Cruelty and Stupidity
Share this Article
Twitter
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Stumble
RedditAuthor:
MayonazeTags:
animal abuse cases degree misdemeanor dog Gestapo grove police department Hyrum Inquisition judgment Labrador labrador mix necropsy OregonHyrum Long and his daughter Susan Johnson were arrested just after 8pm. The 75-year-old man and his 49-year-old daughter were put into the squad car under the glow of the media’s lights and over the din of reporter’s questions.
For the previous two days, Oregonians followed every detail of their heinous crime spree. The public patiently waited for the dragnet to tighten around these felonious fiends and apprehend this dastardly duo before they repeated their evil ways.
“[T]his was certainly the worst judgment I’ve ever heard of,” said Capt. Aaron Ashbaugh of the Forest Grove Police Department.
Hyrum is charged with an aggravated felony in the first degree, while Susan is charged with a first degree misdemeanor.
“It’s one of the worst cases I’ve ever heard of,” said spokesperson Barbara Baugnon.
Many Oregonians hope Hyrum and Susan receive swift and severe retribution, but unfortunately the law doesn’t allow for capital punishment in animal abuse cases.
In these tough economic times, Hyrum and Susan claimed they couldn’t afford to euthanize their 14-year-old dog, Molly, a yellow Labrador-mix. Hyrum and Susan were afraid to take Molly—with her health in decline—to the veterinarian fearing they’d be accused of animal abuse (the irony is palatable).
This makes sense. As we all know we are currently living through the Pet Inquisition: a dark era when the dog Gestapo patrols animal hospitals looking for abusive pet owners to lock up in one of the numerous animal-abuse prisons that seem to be on every street corner.
With a sick puppers and no money to euthanize her, Hyrum and Susan did the next best thing (that is if you eliminated about a thousand other options). They struck Molly in the head with a hammer and buried her up to her neck in the backyard.
According to police accounts, Hyrum and Susan buried Molly to limit the amount of blood spilled on their property. Apparently, a dead dog’s head sticking out of the ground is fine, but blood all over lawn is gauche.
Fortunately, Hyrum and Susan’s neighbors value the sanctity of life. When they heard Molly’s cries, they called police.
You see, Hyrum and Susan had left home. They were so distraught from their ordeal they went out to dinner. They couldn’t afford to euthanize their dog but they could afford a wake.
The police arrived, dug Molly out of the ground and rushed her to the nearest animal hospital.
“She couldn’t lift her head but her eyes were following people around the room; obviously she was suffering,” said Baugnon, spokesperson for the Oregon Humane Society.
The Oregon Humane Society euthanized Molly. No announcement on whether or not they will send Hyrum the bill.
Most cases like this go noticed and unprosecuted; however this was the lead story on the local news. The police had to investigate.
So a necropsy was done. It indicated Molly had endured chronic skin disease, body sores from lying down for prolonged periods of time, long-term malnutrition and chronic starvation. There were also indications Molly had not eaten for at least four to five days.
Appalling as the aforementioned account sounds, we should not be surprised. Hyrum and Susan are stupid.
“When I left, she was not making no noise, or no movement. I stayed with her and that made sure she was dead, see,” a direct quote from Hyrum’s interview with a local news station.
“I have no credit card, I have nothing I could have said to the vet, is this for free? Would they have said it was for free? No, no way,” a direct quote from Susan’s interview with same local news station.
In this case, stupid is not a pejorative it’s a description. While being clinically dumb is neither an excuse nor a catalyst for cruelty, stupidity certainly aided in Hyrum and Susan’s insanely poor judgment. Their first instance of poor judgment was owning a dog. A dog should never be smarter than its master.
2:13 pm
Owning a pet is a responsibility, not a right and should not be taken lightly.
While I detest the further intrusion of the government into my life, the conduct relating to the care of pets is something that must be monitored. We see again that the lowest common denominator of the human population relies on these laws to reign in their behavior. I’ve recently euthanized a pet, and it’s one of the toughest things I’ve ever had to do. The only solace that came from this was knowing that I had exhausted every possibility of treatment and my pet was cared for with the dignity and love that it deserved.
If you aren’t going to love, nurture and care for a pet, don’t get one. If you are outraged by this incident, you are most likely responsible enough to know this already, but there are those that aren’t and just don’t get it. And that’s why my neighbors can call the police when they suspect the mistreatment of my pets. I’ll tolerate this absurdity if it’s going to protect animals unfortunate enough to be owned by the crummy, cruel and stupid.
[Reply]
3:06 pm
Owning a pet takes on the same responsibilities as raising a child. When an owner gets a pet they make an unstated contract that gives them the responsibility to care for that pet as if that pet is a part of their family. I am almost certain that there are very few people out there that would allow their children to lie around and suffer without exhausting every possible avenue of help.
