February 07, 2007

"Geez, you mean I'm supposed to feed them, too?": Sacramento Kings star Ron Artest has his Great Dane seized by animal control officers after neighbors report the dog's going for months at a time with no food or water.

posted by wfrazerjr to basketball at 07:11 PM - 122 comments

Maybe he figured a fan would throw some water bottles and hot dogs to the pooch.

posted by tommybiden at 07:21 PM on February 07, 2007

Will somebody please kill this cocksucker? I can handle the fights and rap records and bizarre haircuts, but jesus h christ take care of the dog! He is now grouped with Ray Lewis and Jayson Williams in my book.

posted by vito90 at 07:44 PM on February 07, 2007

Come on vito, it's not like he murdered the dog, he just forgot to put out the kibble.

posted by tommybiden at 07:55 PM on February 07, 2007

To be fair, Artest is claiming that his dog-sitter was responsible for this as he was out of town. That just might be the case.

posted by lilnemo at 08:27 PM on February 07, 2007

forgot to put out the kibble = starved According to the article, there is a pattern of this behavior, he has been reported several times for neglect and already been fined once before. He is unfit to have dogs. And if you have a job such that you need a pet-sitter for MONTHS at a time, well, then you don't really have a dog at all, your pet-sitter does.

posted by vito90 at 08:34 PM on February 07, 2007

Amen, Vito. Too bad that when he finally did drag his sorry ass home from the last few road trips (and whatever the hell else he's been up to that has him away from home for MONTHS on end) the dog didn't decide to eat HIM (probably too weak). Seriously, even if the dog sitter wasn't doing the job, it sounds like it should have been pretty obvious that something was wrong. If the dog was in rough enough shape that animal control felt it had been abused, then it should have been pretty damned hard for Artest to miss the fact that there was a problem (or are we to believe that all this happened while he was gone on one road trip?). Sure! Yeah! That's the ticket! Oh, and those neighbors? Yeah, they were actually coming over while he was gone and taking the food from the dog, then turning him in 'cause they're a bunch of haters. See? Simple explanation.

posted by ctal1999 at 09:36 PM on February 07, 2007

Camels are slackers compared to Artest's dogs.

posted by forrestv at 01:12 AM on February 08, 2007

My dogs are like family to me. I work a lot, so I feel better when they're home with my wife and kids. I know that they would protect my kids with their life. Plus, they're also great foot warmers when I'm sleeping. They never get mad at me, and think that I'm the greatest guy in the whole wide world. I love 'em. Laugh at me all you want, but I love 'em. Anyone who doesn't want to take responsibility enough to make sure their animal is fed and watered for months at a time is a son-of-a-bitch in my book. According to records obtained by KCRA 3 Investigates from Placer County Animal Control, Artest has repeatedly left his dogs unattended with no food for weeks at a time. If you can't take care of your dogs, give them to someone who will. The guy's an ass as far as I'm concerned.

posted by wingnut4life at 04:19 AM on February 08, 2007

I'm with you wingnut.

posted by SummersEve at 05:43 AM on February 08, 2007

Well Good Morning, Spanyid! Welcome to Sportsfilter! We're excited to have you here. I am sorry to see your keyboard is broken, I hope you can get the CAPS LOCK unstuck soon. In the meantime, I think you'll enjoy our Sportsfilter guidelines. Again, welcome!

posted by jerseygirl at 07:03 AM on February 08, 2007

I have absolutely no tolerance for animal abuse like this.

posted by jerseygirl at 07:04 AM on February 08, 2007

"I have absolutely no tolerance for animal abuse like this" Neither do I JG, but.... I know that everyone thinks that Ron Artest is the lowest form of scum but let's get the whole jist of what's happened here. The guy is an NBA player that goes from state to state to play the game of basketball. He so happens to be the owner of a few of man's best friend. Since he's always away, he hired a dog-sitter to handle the day-in, day-out responsibilities of taking care of his "family members". I would never condone animal abuse being a dog owner myself but I can understand if the dog-sitter didn't follow up as he/she should have. Animal control has been called to his home on a few occasions but this is the first time that something like this has happened to him. If Ron Artest did in fact leave these dogs outside and purposely did not feed them or provide them with water for weeks at a time, then he should not be a dog owner. However, if it was the dog-sitter that neglected to provide the proper care for these pets, then the sitter should be the one that pays the price. Again, I know that most of you out there in SpoFi-land hate Ron Artest with a passion but if he's not the guilty party, let the court of law decide the outcome. That's just my opinion and I'm sure that a lot of people will disagree with me but that's expected.

