Sunday, November 22, 2009

Our Pet Owner Protection Org. Called "NIKKI C.L.U.B." in NationalDogPress

Sunday, November 1, 2009

A "Nonprofit" National C.L.U.B. and Animal Protection Organization to Protect Pet Owners.





A "Nonprofit" National C.L.U.B. and Animal Protection Organization to Protect Pet Owners.


Welcome to our National Organization known as Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom.

We the People, of this National "Nonprofit" Organization, want to express our appreciation to you for taking an "active"interest in preserving "your" rights to freely own your "pets"and "animals" without intrusion by the government, individuals, or "animal rights activist" groups or other organizations, who’s sole mission are to "eliminate" and "destroy" our freedom, liberty, and American way of life, with our pets and animals on our own private property as extended members of our families.

Laws are only words written on paper, words that change on society’s whim, and are interpreted differently daily by politicians, lawyers, judges, and policemen. We cannot by total reliance on law; escape our "duty" to judge right and wrong, and take "action" to stop the tyranny at "Freedom's Gate." For a person's religion is not worth it’s salt, if the animals and pets are not the better for it.

Dean A. Ayers, (Prior) Special Agent, AFOSI, U.S.A.F., United States of America.

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


Please visit daily our National Organization's Official Article Publishers at the links below, with over 50 total articles on Dog Law, Pet Owners, Animal Welfare, Dogs, Pets, and Animal Articles affecting every pet Owner
in the USA and Canada.

Just CLICK on the 3 links below for separate articles numbering in excess of 50 articles to date in total.

Visit our many nationally published pet and animal articles
and postings at the following links. Then be sure to come 
back and read the rest of this web site's pages and articles as well.


http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/members/16235/Dean%20A.%20Ayers/

and

http://www.associatedcontent.com/user/583274/dean_a_ayers.html

and

http://www.AnimalsClubFreedom.typepad.com/


Sunday, October 4, 2009

Animal control laws and officers challenge your right to dog ownership


Original Article Links:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/15426

and

http://animalsclubfreedom.typepad.com/

Animal control laws and officers challenge your right to dog ownership

Animal laws that limit the number of animals allowed in a household or vaguely define a “bad smell” in the pet owner’s home are intended to make it easier to prosecute individuals.

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress ©

4 Oct. 09

 

Many dog owners in recent years have faced the unthinkable; a knock at their door that has heralded the arrival of an Animal Control officer with a complaint about your dog(s). In some cases that visit has been concluded satisfactorily to both the dog owner and the animal control officer; in others it has meant the heartache of either seizure of the owner’s dog(s) and/or facing stiff fines for various reasons in an abuse, neglect, or number limit citation.

With animal ownership laws now undergoing radical evolving changes throughout the country, the result is now a ‘perverted’ evolving animal “activist” produced animal care and control law now being used. Animal rights ‘extremists' some of which are in fact, animal control officers, and others working in animal  rights group legislation lobbies are the new means for dog owner 'harassment.' The constant upgrade of these radical ‘animal controlling’ laws drastically increases the ‘real’ possibility of a visit to your door on your own private property from Animal Control Authorities becoming ever more of a specter to haunt you and also every dog owner in the nation.

Specifically targeted by legislation ‘activists’ are creating the laws that 'limit' the number of dogs, cats, pets, and animals allowed in a household (by an unsubstantiated arbitrary pet ‘limit’ number) which is intended to make it easier to prosecute individuals who are thought to have "too many," according to this arbitrary standard put into the animal law.  Even more sinister is that these ‘activist’ pushed animal laws are also applied even to those people who are not in violation of health, nuisance and humane laws.

These dog or animal "number limit" laws are now being joined by various other anti-pet ownership restrictive laws, such as mandatory breeder permits and licensing requirements (being pursued for example at this time in Iowa legislation) for even a single one time litter of any dog and the owner is now faced with major state intrusive inspections for a kennel or breeder license for having more than 3 pets in the home, or having a single litter of puppies. All of this being “PAINTED” as the need to stop alleged puppy mills, which of course in most instances is “bull”. Other totally vague animal control laws that can threaten responsible dog owners who are not in any kind of notable breeding or kenneling business are those ‘activist’ lobbied animal laws that allow the animal control officer to ‘define’ the offense of “BAD SMELL” in the home as a violation in animal control care and control laws.  Many good and loving pet owners whose dogs are well cared for and kept as their extended family members are suddenly in violation of an animal control officers “definition of “BAD SMELL” in the home, based upon the pets living in their homes, rather than caged outside alone and exposed to the climate, like a beast.

