Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Reply to Comment on New Chicago Pet Ordinance II

Comment by Melissa:

Honestly I think that the reasoning stating that it will reduce dog attacks is ridiculous.

Thank you. I haven't seen anything lately about dog attacks.

That being said, I think this law is a good idea. The shelters are not thinking of the bottom line, they are thinking of all the animals that have to come to them because they are strays or unwanted.

Not only strays or unwanted but due to the flooding in Iowa and Illinois. I've gotten the bulletins through certain organizations stating that they can't afford and don't have the facilities to keep taking on these animals left behind.

Once the term afford is used then the bottom line is being looked at. The bottom line is constantly looked at when ever a business is involved.

If you are not a breeder or showing them then what is the big deal to get them fixed.

Personally, I'm not fixed. Perhaps I should be but that's still in question. I was created this way and I like how I am. Can you ask your pet if it wants to be fixed? When a dog gets fixed it does change the animal. It becomes more sedentary, gains weight and is less attentive. In some cases, like my Father's dog, it becomes more mean. It effects every being differently and there's no way to guarantee what will come of it.

As for cats. Definitely have them spayed or neutered. There's way too many of them getting into my garbage cans. It will also help to stop the cats from marking their territories.

If you can't afford it there are always places that have low cost deals.

I went to a mechanic once that offered low rates. I bought a new car shortly after.

The amount of unwanted animals is staggering and allowing your pet to get knocked up because you didn't want to bother is pathetic.

People not taking responsibility for their animals and allowing them to get "knocked up" without being fixed is pathetic as well. The people that don't want to bother don't need an animal. By that I mean, if a person has an animal and can't stop it from reproducing without altering it, they should not have an animal. Having an animal is much more than just feeding and watering it.

As for the strays, there are a lot of programs set up to spay and neuter them to help the population control as well.

And then what? Spay and neuter them and put them in cages. Hope someone takes them home? Or release them back into the alleys? Here's an idea. Catch the strays, let them sit long enough that someone might claim them. If not, euthanize them. If someone does claim them, then spay or neuter them.

Sounds horrible but there is a huge overpopulation of strays especially cats.

Head down to the shelter some time and look at all of the little lives that are on the line because their owners didn't want to bother fixing them.

I've been to a few of the shelters here and outside the city. I've seen the many puppies and dogs that are in there. I've seen the sad faces. I've also noticed that a lot of those animals are fixed. Whether they are fixed after arrival or before was unknown to me at the time. And it didn't matter, if I had found the right animal I would have adopted it anyway.

However, I've seen many many animals with sad faces. I've nursed kittens to health with eye droppers. I've raised chickens from the egg. I've had many animals throughout my life. I've had many that died in my hands. So even though it did effect me I'm not going to run out and change the entire population because certain idiots don't know how to take care of their animals.

I also will not try to lead anyone to believe that the shelters are full due to the simple reason that someone didn't get their animal fixed.

I will lead people to believe that the shelters are full due to:
  • Strays
  • Animals being taken out of dangerous environments
  • The flooding that occurred in Iowa and Illinois.
  • Puppy mills. Like the ones that sell the animals to pet stores.
  • People buying pets due to their popularity and not realizing the responsibilities involved.
I'm not a bleeding heart. I don't believe that society should condone what actions are good for everyone. If society and government has to condone everything then we all lose our own voice.

Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Real Life Punisher??

Drug Arrests Were Real; the Badge Was Fake

By MONICA DAVEY
Published: July 1, 2008

GERALD, Mo. — Like so many rural communities in the country’s middle, this small town had wrestled for years with the woes of methamphetamine. Then, several months ago, a federal agent showed up.

Arrests began. Houses were ransacked. People, in handcuffs on their front lawns, named names. To some, like Mayor Otis Schulte, who considers the county around Gerald, population 1,171, “a meth capital of the United States,” the drug scourge seemed to be fading at last.

Those whose homes were searched, though, grumbled about a peculiar change in what they understood — mainly from television — to be the law.

They said the agent, a man some had come to know as “Sergeant Bill,” boasted that he did not need search warrants to enter their homes because he worked for the federal government.