posted by BornIcon at 07:32 AM on February 08, 2007

It happens once, it's an accident. It happens twice, it's a problem. When it keeps happening, he's an ass who doesn't deserve pets.

posted by SummersEve at 07:36 AM on February 08, 2007

What SummersEve said, BornIcon. If it was an isolated incident, I could consider forgiving that. It's happened several times before. I don't care if his career keeps him away from the house - ultimately, he is responsible. The dude is neglecting and abusing his animals.

posted by jerseygirl at 07:38 AM on February 08, 2007

It's a high-profile and no-excuses-possible example of something that unfortunately happens all too often. Having a pet is a serious commitment: the animal has little to no ability to obtain food, water and shelter on its own, so you must assume that it's an absolute requirement on a daily basis and that it's got to come from you. In addition, animals such as dogs and cats that have the range of a house and yard must also be socialized and taught appropriate behavior, or they'll come into conflict with people and other animals. Sadly, it's not at all rare for someone to acquire a pet and then find that they're not really up to the commitment of feeding, care and training. The ethical course of action at that point is to admit that you screwed up and find a good home for the animal. While it would clearly satisfy some people's Old Testament rage impulses to take this out of Artest's hide, it wouldn't help the dog and it wouldn't help any other abused or neglected animals. A more appropriate and helpful response in this and every case of animal abuse would be to a)fine the offender heavily, b)remove the animal from his "care", and c)find some way to prevent him from owning pets in the future. The tricky one, of course, is c), but if a way could be found to do it, it would be the right thing to do in this case.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:44 AM on February 08, 2007

And your telling me that just maybe his neighbors just don't have a problem with the guy? Maybe they just don't want to have a person like Ron Artest living next to them at all. Who knows? I don't know the ins & outs of what happened but this is the first time that an animal was taken away from the Artest household, according to the article. It also states that animal control did in fact come out to his home before but there was nothing that came out of it at that time. Is the whole, I-hate-the-shit-out-of Ron Artest the reason why everyone speculates that he was the one that left this poor animal unattended? I mean, when I went away on vacation, I had someone look after my dog while I was away. When I came back, my dog was just fine. However, it's not like I was calling on a daily basis getting the play by play on what my dog was doing. I put my trust into this individual and was not disappointed with the outcome. This is a different scenerio but the point is, is that as a dog owner that went away for a little while, I had another person watching my pet. If he chose to neglect my dog while I was away, that would've been his ass but being the owner, it would've looked bad on me, regardless. I am no fan of Ron Artest the person but until the whole story comes out, I have to give him the benefit of the doubt. We all do.

posted by BornIcon at 08:12 AM on February 08, 2007

Dude, I don't have a beef with Ron Artest. I don't even know the dude's history really. What's his issue? He molest midgets? Replace the Eucharist in church with Wheat Thins? Seriously - I don't watch basketball. I hate it. The last basketball games I've watched were Celtics games, and I watched them against my will because Mr. JG steals the remote from me using Jedi mind tricks. I fall for it every time because I'm not schooled in the ways of the Jedi. In short, you can count me out of the "i-hate-the-shit-out-of-Ron Artest" club. And your telling me that just maybe his neighbors just don't have a problem with the guy? Why is it the neighbors fault? Petty efforts of his neighbors trying to get Artest in seemingly minor trouble, costing him a measly $700 in fines would not be worth the neighbors time and effort. Jesus, you'd think they'd at least dust the dogs with coke or something and then call the Animal Control. In the last 8 months, Animal Control has had to come out to his house 5 times. Animal Control had to impound his animals. Take them away from him because they were not getting the proper care at the Artest house. If the animals were in good shape with proper food, water and shelter, they wouldn't take the animals, BornIcon.

posted by jerseygirl at 08:30 AM on February 08, 2007

If I lived alone and my job had me traveling on a regular basis, I would regretfully not have a dog. Why would I not have a dog? No, not because my name is Ron Artest, but because it isn't fair to the dog.

