americans die everyday as a result of gun violence.)”
Firearms have also saved, in the ballpark of, 12,000 Americans since I posted this article. (6,000 – 7,000 Americans are saved everyday by the defensive use of guns through PERSONAL ownership of the guns – not the police.)
“People kill people with guns.”
Yes, this is true. People also kill people with knives, bats, and dogs. However, there are far more lives saved because of those with guns.
“Pits kill people because their owners see a big sloppy grin on a dog and no nothing about the aggressive history of fighting breeds.”
Exactly, which is why the owners – as I have said repeatedly – should be held accountable.
“Neither guns or pits have made America a safer place where we are free to walk the streets without fear.”
Can’t say about the pits, but I’d say that 3,000 citizens lives saved daily by those with guns has definitely made the streets in America safer.
There are 2.8% assault victims in the UK compared to 1.2% in the states. That’s 183% MORE than the US.
There are 183,419 drug related offenses per 100,000 people in the UK, in the US there are 560.1 per 100,000 people. 326 times the US!
There are also 125% more rape victims in the UK than US.
Canada has 92% more assault victims than the US and is ranked 5th in the world. (And we have roughly 300,000,000 people here and there’s roughly 35,000,000 there.)
AU compared to US –
Assault victims:
US 1.2% of the pop
AU 2.4% of the pop
Rape Victims:
US 0.4%
AU 1%
Guns have DEFINITELY made the streets much MUCH safer. You only want to look at the lives taken by those with guns and not the lives saved by those with guns.
Before you reply with ‘numbers’ and ‘studies’ about the evils of guns, you should probably study up on the other side of the coin. I assure you, I have studied both. The CDC website, the FBI website, the NCPA (National Center for Policy Analysis) would be good starts…
Have a nice day.
LikeLike
You sir, do not understand logic, that is for certain.
Owning a gun for protection and self defense is in the Constitution. Where does it say you have the right to own a dog? It’s not a right, it’s a privilege. Go look up the definition of right and privilege. Two totally different things.
To say guns aren’t made for protection is the height of ludicrous. You can protect yourself with a gun without killing. In fact most protection doesn’t involve killing, often it’s enough just to show it.
And lastly, the United States does have the lowest violent crime rates world wide, precisely because of the high concentration of gun ownership. Not because the police protect us, because they can’t, not when seconds count and they take minutes or hours to respond. Go re check your facts before spewing liberal bull crap. If you think we are violent as Americans, go try being a Christian in China, or any middle east country. You can be killed in many countries just for what you believe… And yet you call us violent? Wow… I have no words.
LikeLike
For every success story that you can claim a gun protected someone, 500 women are killed by domestic gun violence.
“And lastly, the United States does have the lowest violent crime rates world wide, precisely because of the high concentration of gun ownership.”
It only takes a 5 minute Google search to debunk this. For example:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115404/guns-and-domestic-violence-five-facts-about-how-women-are-murdered
LikeLike
First you say ” Gun violence, which is a clear result of easy access to firearms, killed in the ballpark of 200 Americans since you posted this article. (40-90 Americans die everyday as a result of gun violence.)”
I present you with the thousands of lives saved daily through the proper use of a gun and suddenly there are 500 killed for every one that’s saved?
And the link you provide to ‘debunk’ the myth are stats provided by “Mayors against illegal guns”. Try going to one of the sites I mentioned, like the FBI or the CDC for information not a biased source.
More guns = Less crime.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/preliminary-semiannual-uniform-crime-report-january-june-2013/tables/table_1_january_to_june_2012-2013_percent_change_by_population_group.xls
LikeLike
THE difference between a dog and a gun. A dog allegedly has a brain a gun does not.
LikeLike
Also, a firearm cannot load itself. can start and stop itself
LikeLike
Oh my, where to begin.
“by the foolishness that makes people think that pit breeds are family dogs.”
What’s wrong with pit bulls? I’ve seen extremely nice pit bulls. Stop hating on certain dogs, man, it’s all in how they are treated and trained. a German Shepard can be more vicious than a pit.
Now you compare a dog to a gun.
A dog can act of its own free will, a gun cannot. A dog can attack independent of the owner. A gun cannot. A gun is a tool. A dog is an animal.
If the owner knows of an issue with the dog but does nothing, its on the owner. But the dog can still be dangerous and if a dog is being aggressive to me or my family I’ll kill it with no qualms.