Why, there are many people, who object to a ‘single turd’ in a field that can be smelled downwind from 3 miles away, and object to that smell as a “BAD SMELL” under animal law or other people who are obsessed, compelled or driven to use massive amounts of dangerous cleaning products (by the liter or gallon) in a home (that are dangerous to the health of the animals and humans alike)to kill any and all ‘bad’ smells; so take into account an ‘activist’ animal control officer, who is this described ‘clean freak’ inspecting pet owner homes, using this vague and intrusive animal law as a criminal, abusive, or neglectful animal law violation according to their ‘definition of a ‘BAD SMELL’ in the pet owners home.

This vague and intrusive ‘unbalanced’ definition of tyranny control in the animal law begs for fees, fines, confiscations, seizures, and ultimate adoption or euthanasia of properly maintained pet owner animals in their home. Tyranny at its core to allow an ‘activist’ animal control officer to ‘harass’ and ‘intimidate’ virtually any pet owner in their jurisdiction, based solely upon a “BAD SMELL?” Please! These ‘activist’ animal laws have completely gone over the edge of the cliff in dealing in ‘reality’ and ‘common sense’.

'Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom' National Organization Incorporated (Nonprofit) is actively opposing all restrictive legislation limiting the responsible pet ownership of all dogs, cats, and other pets. Unfortunately some 'perverted' anti-pet ownership laws have still made their way onto the books. Just take a look at the 94 + page anti-pet ordinance of Louisville, KY by its Metro council, or the tyranny animal control laws with a three strike violation rule, taking away any right to owning any pet or animal in Omaha, Nebraska, or the 3-strike violation rule in Mills County, Iowa if your little 'fluffy' is caught off your private property 3 times. Your little "Fluffy" will be declared a "dangerous dog" according to their animal care and control ordinance for the county. How’s that for success in animal control laws stopping animal crimes in the midst of a rural county? These ‘activist’ based and promoted animal tyranny laws are occurring all across the nation as we speak. Ever more intrusive and controlling by the day.

For all dog owners, do we need reminded that it is important to promote the need for responsible freedom in the care and ownership of your dog(s) and pets in order to prevent tyranny from overcoming common sense in dog ownership matters? Or is it going to take a ‘knock at your door’ and an unlawful dog confiscation without any ‘due process’ for the dog owner to open your eyes to the truth in animal law "tyranny" now days?

 

Breeding even a single dog litter is now the ‘target’ of license laws

There is great value to society in the historic preservation of all our pet ownership of our chosen dog breeds as extended members of our family, and in the selective, planned breeding of our pets, for desirable and predictable traits in our chosen and favored dog breeds as well.

Claims that the organized dog fancy or local backyard hobby dog breeders contributes to the problem of homeless dogs in shelters cannot be supported by any alleged evidence from any Animal Rights activist groups, such as PETA, ELF, ALF, HSUS, ASPCA or any local humane society through facts that are real, not manufactured like liberal propaganda.

Above all else, dog owners, backyard dog hobbyists and dog fanciers must all become aware of the animal control laws in their own locale, and must also be aware of their 'rights' if faced with that ‘intrusive’ visit from an Animal Control Officer or Law Enforcement Officer regarding your pets and animals, and their ability to ‘harass’ you with vague and ‘interpretive’ definitions of the animal laws.

It is necessary for all dog and pet owners  to be familiar with all animal identification regulations for your dogs in your locale, as the future to continued further 'restrictive' local, county, state, or federal animal care, control, or identification regulations are potentially, only a 'stroke of the pen' away from being amended to include identification of many non-farm related pets and animals to be further controlled and cared for by government laws, due to any potential future transmission of a communicable animal disease in dogs or other pets or animals that may arise.

At that time, you and your dogs, and animals will then have to deal with Federal, State, and local animal control regulations on your private property, called a premises. Not only will you have a real possibility of 'animal control' showing up with restrictive regulations and ordinances of your dogs and your ownership freedom, but you will also have to deal with the 'dog-ma' of inspector police from the USDA animal and agriculture authorities or your state controlled 'dog-cops' checking your animals on your private property premises as well.

ALWAYS, Always, always, educate yourself and learn your animal control laws for your area and 'stand your ground' in knowing your 'rights' in responsible dog ownership. Always insure you have a name, and contact number for an Attorney at Law that is familiar with ‘Animal Law” in order to represent you and your dogs, not if, but when, the ‘activists’ in animal control come knocking at your door.

Remember when it comes to freely owning your dogs, pets and animals in an area frequented by Animal Rights Activists or Animal Control, "The truth is rarely pure and never simple."