posted by SummersEve at 08:38 AM on February 08, 2007

Having a pet is a serious commitment: the animal has little to no ability to obtain food, water and shelter on its own, so you must assume that it's an absolute requirement on a daily basis and that it's got to come from you. Very well said, LBB. If you look around, you can easily notice all sorts of abuse with animals and pets. It doesn't even have to be as blatant as depriving them of food/water. Many people I've unfortunately come in contact with have pets, especially dogs, and pay absolutely no attention to them. They keep them tied out in the yard, through every type of weather, from blazing sun to frigid cold, and don't walk them or anything. The dogs have no option but to shit all over the only small space they have to move around, and they live an entire life of basic-neglect. People do need to do something about these cases when they see them, though. Some will say if the pet is taken in by a shelter they may be destroyed after a certain time, but that's not usually the case anymore. I've stepped in about a few animals in the past couple of years, and the SPCA has managed to find them really good homes. I was driving down the road one day and saw a kid dragging what I thought was a stuffed animal (a cat) down the sidewalk with a chain around it's neck. I thought it was stuffed because it was absolutely limp. Luckily I saw the slightest of movement from the animal and went back to confront the kid. The cat was near death, and I went to where the kid lived, and his mom didn't truthfully give a damn. She wanted to take the cat in with her, but I said absolutely not. I told her to get me a towel or something to wrap it in (it was covered with matted-shit and crap in the fur it had left), which she did, and I took it to the SPCA. They had to shave the cat entirely and nurse it back to health, but a person I know ended up adopting it and giving it a fantastic home (and I had no idea this person adopted the cat, until I happened to hear them talking about the story of what the cat had gone through). The SPCA also sent investigators to the home, where other animals also lived. These things often do make a big difference. But when you're dealing with a society that neglects and abuses other humans at an alarming rate, you can't (unfortunately) be too surprised when such things happen to defenseless animals.

posted by dyams at 09:03 AM on February 08, 2007

And your right, I'm not disagreeing with either of you two (JG & SE) on this matter. Like I said, if he left the dogs without food or water, then he needs to be dealt with by the courts and fined heavily. I'm just saying that there are people out in this world that may or may not like you for whatever reason and the moment they get to shit on you, they will. I know that I am not the only person in the world that has seen vindictive people that are more than willing to try to do whatever is necessary to make another person look very bad (although Artest doesn't need any help in that department). Maybe he did leave the dogs out and maybe he didn't. I for one am not going to sit here and act like I know the exact details of this situation except that Ron Artest has looked like a complete idiot since the "Malice at the Palace" in Detriot and wouldn't be surprised if he was found guilty. Until then, I'll let the proper authorities handle this and will comment when I hear the final outcome on this matter.

posted by BornIcon at 09:08 AM on February 08, 2007

I'm sorry, but we just have way too many torches and pitchforks going unused to sit idly by while poor animals get tortured.

posted by SummersEve at 09:45 AM on February 08, 2007

They keep them tied out in the yard, through every type of weather, from blazing sun to frigid cold, and don't walk them or anything. I see it everywhere I go. A person sees a cute little sad eyed puppy and just has to take it home. People fail to realize that puppies grow up to be dogs, sometimes really big dogs. I think a lot of it also has to do with laziness. Don't feel like getting up every couple of hours to let the dog out? Just chain him up out back. Fortunately, some neighborhoods have strict rules against leaving dogs tied up outside. Artest may not be directly responsible, but as an owner, it is your responsibilty to find a competent dog-sitter. I would have hired a new sitter after the first time animal control was called. On preview: Let's go lynching SE!

posted by MrFrisby at 09:57 AM on February 08, 2007

And Ron Artest is the only person to ever been accused to have done this? The answer is no. Unfortunately, this is a recurring scenerio that happens on a daily basis. People do not show the proper care for these animal and end up mistreating them. "...we just have way too many torches and pitchforks going unused to sit idly by while poor animals get tortured" So it's ok to hurt and torture people to make a point? I understand that these animals cannot take care or even feed themselves but stooping down to the level of some piece of shit is not the answer.

posted by BornIcon at 09:59 AM on February 08, 2007

He is now grouped with Ray Lewis and Jayson Williams in my book. Whatever, it's not like he killed Barabaro or something.

posted by tron7 at 10:07 AM on February 08, 2007

I can't understand why he can be out of town for months at a time, don't the Kings play home games?? Keeping your pets on a tether for weeks at a time is enough abuse to justify these punishments: a)take his dogs away b)fine him heavily c)make him watch "Must Love Dogs" everyday for two years.