The dog in this case is dangerous, it shouldn’t be released and it obviously has issues. I see know problem with euthanize a dog for attacking a defenseless human who did nothing to provoke it.
LikeLike
We are getting off the topic with the gun analogy.
This is about a dog, that maul and almost killed a 4 year old, getting more support than the boy.
The second part is about The Lexus Project and their followers who believe a dog is never at fault. And if the dog did attack, they will make up a story that makes the victim or someone else at fault.
There is Onion, the dog they got release after he killed a one year old baby. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/jan/23/dog-killed-boy-henderson-released-after-2-years-cu/
And Gus, who is going to court soon, where they have blamed the victim, claimed she abused the dog, and let their followers harrass and threaten her. http://advocatesforamber.org/
LikeLike
well that was the biggest pile of shit I have ever wasted my time reading.Kevin Vicente Funds $45,000+ Mickey Funds $5,000+ People who Value Mickey’s Life over Kevin’s 0, OK lets say 1 I’m sure there’s one retard out there.How is keeping Mickey alive putting people at risk if he is in a sanctuary with people that know how to handle him? people who chose to care for and rehabilitate him, people he will live with for the rest of his life.I’d also like to know how the baby sitters little white puppy with black spots she showed on live television as the puppy Mickey supposedly killed some how became a German Shepard today. http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o197/pawpaws4/Screenshot-3_15_20149_58_28PM.png
You say that Mickey was only on the chain for 6 months? because of this white puppy with the black spots/German Shepard puppy he supposedly killed but no one reported, and yet animal behavior specialists say he has been obviously chained for most likely all his life and beaten.
Sorry but wrong again no you don’t find double/triple the amount of people supporting the dog than you do supporting Kevin and his family. What you see is a page called ‘Save Mickey’ with 65k likes that supports both Mickey and Kevin and a page called ‘For the Love of Kevin’ with 500 likes and 15+ spin off hate Hate Mickey pages. As long as Kevin has support I don’t think it really matter what the name of the page is, what matters is the kind of people supporting the page, the ‘Save Mickey’ people are good level headed people the ‘For the Love of Kevin’ are hateful, cruel and spiteful, they lost sight of what they were supposed to be doing.
Seriously you people need to move on, Mickey will get the help he needs which is the only good that will come of this.
If any of you around Kevin really do care about him, please for his sake don’t fill his little mind with your hatred your not helping his nightmares any and your going to insure that he will be terrified of dogs for the rest of his life.
LikeLike
Currently
Save Mickey Likes: 65,995
For the Love of Kevin Likes: 833
Who taught you logic?
If that were true, people wouldn’t be saying things like “if that kid hadn’t taken his bone, then…” or “Mickey was only acting within his nature…” and countless other hateful remarks. And it’s not one person saying them. You/They can claim you don’t value Mickey’s life more, but actions speak louder than words. You actions are so loud, it drowns out your words.
Who taught you the meaning of cruelty?
Well, see… if you’d been paying attention, you’d see the date this was written was before the ignorant judge passed down the ruling. (Again, your need to act shows your contrary position…) However, it is still very cruel. He’ll be put under anesthesia where he’ll be castrated, microchipped and his teeth will be pulled and/or ground down. A process that tax payers are, no doubt, paying for and a process that will be painful for the dog and often results in a broken jaw. It’s considered such a cruel practice that vets won’t do it unless ordered to do so by a court of law. Vets don’t do them, otherwise, because of the cruelty and because it never works. If the teeth are removed, the ones behind them move into place. If ground down, he’ll adapt and still be able to do the same damage he did before. (The fact that it won’t work or won’t make the dog any less dangerous is per a vet.) One can only hope that something goes wrong while he’s under and he doesn’t wake up. It would certainly be far less cruel to him. But see, you animal rights fruitcakes don’t care about that. You care only that the dog will live because it makes you feel better. Makes you feel like you accomplished something.
Who taught you to be so gullible?
I have no idea why you’re showing me a random picture of a dog or what German Shepherd you’re talking about. Apparently you’ve gotten the notion that the dog pictured was the one killed, but it really didn’t and now it’s a German Shepherd. Another example of your kind getting up in arms and screaming abuse by believing what some random person on the net says rather than actually finding out on your own.
Who taught you how to research?