But after a reporter for the local weekly newspaper made a few calls about that claim, Gerald’s antidrug campaign abruptly fell apart after less than five months. Sergeant Bill, it turned out, was no federal agent, but Bill A. Jakob, an unemployed former trucking company owner, a former security guard, a former wedding minister and a former small-town cop from 23 miles down the road.

Mr. Jakob, 36, is now the subject of a criminal investigation by federal authorities, and he is likely to face charges related to impersonating a law enforcement officer, his lawyer said.

The strange adventures of Sergeant Bill have led to the firing of three of the town’s five police officers, left the outcome of a string of drug arrests in doubt, prompted multimillion-dollar federal civil rights lawsuits by at least 17 plaintiffs and stirred up a political battle, including a petition seeking the impeachment of Mr. Schulte, over who is to blame for the mess.

And the questions keep coming. How did Mr. Jakob wander into town and apparently leave the mayor, the aldermen and pretty much everyone else he met thinking that he was a federal agent delivered from Washington to help barrel into peoples’ homes and clean up Gerald’s drug problem? And why would anyone — receiving no pay and with no known connection to little Gerald, 70 miles from St. Louis and not even a county seat — want to carry off such a time-consuming ruse in the first place?

Mr. Jakob’s lawyer, Joel Schwartz, said that what happened in Gerald was never a sinister plot, but a chain of events rooted in “errors in judgment.” Mr. Schwartz said he believed that at least three Gerald police officers, including the chief, knew that Mr. Jakob was not a federal drug agent or even a certified police officer.

“It was an innocent evolution, where he helped with one minor thing, then one more on top of that, and all of the sudden, everyone thought he was a federal agent,” Mr. Schwartz said. “I’m not saying this was legal or lawful. But look, they were very, very effective while he was present. I don’t think Gerald is having the drug problem they were having. I’ve heard from some residents who were thrilled that he was there.”

There were numerous arrests during Mr. Jakob’s time in Gerald (the exact number is uncertain, local law enforcement officials said, as legal action surrounding the case proceeds), but Mayor Schulte said that Mr. Jakob had, in fact, gone to elaborate lengths to deceive local authorities, including Ryan McCrary, then the police chief, into believing that he was a federal agent — with the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Marshals Service or some other agency.

In addition to having a badge and a car that seemed to scream law enforcement, Mr. Jakob offered federal drug enforcement help, Mr. Schulte said. (Local officials thought the offer must have somehow grown out of their recent application for a federal grant for radio equipment.) Mr. Jakob even asked Chief McCrary to call what he said was his supervisor’s telephone number to confirm Gerald’s need for his help, the mayor said.

When the call was placed, a woman — whose identity is unknown — answered with the words “multijurisdictional task force,” and said that the city’s request for federal services was under review, the mayor said. Mr. Schulte said he now suspects that Mr. Jakob adapted the nonexistent task force name from the “Beverly Hills Cop” movies starring Eddie Murphy.

“Not only were these officers taken in, but so was everybody else,” said Chet Pleban, a lawyer for Mr. McCrary and the other two members of the police force who lost their jobs after Mr. Jakob’s real identity came to light.

Of the firings, Mayor Schulte said, “Nobody wanted to, but the city’s lawyer recommended it.”

When residents first began noticing Mr. Jakob, he certainly looked the part. His hair was chopped short, residents recalled, and his stocky chest filled a black T-shirt he sometimes wore that read “Police.” They said he wore military-style boots, pants with pockets running down the legs and carried a badge (his lawyer said it was from a former job as a security guard in St. Louis). And his off-white Ford Crown Victoria was decked out with police radios and internal flashing lights, residents said.

He first came to town in January, his lawyer said, to meet Chief McCrary, whose experiences serving in Afghanistan Mr. Jakob had read about in a local newspaper. Mr. Jakob was considering contract work overseas, Mr. Schwartz said, and the pair hit it off.

Soon, the arrests began. Some of those whose homes were searched said they had been kicked in the head and had had shotguns held against them. Mr. Jakob, many said, seemed to be leading the crew of Gerald police officers.

“He was definitely in charge — it was all him,” said Mike Withington, 49, a concrete finisher, who said Mr. Jakob pounded on his door in May, waking him up and yanking him, in handcuffs, out onto his front yard.