Somehow in this country it seems as if this has become almost second nature. If you don’t believe me just take a trip to your local humane society, which are overcrowded like homeless shelters. People just are not smart enough to take the time to think about how much an animal is going to cost them. It also blows my mind that there was not even any effort put forward by these owners to see how much this would cost and what there options would have been because there are plenty of animal lovers out there that probably would not have allowed an animal to suffer like this.
[Reply]
6:09 pm
I’m not sure which is more upsetting…the fact that this is a sick and twisted retelling of “Old Yeller” or the fact that the owners feel they have done nothing wrong. I’m no diehard animal activist, but I love my so-called “puppers” and simply wonder how people can be so inhumane. It’s sickening, really. Whether it’s those with the intelligence of a grapefruit like these two or those who own twenty-seven cats who feast on their own feces, why don’t they know that there’s a line and that they’ve crossed it?
These people have killed a living thing, a piece of life that children, families, and most others cherish and love as their own children or siblings. Pets are a piece of a family, so striking a dog with a hammer with intent to kill is murder. Canine murder or whatever you prefer to call it, there’s motive and there’s some sort of malice here. This crosses the line from abuse to premeditated murder. Canine or human…it doesn’t matter in this case.
If the dog was a child who they couldn’t feed, would they do the same? If the child was starving, malnourished, whining, and in need of medical attention and they have “no credit card” so is that reason enough to kill the child? To me, they’re interchangeable in this instance. It’s purely sickening.
[Reply]
11:00 pm
Yeah, dog killing is bad, unless of course you were raised in an environment where dog fighting is part of your culture, then it’s okay, right?
No, I still think it’s bad, HOWEVER, I think when you put the wrongness of dogicide on the same level as that of homicide you make the mistake of cheapening the value of human life. Dogs are precious, no doubt, but they aren’t as precious as humans.
Don’t agree? Then ask yourself this question and answer it honestly: if you knew that any and every child that you and your spouse would be able to produce would only live to be about 15 years old, and then it would die, would you still have children? Would knowing you’d suffer that loss at least give you pause about bringing those kids into the world? Would knowing that you’d surely lose that child change your attitude about or willingness to enter into parenthood at all?
My guess is that yes, the certainty of burying your own child would negatively affect your willingness to have children, at least if you knew of the 1 year life span BEFORE you tried to procreate. When it becomes known AFTER you procreate (such as during an ultrasound during week 15 or so) people still do decide to have children who are bound to die young, but even in those cases some opt not to have those children.
Now, just about anyone except the very old (and the very stupid) know full well when they buy a dog that they’ll likely have to bury that dog, and it doesn’t stop them from buying the dog at all. It doesn’t even make them pause. So, why the difference in buying a dog you know you’ll outlive versus having a kid you know you’ll outlive? Simple, because losing a dog is much more bearable than losing a human.
Okay, everyone may begin calling me a heretical dog hating bastard…now!
[Reply]
7:41 am
Brent, you’re a heretical dog hating bastard. Naw. I’m just curious why you value human life so much. We don’t really do anything all that special. I mean, I could probably count on one hand the number of people I’ve met who can catch a frisbee in their mouth. Screw people. They should all be hit in the head with a ball peen hammer.
[Reply]
10:42 pm
Lassie,
I know that you had your human master type that whole thing up, and you probably even had him help you craft your argument, am I right?
Listen girl, It’s not that I think you’re unworthy of human respect and love, it’s just that I think I as a human am even more loved and more respected by my fellow humans than you are, okay? I mean seriously, I’ve been to human funerals and I’ve been to dog funerals, and there IS a difference.
At a human funeral people get up and speak fondly of the departed and tell stories of that person’s life and their special qualities, and then there’s a wake where people keep bawling all night. The next day, the humans continue to struggle with their loss and it’s not uncommon for them to think of their lost loved one every day until THEY die.
At a dog funeral you dogs can barely be persuaded to sit together in the same place log enough to take a cute photo. There is barking and growling, but it has nothing to do with the decedent, and before too long you all lose interest, roll over and start licking your balls. I have a hard time putting that level of grief on the same level as the grief felt when a human passes.
You and Timmy have a good time with that rebuttal.
Brent
[Reply]
7:47 am
I like licking my balls. I figure the decedent would want to canines that loved him or her to be happy. Licking balls makes me happy. I’m celebrating life with a tongue on my dog junk. Maybe humans are just to narcissistic to really move past their own grief and truly celebrate the life of the person they lost. Lick yourself clean at your next funeral–you might find that’s a fitting tribute that can never be matched by cliched eulogies and casseroles.
[Reply]
4:01 am
I’ll compromise. How about YOU come lick MY balls the next time either one of us feels down IN THE MOUTH?
[Reply]
12:17 pm
Rad
[Reply]