Going by the interviews of the person who filed the report to have Mickey euthanized after he killed their puppy (because, again, you believe something that isn’t so. It was reported.) it was restrained more often and more closely after it killed the pup. (Try reading the actual police reports and things rather than believing nonsense that someone tells you with no proof to back it up.)
WHO TAUGHT YOU MATH?
There’s not double and triple the number of supporters for Mickey than Kevin, that’s true. There’s 79 times more. SEVENTY NINE TIMES AS MANY PEOPLE SUPPORTING THE ANIMAL. That’s just on Facebook. *IF* the people on the Save Mickey page claim they also support Kevin, there would be 833 likes MORE on Kevin’s page than Mickey’s. Not all Kevin supporters support the dog, but all the dog supporters claim to support Kevin. Logic dictates that if that were true, Kevin’s page wouldn’t just have as many likes. It would have more.
Who taught you manners?
From Mickey supporters: “Kill the babysitter” … “Someone should put the owner on a chain” … “That boy’s mother needs a bullet in her head” Those things say “good and level headed” to you?
Who taught you goodness?
Who taught you compassion?
Who taught you observation?
The dog that chose to attack and viciously maul him, unprovoked – from behind, insures he’ll be terrified for the rest of his life.
The dog that chose to attack and viciously maul him, unprovoked – from behind, is the reason Kevin will have to have reconstructive surgery for YEARS to come. Long after Mickey gets what’s coming to him.
The dog that chose to attack and viciously maul him, unprovoked – from behind, is the reason Kevin’s mom had to quit her job.
The dog that chose to attack and viciously maul him, unprovoked – from behind, is the reason Kevin no longer has a home.
And you people felt that dog was worthy of saving – rather than one of the 3 million innocent animals – in shelters – that will be euthanized this year.
Whoever it was that taught you logic, cruelty, gullibility, math, manners, goodness, kindness, compassion, how to research and how to observe has failed miserably. You are a stellar example for those who put the well being of animals before people.
You all clearly lack compassion for your fellow man.
I find you deplorable, sad and absolutely disgusting examples of human beings.
Currently
Save Mickey: 66,171 Likes
For the Love of Kevin: 833 Likes
In the mere minutes it took me to type this, Mickey gained 183 likes. Kevin gained none.
LikeLike
LOL, what a joke.
“Mickey, and the mean nasty 4 year old, Kevin,”
Kevin isn’t any more or less “mean nasty” than any other kid, he’s just a four year-old. Who wasn’t supervised.
“The neighbor has a dog named Mickey, who is chained up 24/7 because six months or so ago it killed a puppy.”
Which version of her story do you believe, the one where a few months ago a strange puppy wandered back and Mickey killed it or the one where her dog was killed by Mickey nearly a year ago yet somehow she never made a report about it and still brings kids around Mickey? How about the gentleman that originally said Kevin was bitten by Mickey before and was scared of Mickey and went nowhere near him when Mickey just attacked him out of nowhere? I don’t think you realize how many stories came out of Ms. Lupe Villa’s camp. You hoot and holler about the police report like its gospel while we note that it speaks volumes they can’t get their story straight. ALL these claims came from Lupe and her camp, they aren’t “rumors.”
Also, he was likely chained up for much of his life, and it was revealed he’d been under-fed.
“Kevin and the other kids were playing in the back yard, while being watched by the sitter and other adults that were there.”
Incorrect. The actual sitter was talking away on the phone inside a house. Lupe (the girlfriend of the sitter’s son) was around the corner not watching Kevin. I know Lupe Villa and her camp have put forth several different versions but this is what she testified in court.
“Kevin unknowingly came within reach of the chain that Mickey was on. He had his back to the dog, and the dog, unprovoked, tackled and mauled Kevin.”
Incorrect. Kevin, being a curious little four year-old, approached Mickey and took his bone. This is what Lupe testified in court as what the boys told her. It is also consistent with the poor boy’s injuries where the wounds are concentrated to the right side of his face (Kevin is right-handed). Kevin is tiny for a four year-old boy and Mickey is a larger American Bulldog Mix so it’s a logical occurrence.
“You’ll also find that there are double and triple the number of people who support the dog and its behavior, fighting to keep it from being euthanized, than there are who support the child and his family.”