Mr. Withington said he had not yet been charged with a crime; Gary Toelke, the Franklin County sheriff, confirmed that no local charges had been issued against him. But the mortification of that day, Mr. Withington said, has kept him largely indoors and led him to consider moving. Since the search, residents have tossed garbage and crumpled boxes of Sudafed (which has an ingredient that can be used to make methamphetamine) on his lawn, he said, and he no longer shops in town, instead driving miles to neighboring towns.

“Everybody is staring at me,” he said. “People assume you’re guilty when things like this happen.”

When Linda Trest, 51, a reporter at The Gasconade County Republican, started hearing complaints from people whose homes had been searched, she began making inquiries about Mr. Jakob.

“Once I got his name, I hit the computer and within an hour I had all the dirt on this guy,” Ms. Trest said.

As it turned out, Mr. Jakob, who is married and lives near Washington, a small town not far from Gerald, filed for bankruptcy protection in 2003 when he owned a trucking company, and had, at 22, pleaded guilty in Illinois to a misdemeanor charge of criminal sex abuse of someone in their teens.

Since the 1990s, he had worked, at times, as a police officer in tiny departments in towns like Kinloch, Mo., and Brooklyn, Ill., though he never seemed to stay anywhere long and was never certified as a police officer in either Missouri or Illinois, his lawyer said. (Under some conditions, short-term employees with some departments are not immediately required to have state certification.)

As in Gerald, he impressed some, if only at first. “He seemed to have experience on the street,” said J. D. Roth, the police chief in Caseyville, Ill., where Mr. Jakob was a temporary part-time officer for almost two months in 2000. “He walked the walk and talked the talk.”

In Gerald, just a day before it was revealed that he was not a federal agent, the city aldermen voted to make Mr. Jakob a reserve officer; he wanted the designation, Mr. Schulte said, so he could enforce local ordinances, and he stood before the aldermen, hands behind his back, seeking the title.

Mr. Jakob offered city officials three contact numbers — his personal cellphone, a cellphone he said he used for drug informants and his “multijurisdictional task force” cellphone, Mr. Schulte said.

“It was the movie, ‘Catch Me if You Can’ all over again,” said Mr. Schulte, referring to the 2002 film starring Leonardo DiCaprio as a master of deception. “I’m telling you, with this guy, everything was right.”

Friday, June 27, 2008

2nd Amendment Upheld by Supreme Court - Could Chicago be next?

Just to start off, here's a few links to news stories that you might want to check out.

Daley vows to fight for Chicago's gun ban

Jury still out on city gun ban

Mayor Daley calls Supreme Court's gun-ban reversal 'a very frightening decision'


Landmark Ruling Enshrines Right to Own Guns



The 2nd Amendment was written for a reason. It wasn't put into the Constitution just for the government's uses but it was also put there for the common good of every person that lives within the border. I should reword this. For the common good of every person that 'legally' lives within the border.

Granted, it was written during a time when there wasn't a police force but that was then. Even now I believe that the 2nd Amendment should be fully instated everywhere. I grew up in a household that hunts and shoots firearms. For now, I do not possess any firearms within the city limits. It's illegal to do so thus I do not.

I believe that people should have the choice to bear arms. If you don't like guns then don't have them. Simple enough. I believe that a person should be able to have a handgun in their home for protection. A part of me thinks we should be able to carry them in public as well.

Mayor Daley stated, "Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West..." at a recent speaking engagement at Navy Pier. Why not?

There were court systems in the larger areas during the "Old West". There was also local Sheriffs and Deputys in many of the towns and the gun was a major factor in many disputes away from the towns. Public hangings were allowed then as well. Imagine if they were today, would crime go down? No one knows until we try.

In today's society a trip back to the old west could be a disaster. With the generations becoming softer and more outspoken it could lead to a large 'thinning of the herd'. Which isn't necessarily bad in a theoretical sense but in reality it would be horrible.

Within the past few months here in Chicago there have been a lot of deaths due to gun violence. Which could possibly be used as a platform to help keep the gun ban. But here's the question that I pose.

Are these deaths due to "gun violence" a result of people that have the legal means to own the firearms?