posted by sauceysays at 10:09 AM on February 08, 2007

So it's ok to hurt and torture people to make a point? Well, duh. Mob mentality, buddy, join up or get out of the way. On preview: make him watch "Must Love Dogs" everyday for two years. Now that's funny... talk about torture.

posted by SummersEve at 10:11 AM on February 08, 2007

Well, duh. Mob mentality, buddy, join up or get out of the way Being that I'm a sane individual and not one to follow the crowd, have fun with your "mob mentality". See you at lockdown.

posted by BornIcon at 10:28 AM on February 08, 2007

Being that I'm a sane individual and not one to follow the crowd, have fun with your "mob mentality". See you at lockdown. Given how hard you've been trying to work this into a "everybody's out to get Artest" thread, it's not surprising that SummersEve was successful in trolling you. I hear that Target has a sale on sarcasm meters this week; you might consider investing in one.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 10:45 AM on February 08, 2007

Given how hard you've been trying to work this into a "everybody's out to get Artest" thread Thanks LLB, I see that you so happen to disagree (which your entitled to as I am) but maybe you should think about purchasing your very own have your own opinion handbook. I hear that this year's version is a must read. Again, I'm just giving my honest opinion about today's society because I know if my neighbor was Ron Artest and with all the negative criticism that surrounds him (deservingly), there might (just might) be some individuals that just don't want that guy around. Or maybe he just is the scumbag we all think he is and just doesn't care about his pets. Either way, all I care about is if he's actually neglecting these animals, let the chips fall where they may and may one of those dogs bite him right on the ass.

posted by BornIcon at 10:57 AM on February 08, 2007

What kind of a piece of shit forgets to feed his dog for several months? What a jerk.

posted by fenriq at 10:58 AM on February 08, 2007

Thanks LLB, I see that you so happen to disagree (which your entitled to as I am) but maybe you should think about purchasing your very own have your own opinion handbook. I hear that this year's version is a must read. Sounds to me like you must be the one who wrote that book, since you're the one who's been telling everyone what their opinion is. Throughout this thread, you've been the one who's telling everybody what their opinions are, what they think of Ron Artest, why they're reacting to this case as they are, etc. Cut it out, okay?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:11 AM on February 08, 2007

He is now grouped with Ray Lewis and Jayson Williams in my book. Whatever, it's not like he killed Barabaro or something. Whoa - Ray Williams killed Barbaro?!? Thank you internets! Another truth revealed. Also, it occurs to me in times like this that we know way too much about these pro-sports guys. Apparently, some of them are assholes like the rest of us. And I always figured a guy like Artest would feed his doberman/pitbull/Sherman Tank-cross dogs $30 steaks like the guy in Moonraker. Now that's pimping.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 11:15 AM on February 08, 2007

There's nothing like an animal story to bring out the raw animal emotion in SpoFi-ers. Anyone who owns a dog has the obligation to make sure the dog is fed, watered, and exercised daily. A breed as large as the Great Dane needs a lot more care than just the occasional bowl of kibbles. It is unforgivable to allow a dog to be neglected. If you must have a pet, and you will be away for periods of time, get a cat. Better yet, get 2 cats so they can keep each other company. They are low maintenance, and will do nicely for a week or so, as long as sufficient food, water, and litter boxes are available. Of course, cats are smart enough and vindictive enough to make you pay for being away, but that's another story. (Just check your shoes before you put them on)

posted by Howard_T at 11:20 AM on February 08, 2007

C'mon Dogg, throw the dog a bone fer cryin' out loud! Shit.

posted by mjkredliner at 11:21 AM on February 08, 2007

Actually, I haven't done that at all LBB. I have only given my interpretation of what's being said. I agree that if Ron Artest did what's being said he's done, then the guy deserves no mercy. I have done nothing more than disagree about hurting another human being. Like I said before, I do not condone animal cruelty which is the main point here. This is not about you & I, this is about an individual that neglected to care for and nurish his dog so apparently, you're the one that needs to cut the crap. I will continue to give my honest opinion regardless whether anyone agrees with me or not, it's still an opinion. I am a dog owner and treat him like if he was my son (he pretty much is) but I'm not going to act like I know exactly what happened with this whole Ron Artest deal. What makes a good front page post (FPP)? Personal opinion belongs inside the thread. Take pride in what you are writing.

posted by BornIcon at 11:28 AM on February 08, 2007

Well, duh. Mob mentality, buddy, join up or get out of the way. I FINALLY have a use for all these torches and pitchforks!