Probably because there was a deadline to save Mickey’s life in addition to the loud, crazy townspeople waving their pitchforks and screaming for the dog’s blood despite the overwhelming evidence (which even the judge blasted the adults about) that the care-givers were irresponsible with Kevin and neglected the dog. The Save Mickey people are logical enough to realize killing Mickey won’t help Kevin and understand his care-givers at the time are negligent people that should be faulted first and foremost. You know it is possible to support the dog AND donate to Kevin, right? In fact one woman (a Save Mickey supporter) that bought a bathrobe for Kevin’s mom found out she’s a different size than what was asked for. Now she’s called out the fundraisers (who opened groups such as KILL MICKEY!, MICKEY SUPPORTERS ARE SCUMBAGS!) to explain themselves and no one wants to take responsibility.
If you want to know why Save Mickey keeps gaining so many votes, it’s because the truth has come out and the shitty guardian apologists calling for the dog’s blood have revealed their true colors.
But go on; keep enabling shitty guardianship like the rest of the shitty guardianship apologists. You look really, really tough, LOL.
LikeLike
You must be watching ABC news “Animals Before Children” or something because in the courtroom it was divulged that there was NO BONE taken from the dog. Actually, the testimony in the courtroom revealed every single bit of the lies coming out of your mouth were just that – lies. The boy was being watched by adults, who were helpless to stop it because a vicious dog on the attack is hard to stop.
As I said, a 75¢ bullet in the worthless piece of crap dog 6 months ago would have saved a WHOLE lot of problems. I’m hoping the surgery to cruelly grind his teeth off hasn’t taken place yet and the vet has gotten the money we raised to have him ‘accidentally’ give the dog too much anesthesia…
The majority of the people who support that dog do NOT support Kevin. They lie and say they do, but their perverse and vile actions prove otherwise. Since this morning, the dog has gained over 500 likes while Kevin’s has gained 2. If the lies you’re spewing were true, there would be 835 more likes on Kevin’s page than the beast’s.
People like you, who call themselves animal lovers or animal rights people, make me sick. You give true animal lovers a bad name. You’re disgusting because you pervert the truth to save a dog THAT HAS KILLED and are okay with the cruelty in grinding down its teeth – which vets won’t do without a court order because it’s cruel and doesn’t work – while 3 million perfectly innocent and loving dogs are euthanized for no other reason than existing. You are revolting because you defend a DOG over a HUMAN LIFE. You’re repugnant because you excuse the torture of a 4 year old because you THINK the child took the dog’s bone. Even if he DID, what “SICK”EY the dog did to him still deserves death – and a painful one. You probably have no problem with abortion or the euthanizing of the elderly. If a child accidentally killed a dog, defending itself, you’d be calling for that kid’s head on a plate and you know it.
And you probably do all this while enjoying a steak or cheeseburger too – like the hypocrites you are.
It’s okay though… We’ve got people watching the enablers that are going to send Mickey to a sanctuary so we know where he ends up. You know, people on the inside and all… Then snipers will get some free target practice and Mickey will get what’s coming to him!! All the while you will be celebrating the victory you THINK you obtained by allowing a murderous dog go free.
You are a sorry excuse for a human being and I hope you don’t have children and never do. May God have mercy on all of you.
LikeLike
Look, lady, go find a transcript. There were witnesses and reporters present in court. Lupe Villa testified that the mother of her boyfriend (who was actually babysitting Kevin, according to Lupe) had gone into a house to take a call. Lupe and her boyfriend were around the corner of the house while her own son and Kevin played in back. This is Lupe’s testimony. Lupe’s own son, according to Lupe, told her that Kevin took Mickey’s bone. Lupe did NOT witness the incident, do you understand this? The children were left unsupervised by Lupe’s own account.
So basically you’re angry Kevin’s page hasn’t generated as many likes as Mickey’s which conclusively proves people that support Mickey don’t support Kevin. Got it! Those of us that support Mickey also want the negligent adults held accountable to protect Kevin in the future and hopefully deter adults from such negligence. Since Mickey is out of the picture you no longer have an ax to grind. I just know that wherever there is lazy parenting or guardianship, you’ll be there to protect them.
I’m going to go ahead and skip over your theatrics, as hilarious as they are, because I just don’t care.
“May God have mercy on all of you.”
Blessed be!
LikeLike
Yes, I know you don’t care. That is clear and my point.