The answer to this question is no. As of this time it is illegal to own handguns within the city limits of Chicago. So these people that are shooting other people are breaking the law to begin with.

So how can the blame be put on the guns?

I've wondered for years how anyone can say that guns are bad. I've never understood this. You can go out and adopt a child. Do you know what your going to get with that child? Do you know the family history behind that child? Do you know if that child will become an alcoholic, drug dependent or anything else about that child when you adopt it? No, you don't. It's a gamble but it's a gamble that is worthwhile.

Do you know what you get when you purchase a gun? You get a gun. You know that it was built. You know what it was built for and it never strays from what it is. Until the person that wields that gun decides to use it for something else. A gun is a gun. It's the decision of the person holding the gun as to what they use it for.

Another example.

As I'm writing this and you see any misspelled words. Who misspelled those words? Was it the program that I'm writing through or was it just me? Could I place blame on this program due to the fact that I pressed the letters in the wrong manner? No, I can not.

Guns bring more violence.

This argument is over done. The only way that the violence will raise is due to the fact that people will be able to defend themselves from the numerous thugs that already have the illegal guns. When people can stand up for themselves they will. When the playing ground is level there will be more instances. Perhaps now the right people will be getting hurt instead of the wrong ones.

Lately there has been a lot of deaths due to gun violence in Chicago. Mostly younger kids that have access to illegal firearms. Has anything been done to find out where these firearms are coming from? Why do these minors have them? Has anything been done to try and rid these areas of these firearms? No one knows for certain except those that are directly involved. There have been no statements made to confirm or deny these procedures.

However, I'm sure it will all come up in court once someone decides to try to overturn Chicago's ban. The city will gladly try to make it seem that all of these people that caused the shootings we're from nearby suburbs. Suburbs where it is legal to own handguns. They drove into the city to shoot a person.

Children's deaths due to guns.

Again, I don't believe that guns cause the deaths of the children that find their parents handguns. I believe that to be the full fault of the parents. If your stupid enough to leave a gun in your home, fully loaded and accessible to your child then your stupid enough to lose a child. That gun did not call out your child's name and it did not ask your child to pull the trigger.

Your an adult and a gun owner. Take the responsibility to teach your children about the gun and how it's to be or not to be used. Put the gun in a place where your child can not get to it. They make gun safes for a reason, not only to protect the guns but your family as well.


In a lot of the articles that I've read it seems that certain people are very scared that the citizens of Chicago could have guns. You can now legally own rifles and shotguns in the city. Rifles which can shoot farther and more accurately than a handgun. Shotguns that can be more destructive than many handguns. What's the difference? You can't hide rifles and shotguns as easily as handguns.

Imagine if the city decided to put forth a license for people to be able to carry a gun. It could be a reasonably priced license anywhere between $500 to $1,000. This license would only be available so people could carry the weapon in public. It would not be a license for ownership because that would be against the Constitution.

Now lets say a majority of people can now carry these weapons. When they are assaulted by a mugger, a rapist or any numerous other scenarios; they have the ability to protect themselves. They have the ability to level the playing field. I'm not advocating that this should happen, I'm just putting a scenario out there.

With the playing field leveled I believe there would be less crime. The "bad guys" would have more to worry about other than just the police or wearing multiple layers of clothing to escape. Of course in the beginning there would be more deaths on both sides of the spectrum. Which is why there would have to be certain training seminars that any person obtaining this license would have to go through to obtain it.

According to an article about Texas' Right to Carry law on the NRA-ILA website: "Gov. Bush vowed that Texas` Right to Carry law would make the state a "safer place," and statistics prove he was right. Texas` homicide rate has declined to its lowest point since the 1950s and has decreased a startling 60% from the high under his predecessor. Murder rates in Texas fell by 25% between 1995 and 1997, much faster than the 16% decline in states without "shall-issue" laws. Overall, Texas` total violent crime rate has dropped 20% under Gov. Bush and is lower than at any time since 1974."

Imagine if Illinois and Chicago adopted this policy.


Maybe people could walk around any where they wanted without holding their mace, a knife or any other object in their hands.

Employees Expose FOX NEWS Distortions