posted by grum@work at 11:32 AM on February 08, 2007

...Fine already, I'll join your damn mob, I guess LBB was right, they do have everything at Target. Now let me hear your battlecry....

posted by BornIcon at 11:35 AM on February 08, 2007

WOLVERINES!

posted by MrFrisby at 11:49 AM on February 08, 2007

LOUD NOISES!

posted by jerseygirl at 12:03 PM on February 08, 2007

What makes a good front page post (FPP)? Personal opinion belongs inside the thread. Take pride in what you are writing. I view the rule as "Don't put your opinion in the description of the story, but if you can be funny in the title, knock yourself out." I happen to be a professional writer, and so I do take great pride in what I write, BI. There's a great amount of latitude given in the art of headline writing, whether it's at a newspaper or (even moreso) here on the Internets. I'll also add that we've now got 40 comments on this thread. Ends, meet means.

posted by wfrazerjr at 12:11 PM on February 08, 2007

Fraze, that was not directed towards you. Good luck with your writing though. It's 41 now.

posted by BornIcon at 12:14 PM on February 08, 2007

The SPCA also sent investigators to the home, where other animals also lived. These things often do make a big difference. This was absolutely the right thing to do and the actions of those who genuinely care about animals do matter. I volunteer at a shelter nearby and it sickens me to see so many abandoned and mistreated dogs and cats. What the hell are people thinking? If you can't understand that pets should be part of your family with all the responsibilities that come with that...don't own a fucking pet! I'm probably preaching to the choir but if responsible folks out there want a pet, please get him or her from a shelter and not a breeder or retail store, unless a shelter has brought animals into the store to find homes. Sometimes we have to do the right thing.

posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 12:43 PM on February 08, 2007

I'm probably preaching to the choir but if responsible folks out there want a pet, please get him or her from a shelter and not a breeder or retail store, unless a shelter has brought animals into the store to find homes. Sometimes we have to do the right thing. All three of our dogs are rescue dogs. I can't even walk into a shelter. I know I'd bring them all home. I view the rule as "Don't put your opinion in the description of the story, but if you can be funny in the title, knock yourself out." Fraz is correct. Writing 'artest should go to hell for this' in a front page post is the type of thing the guideline is referring to. Humor is always welcome (and you can always get away with more the better you write).

posted by justgary at 12:58 PM on February 08, 2007

I view the rule as "Don't put your opinion in the description of the story, but if you can be funny in the title, knock yourself out." Absolutely, I agree. Plus, laughing and having a sense of humor (and being able to laugh at yourself) is good for the soul. "Sometimes we have to do the right thing" Again, I have to agree.

posted by BornIcon at 01:04 PM on February 08, 2007

This is not about you & I, this is about an individual that neglected to care for and nurish his dog so apparently, you're the one that needs to cut the crap. I am? What crap is it that I need to cut? Asking you one more time, just what opinion is it that you're ascribing to me?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:53 PM on February 08, 2007

What are you asking me "one more time", LBB? Since you never asked me anything in the first place except, "Cut it out, okay?" But was that a question or a statement? And what exactly do I need to cut out? I mean I bought this vicious porterhouse with minimal fat so maybe your right, maybe I should cut the rest of the fat out. My dog could care less about the fat though, he'll eat just about anything. Thanks though but how did you know? In all seriousness, let it go, it's not that serious.

posted by BornIcon at 02:00 PM on February 08, 2007

Everyone let it go then. That's how it works. If you want her to stop, you stop too. Stops in this thread, stops in other threads.

posted by jerseygirl at 02:47 PM on February 08, 2007

In all seriousness, let it go, it's not that serious. You seemed to think it was at one point. What was it...oh yeah...in response to SummersEve's remark about torches and pitchforks: So it's ok to hurt and torture people to make a point? and: I have done nothing more than disagree about hurting another human being. Did you really think that SummersEve was serious about hurting another human being? That was what the reference to getting trolled was about, just to make sure there's no confusion here.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:52 PM on February 08, 2007

Well I know I'm in an utter state of non-confusion. I'm sure it'll pass.

posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 03:48 PM on February 08, 2007

I thought you were in the state of Texas, again. What happened?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:39 PM on February 08, 2007

Check the rest of his name.

posted by yerfatma at 05:21 PM on February 08, 2007

New username: Texan lost in NY moved back to TX then lost once again in NY.