No mercy needed here, Sugar Britches, my faith and honor is placed on and in God and I place no creature above that of a man. Justice was not served and you’re disgusting and perverse if you think so. I hope some kid murders some dog when the dog attacks, because then you bunch of hypocrites will scream for the child to pay.
YOU are the one in need of finding a transcript honey. I’ve seen many. You have CLEARLY not. So, I’ll post one for you since you are seemingly incapable of researching anything and only listen to those who would probably love to prosecute the child for being in the dog’s yard.
From 3TV News in Phoenix: (LIVE FROM THE COURTROOM)
Guadalupe Villa is talking about why she thinks Micky is vicious at Micky’s hearing. Guadalupe Villa says she filed petition to put Micky down because he killed her dog 7 months ago and was vicious. Sgt Rummel takes the stand on his investigation. Says Micky was on an 18 foot chain. Sgt Rummel says Micky shouldn’t have been out there. He shouldn’t have been in common area because he could attack. Chain shouldn’t be more than 6ft. Sgt Rummel says Kevin was bit 8 feet out. Dog still had 10 more feet on chain. Sgt Rummel says Kevin picked up bone from ground NOT Micky’s mouth and then Micky charged after him. Kevin had back turned wasn’t taunting Micky. Sgt Rummel explains “it’s a prey thing now. He attacked a small animal and then a small person” Kabbel/Animal Behaviorist says Micky perked up around puppies and small dogs not in a social way but a predatory type interest. Judge finds Micky vicious. Villa tells judge she wants dog euthanized and Sgt Rummel agrees. It’s best interest of public. Judge says “There’s no guarantee that this dog won’t do this again.” Attorney Schill: “You’re right there is no guarantee” Judge orders trustee have Micky defanged, neutered, microchipped and may not be adopted out.
And you repugnant people feel that removing the dogs fangs and limiting his contact with others – for the rest of his life – is humane. You are the most sorry excuses and examples of human beings in existence and you SICKEN me.
Don’t bring a dog to a gunfight. You’ll lose every time. Find some real resources, quit distorting the truth and have a nice time sleeping soundly knowing that you allowed a killer to go free.
“What is the truth?” is what the judge asked and admitted it was a horrible situation. “No, don’t euthanize the dog!” The masses yelled and demanded “Give us Barabbas!” – Ooooops. I mean, the masses demanded “Give us Micky!”
LikeLike
“Yes, I know you don’t care. That is clear and my point.”
I said I don’t care about your theatrics. 😉
“Sgt Rummel says Kevin picked up bone from ground NOT Micky’s mouth and then Micky charged after him.”
First off, that isn’t an actual transcript. Second, all I see is the cop saying Kevin didn’t literally remove the bone from the dog’s actual mouth, something I never claimed and you never mentioned before. Looks like your own proof backfired so you hoped nobody noticed the goalposts moving. LOL, nice try though.You done lost it, lady.
I notice the part where Kibbel confirmed Mickey was probably abused physically and is treatable was omitted from your “transcript.” Nice of you to pretend to care but filing his fangs isn’t removing them.
Again I’ll skip your hilarious theatrics. But you’ve lost all credibility anyway.
LikeLike
Well, bless your heart. You don’t care about my theatrics, but you keep on comin’ back. I think you do care. The boy, you have made it clear, you don’t care about.
Honey, please, continue to make a fool of yourself. I left nothing out. It’s funny because my son is dealing with a bully at school who pulls the same malarky you’re trying to pull. So, this is good fodder for him to learn when dealing with bullies. YOU can say it until you’re blue in the face, doesn’t make it so.
How about you throw me a bone and show me some actual evidence that I can sink my teeth into. Much in the same rapacious manner Mickey did when he tore apart that poor child that you clearly don’t care about. You keep insisting you’re right. Who died and left you in charge? Whoever it was, let me know so I can lodge a complaint.
You and the rest that defend murderous dogs suffer from diarrhea of the mouth and I’m kinda sick of it leaving skid marks on my page, but I can deal with it because every time you come to my page and proliferate your fecal folly – I get paid.
So keep on coming by and defecating on my page. I’ll be donating the money that I make, changing your and your nutjob friend’s diapers, to the local shelter where I can make sure only innocent puppies and kittens are euthanized and ones that rip flesh from an innocent child’s bones can go free. Well, innocent animals euthanized after I kick them…
LikeLike
So, you have no problem with the dog attacking a kid? I hope you get a visit for DHS
LikeLike