NationalDogPress ©

 

 

 Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."



PLEASE
 DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK BELOW: 

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=6721925

Fair Use Notice:
 Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 

Legal Disclaimer:
 The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 

Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

Friday, August 14, 2009

Your Pet Belongs to You, Not the Government

Saturday, August 1, 2009

An Open Letter of “Satire” to Mills County, Iowa Animal Control Authorities

An Open Letter of “Satire” to Mills County, Iowa Animal Control Authorities

AnimalsClubFreedomNatOrgInc

An Open Letter of “Satire” to Mills CountyIowa Animal Control Authorities

 

Do I have to pay animal taxes on my "not" raised dogs with your office in Mills CountyIowa according to your new animal care and control county tyranny laws?


2 August 09

By Dean A. Ayers

Lead Investigative Reporter

NationalDogPress ©

 

Dear Mills CountyIowa Sires and Animal Care and Control Authorities,

My friend over at Well Fare, Iowa just received two subsidy checks for $1,000 each from their county government office of animal care and control run by the State of Iowa Animal Rights Activist Legislation Employment Office, for "not" raising dogs in Iowa counties. 

Right now I'm not getting any extra help from the government while I'm displaced from my previous employment because of the failing economy, so I want to go into the "not-raising-dogs" business, sponsored by State of Iowa and Mills County, Iowa Animal Rights Activist Legislation Employment Office, which I heard was sponsored by the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) created by the USDA. I heard allegedly that these new animal care and control laws you now have are now approved by Mills CountyIowa, Board of Supervisors, on 1 March 2009, in order to promote tyranny in animal care and control of law abiding dog and pet owners in your Iowa County. All of this animal control, of course, for the purpose of totally “taxing” dog and animal owners to “death” in the county, or face confiscation of their animals by the county animal controlling authorities.

So in the spirit of following your new animal ‘taxation’ laws in Mills County, Iowa; what I want to know is, in your opinion, what is the best kind of dog home or animal farm "not" to raise dogs in, and what is the best breed of dogs "not" to raise in Mills County, Iowa? 

Do I have to register or license my "not" raised dogs with the new National Animal Identification System (NAIS) of the USDA, or with the Mills County, Iowa ARF Animal Control office?  Also can I "not"report all the dogs that I will “not” own, every 24 hours as required by the NAIS regulations, when I do “not” move them off premises, so I will "not" be fined $1,000 a day, per "not" dog or animal, per"not" violating the regulations, according to the USDA NAIS and Mills County, Iowa anti-dog care and control regulations "not?" 

I want to be sure that I approach this endeavor of “not” raising any dogs with my family in Mills County, Iowa in keeping with all the USDA and Mills County, Iowa alleged governmental/corporation "taxation without representation" funded laws and policies that your animal care and control laws allegedly promote. I would prefer “not” to raise purebred, cross-breed, mixed dogs, or any rescued dogs, but if that is not a good type or breed "not" to raise as a family dog, then I will just as gladly"not" raise any AKC registered breed of dogs on my private property either, in Mills County, Iowa. 

As I see it, the hardest part of this USDA and Mills CountyIowa “animal taxation” and tyranny animal care and control legislation program will be in keeping an accurate inventory of how many dogs I have "not" raised.

That being said, in the "not" raising dogs for "unincorporated county area families" animal care and control brochures (not), for small dog non-producers, which I will qualify for; that this regulation and animal license and taxation program is “not” voluntary, even if my dogs are permanent indoor house dogs.

I need to know that as long as I "not" let the "not" raised family dogs off my private property, called"not" a dog owner premises," then I understand you will "not" subject my family to tyranny controlled ‘taxation’ and “harassment” on my private property about my “not” owned dogs under the Mills County, Iowa animal care and control animal taxation control legislation program that is now mandatory.

Can you please tell me if I got the Mills County, Iowa dog taxation facts correct from the new animal care and control laws you approved, Sire? I understand you all are "not" very responsive to citizens questions about this new animal care and control law, but that you all think you already have "all" the right answers at the USDA and Mills County, Iowa animal control authority office’s "not."

My friend, named DAM PISSED, is very joyful about the future of this Mills County, Iowa tyranny taxation of all the dogs in the rural county (especially any dog that never leaves the inside of their house), by your alleged agri-biz-incorporated sponsored "welfare" county business, of "not” raising dogs in family homes on private property in the rural areas of this county." I also heard that you just essentially ‘copied’ the tyranny animal care and control ordinance from a neighboring county of Mills? Did you not know how to properly write animal care and control legislation that would actually be ‘fair’ to dog owners in the county? Was it really necessary to plagiarize tyranny animal control laws from someone else?

