Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The fawn, who was abandoned by her mother, was named "Giggles" for the sound she made when petted They were armed to the teeth, and when someone tried to take photos, they confiscated all the shelter volunteers' cell phones.
The fawn, who was abandoned by her mother, was named "Giggles" for the sound she made when petted They were armed to the teeth, and when someone tried to take photos, they confiscated all the shelter volunteers' cell phones.
Freakin' absurd. "Hey guys, we have all these cool guns and all this neat body armor... we need to use it! I heard that there's a baby deer at a shelter; let's go EUTHANIZE IT!!"
Well if the Washington Times says so, it must be true.
Hint: there is a lot more to this story then is reported there. Starting with that Cindy Schulze, the owner of the shelter was in violation of the law for keeping the deer there, and she was raided, because she refused to cooperate with authorities in the matter. She was probably reported by animal rights activists who have been monitoring her operation for years and trying to get her shelter shut down for inhumane treatment of animals. She sounds like a crazy cat lady who doesn't just limit herself to hoarding cats, but many other animals as well.
Makes zero sense to kill the deer; what did the deer do wrong, exist?
Yup. It was to be transferred to an Illinois wildlife rescue the following day.
What else do you do with all of that militarized police gear; that baby deer might have had the disease that only strikes adult deer ... oh, wait. Yeah, no excuse.
Well if the Washington Times says so, it must be true.
Hint: there is a lot more to this story then is reported there. Starting with that Cindy Schulze, the owner of the shelter was in violation of the law for keeping the deer there, and she was raided, because she refused to cooperate with authorities in the matter. She was probably reported by animal rights activists who have been monitoring her operation for years and trying to get her shelter shut down for inhumane treatment of animals. She sounds like a crazy cat lady who doesn't just limit herself to hoarding cats, but many other animals as well.
That's the just the paper I chose to link, there were actually a couple of dozen to choose from. The deer was supposed to have been transferred. They had a vendetta against this lady and chose to punish the deer for it, gee that doesn't sound like abuse of power at all. Regardless of any problems they had with this lady, you really think this level of response was warranted? It's crazy to me, but you go ahead and live in la-la land where armed men invading a no-kill shelter to murder a deer is a good thing.
[quote=KaaBoom;30816067]Well if the Washington Times says so, it must be true.
You forgot the NY Daily News, WISN, daily Kos, Business Insider, CNN...
Notwithstanding the questionable "why," which was reported by all outlets, BTW, it's always revealing when people choose to complain about the source of the news rather than its veracity.
Well if the Washington Times says so, it must be true.
Hint: there is a lot more to this story then is reported there. Starting with that Cindy Schulze, the owner of the shelter was in violation of the law for keeping the deer there, and she was raided, because she refused to cooperate with authorities in the matter. She was probably reported by animal rights activists who have been monitoring her operation for years and trying to get her shelter shut down for inhumane treatment of animals. She sounds like a crazy cat lady who doesn't just limit herself to hoarding cats, but many other animals as well.
Do you see anything wrong with using heavily-armed SWAT teams wearing military-style body armor and often wielding automatic weapons raiding businesses and residences who are accused of entirely non-violent offenses? Are you okay with them discharging those weapons in close quarters and in close proximity to civilians to neutralize animals that are in no way, shape, or form a threat?
This country is moving in a very frightening direction, one where nonviolent misdemeanor offences are now justification for civil servants who think of themselves as a paramilitary force and are equipped as such to come in, destroy property, threaten the suspension of miranda rights, and occasionally kill animals and people.
Do you see anything wrong with using heavily-armed SWAT teams wearing military-style body armor and often wielding automatic weapons raiding businesses and residences who are accused of entirely non-violent offenses? Are you okay with them discharging those weapons in close quarters and in close proximity to civilians to neutralize animals that are in no way, shape, or form a threat?
This country is moving in a very frightening direction, one where nonviolent misdemeanor offences are now justification for civil servants who think of themselves as a paramilitary force and are equipped as such to come in, destroy property, threaten the suspension of miranda rights, and occasionally kill animals and people.
I agree 100% with your last paragraph. But to make a link between that, and this case is ridicules, and does a disservice to the point you are trying to make about the direction this country is moving.
Try to use some common sense. Don't take the word of some crazy old lady. It was the Department of Natural Resources that served a legal search warrant. No weapons were fired. The Department of Natural Resources does not have a SWAT team. No wild life agency in this country has their own SWAT team. Those are only operated federal, and local police agencies. They were not involved in this case.
In any search warrant, the DNR said its important to first make sure its staff is safe, according to Jennifer Niemeyer, DNR conservation warden supervisor for the southeast region. The department had to search more than 10 buildings on the property.
“We have to prepare for the worst-case scenario,” she said.
Wardens asked an individual in charge at the shelter to voluntarily give up the deer when they arrived, Niemeyer said. The worker reportedly replied, “What deer?” and failed to comply, leading law enforcement to execute the search warrant, she said.
Staff members from the shelter were held on the west end of the property and the deer was located in a barn on the north side of the property. The fawn was then given an injection to relax, wrapped in a towel and placed in a kennel for transport, Niemeyer said.
“At no time was the fawn in a body bag, and at no time was it thrown over anyone’s shoulder, like some people claimed,” she said.
The fawn was alive when it was removed from the property, and it was euthanized off scene, Niemeyer said.
Possibility of disease weighed in
The law requires the DNR to euthanize animals in situations like this because of the potential for disease and danger to humans and other animals, Niemeyer said.
“It’s important to look at this case through a few different lenses,” she said. “We do believe everyone working at that shelter was trying to do the right thing, but in actuality, the fawn was stolen from not only its mother but also the public. When they took that deer out of its natural habitat, they sealed its fate.”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They were armed to the teeth, and when someone tried to take photos, they confiscated all the shelter volunteers' cell phones.