My friend, named DAM PISSED, has been raising his family dogs for twenty years or so, and the best he ever made on them was $422 in a county dog show prize award in 1988. Until this year 2009, when he got two subsidy checks for $1000 each for "not" raising any dogs anymore, from your USDA and his neighboring county in Iowa by their sponsored animal care, taxation, and control programs"not." 

If I can get $1000 (like my friend DAM PISSED) for each "not" raised family dog on my private property in Mills County, Iowa like my friend allegedly did in his county, then if I “not” raise 50 dogs on my private property in Mills County, Iowa will I get a bigger check of subsidy? For example, can I get $2000 for “not” raising 100 dogs, as long as I do "not" license them, and register them with the new National Animal Identification System (NAIS) "not"? 

Also, with the bad economy and high price of food now days, I am considering the "not” raising cows or hogs animal control program on family private property that the USDA and various Iowa Counties also sponsor from all those "not" so interested independent farmers “not” making any money on their family farms. I think they call them "mad cow" family operations don't they, so please send me any information you have on that subsidy program in Mills CountyIowa also for “not” raising those family pets or animals also. 

In view of these circumstances, Sires, you understand that I am now totally unemployed and that I have no money to pay for all these new ‘tyranny’ dog license taxes for “not” raising any dogs, pets or animals on my private property in Mills CountyIowa. There for I plan to file for Iowa State Unemployment and Federal Government food stamps also, while I am "not" raising all these NAIS andMills CountyIowa controlled animals.

Sires, after you have began to tax me and my dogs, pets, and animals “to death” for simply owning my own dogs, pets or animals in your fine establishment of a county in Iowa with all these new animal care and control laws "not" will you subsidize my ‘burial” of pet ownership also?

Be assured, Sires, you all will have my VOTE in the coming elections for YOUR re-election. NOT!


Patriotic-ally Yours, 

Mr. Dog Smith, “A Man who just owns a pet dog inside his home as his family”. 



PS. Please notify me when you are giving out free Iowa surplus corn and cheese, from the independent animal home owners and farmers you run out of business by your tyranny animal taxation laws. 

PPS: TO ALL AMERICANS; For "Real" folks; Just VOTE, "NO" to Deadwood County, and State Politicians, who won't say "NO" to NAIS or the USDA or to STOP Anti-Pet, animal care and control county taxation and tyranny animal laws, spay/neuter to avoid taxation tyranny requirements, and unlawful and unconstitutional animal care and control legislation that does “not” provide “due process” for a pet owner before animal control can confiscate, seize or euthanize your dogs. This county has approved animal care and control regulations with an agenda to end American's freedoms and liberties to freely own animals and pets without government intrusion or violation of the U.S. Constitution and that is appalling! 

PPPS: Also, Stop the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) to "protect" America from corporate - government intervention into American's U.S. Constitutional freedoms on your "own" private property with animals called a premises.

PPPPS: Stop any and all perverted Anti-Pet Ownership ordinances, spay/neuter license requirements, and mandatory taxation for animal owner control legislation/laws that take away your rights to freely own and maintain your pets and dogs on your own private property. 

 

And by the way, please tell Mills CountyIowa. "We the People Have the Right to Bear F.arms!" 

...AND OWN OUR DOGS, PETS AND ANIMALS WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INTRUSION!

###

  

Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit)

"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


PLEASE DONATE to Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) BY CLICKING ON THE PAYPAL LINK:

Click Here to 'DONATE' to Protect Pet Owners with Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom Nat. Org. Inc. 


Fair Use Notice: Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 

Legal Disclaimer:
 The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 

Copyright © 2006-2009,
  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization Incorporated (Non-Profit) Iowa 2009, NationalDogPress News, All Rights Reserved

Thursday, July 16, 2009

A Culture of Pet 'Ownership' Death and Evil Clowns in Society

07/16/2009

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Dog ordinance 'number limits' are not logical or valid

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_3rbHvoEpRh8/Sk2tgIOcPeI/AAAAAAAAAKQ/RTmM5iXtzlc/s1600-h/AnimalsClubFreedom-2.aspx.jpg
 

 

Dog ordinance 'number limits' are not logical or valid

 

Dog 'number limit' ordinances lead to a decrease in pet license taxes collected from non-reporting owners over the pet limits. The 'number limit' laws are counterproductive.

 

MILLS COUNTY, Iowa, 7 July 09 (NationalDogPress.com) --

 

Dogs and dog owners face more discrimination than ever before in American society. While local, city, county, state, and federal entities pay lip service to the dog as man’s best friend by passing tyranny dog limiting ordinances and laws, We the People as a whole community allow fear and politics to determine the parameters of dog ownership based upon emotions not logic and common sense in law making.

 

We the People, spend hundreds of millions of dollars on premium foods, veterinary care, toys, kennels, pet sitters, training classes, and more even while limiting the number and type of dogs an owner can house. We use dogs to aid in catching criminals, search for victims of crimes and natural disasters, help handicapped humans, and provide emotional support even while barring dogs from communities if they exceed a certain weight, certain breed to be banned, or limits to the number of dogs allowed in a home even if they are properly cared for and loved as family.

 

 

The disadvantages of dog number limits in homes are:

 

Dog owners in some communities face a limit on the number of pets they can own, but these limits, too, are counterproductive.

 

Laws that criminalize pet ownership based on numbers alone have been declared unconstitutional in some states because they do not address the need to control nuisances or provide for the health and safety of residents.

 

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, the state’s highest court, has declared such a law unconstitutional in that state, citing a precedent in Kadash v City of Williamsport:

 

“What is not an infringement upon public safety and is not a nuisance cannot be made one by legislative fiat and then prohibited....

 

“Even legitimate legislative goals cannot be pursued by means which stifle fundamental personal liberty when the goals can otherwise be more reasonably achieved.”

 

A dog or pet limit ordinance is difficult to enforce without increased presence of animal control or police agencies and often leads to a decrease in pet licensing to prevent cross-referencing of license records. If the law is enforced only upon complaint, it becomes just another law for people to circumvent and further erodes confidence in legislative bodies.

 

Numbers have no relationship to nuisances. A person with one dog that runs loose or barks all night is a greater nuisance than a person with a dozen dogs that are quiet, clean, and kept at home.

 

Limiting people to four dogs (or fewer) puts an unreasonable strain on people who raise show dogs, compete in performance trials, participate in canine rescue operations, foster dogs for service dog organizations, etc. and can lead to those responsible dog owners leaving the community.

 

A number limit causes dog deaths by forcing people to give up dogs they own, thus causing crowding in local shelters; denying people the opportunity to buy an additional dog from a shelter or a rescue; and adversely impacting rescue groups and foster homes that help find new homes for dogs whose owners cannot keep them.



Alternatives to number limits are:

 

  • Passage and enforcement of strict nuisance laws.
  • Use of an arbitrator to mediate neighborhood disputes about animals.
  • Use of alternative sentencing such as community service at the county animal shelter or attendance at a full obedience training course for those who violate nuisance ordinances.
  • Periodic programs or mailings about responsible dog ownership or city sponsorship of a Canine Good Citizen test to encourage residents to be responsible dog owners.

 

Animal laws are not always a result of state and federal battles. Squabbles between neighbors often erupt over animals, squabbles that often spill over into law enforcement or animal control filed complaints to local governments.  

 

As an emotional result the local government greases the squeaky wheel complaints by citizens with even more stricter ordinances or other tacked on to the zoning code or the criminal codes to existing animal ordinances.

 

Dog limit ordinances are often passed out of frustration, with little consideration for the consequences or valid and factual basis to make any “positive or constructive” benefit to the community dog complaints, other than a government official “feel good” action giving We the People even more tyranny in our local animal control ordinances.

 
Copyright © 2006-2009,  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization, All Rights Reserved
 
 
Dean A. Ayers
Director, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization
"The truth is rarely pure and never simple."


Dean A. Ayers is a prior United States Air Force Special Agent for the AFOSI. His duties included that of law enforcement specialist, criminal, fraud, and counter-intelligence. He was assigned to felony crimes in federal government, fraud, waste and abuse investigations of the military branches of service, and counter-intelligence in overseas locations. Dean was also a former Texas State Commissioned Alamo State Park Armed Ranger.

Dean is currently Director, Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom
 National Organization and Dean is also a Lead Investigative Reporter for the NationalDogPress.com Headline News ©, and DogPress.org news press services.
 

Fair Use Notice: 
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
 

Legal Disclaimer:
 The information, articles, or links (posted, embedded or otherwise) to the above postings are provided to give readers more information on general dog-related or associated subjects and are not intended as legal advice. All individuals are urged to contact licensed attorneys in their states regarding specific legal issues.
 

Copyright © 2006-2009,
  Animals C.L.U.B.- Freedom National Organization, All Rights Reserved