posted by bperk at 05:33 PM on February 08, 2007

In all seriousness, let it go, it's not that serious You seemed to think it was at one point What I thought was serious and still do is the inhumane acts inflicted upon defensless animals such as this article is referencing to.

posted by BornIcon at 05:33 PM on February 08, 2007

We should be fortunate enough to see Artest on "Animal Cops". Anyone that treats their animals with such blatent disregard should be barred from owning animals. I bet he only owns the dogs for the status it brings him..."Yeah, well my dog is bigger than yours, at least when I feed it"

posted by urall cloolis at 05:58 PM on February 08, 2007

Yes, lbb, it's all very confusing. I mean, how could I possibly be in Texas yet be in a state of non-confusion? It's a mystery really, much like Mr. Artest's dog ignorance, being he's such a fine, upstanding example of today's American sports culture. And yes, I am back in Texas...have been for about 9 months, which was around the time I asked for a SpoFi name change while keeping my four-digit status. Of course there was no "status" to 4-digiters way back then.

posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 06:15 PM on February 08, 2007

Come on now folks!, Is anybody really surprised by the fact the Ron Artest mistreats his dogs? Gee and to think he could get a 20,000 dollar fine!...I'll just bet that will scare the hell out of him, especially after having to sit out almost an entire season for assaulting a fan. Let's face it, this guy is a JAG OFF to the n'th degree...He probably just feels that his dogs deserve the type of sterling treatment he generally reserves for other human beings.

posted by R_A_Mason at 06:19 PM on February 08, 2007

If I lived alone and my job had me traveling on a regular basis, I would regretfully not have a dog. Why would I not have a dog? No, not because my name is Ron Artest, but because it isn't fair to the dog. Comment icon posted by SummersEve at 8:38 AM CST on February 8 Maybe being single and a regular traveler isn't the most suitable situation for dog ownership. I do think, as long as its done responsibly, a dog can have an emotionally healthy life under these conditions. I'm guessing there are many dogs alive in shelters (without a no kill policy) who would be willing to give it a try. No disrespect is intended here SE. I just hope any SpoFi members who are hesitant to get a dog, due to the reasons you noted, will rethink their decision. There are way too many dogs in the world just waiting to let you know you are the best person on earth.

posted by danjel at 08:31 PM on February 08, 2007

I hear Artest is a fan of T. J. Simers of L. A. Times Page 2 fame. His attitude must be that it's just an animal. No Ron it's a dog and is a living, breathing entity that deserves better.

posted by Bossman90262 at 08:33 PM on February 08, 2007

I'm probably preaching to the choir but if responsible folks out there want a pet, please get him or her from a shelter and not a breeder or retail store, unless a shelter has brought animals into the store to find homes. Sometimes we have to do the right thing. I wonder what happens to the unsold pets at the retail store.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 09:17 PM on February 08, 2007

Um....clean-up on aisle 7?

posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 10:59 PM on February 08, 2007

Wow, a 60 poster. Let's see a different perspective. Maybe this is true; He said part of the problem is that his bulldog eats food intended for other dogs. "The new dog-watcher that I have didn't separate, you know, the dog food like he was supposed to," Artest explained. Maybe? In July of last year, a neighbor filed a report with animal control alleging Artest left four of his dogs tied up in his yard with no food for at least six weeks. A month later, another neighbor filed a report claiming the dogs had been without food for months These 2 "neighbors" know each other for sure. In review of the records show that animal control has been called out to Artest's estate at least five times in the last eight months. On at least two occassions, the dogs were impounded by animal control and Artest was billed more than $700 in fines and fees. This statement indicates the dogs were returned (if their lives were in danger it would be the responsibility of animal control to keep the dogs). This statement also indicates that animal control has been to Artest's home at least FIVE times only taking action twice and then returning the confiscated dogs to Artest. It would seem that these neighbors are calling animal control every time the wind blows. I'm not sure but, shouldn't we make sure that the "black particulate" is actually illegal drugs first this time? Will somebody please kill this cocksucker HOW THE GOOD LORD ALLOWS ANY MAN,WOMAN,OR DOG,TO CO-HABITATE WITH THIS RETARDED BEAST,IS BEYOND BELIEF,HE SHOULD BE STONED TO DEATH,LIKE IN THE BIBLICAL DAYS Sarcasm? On preview: Let's go lynching SE Ridiculously bad choice of words here my friend. This is the type of shit that should be reviewed and deleted immediately (sarcasm or not). Remember it would be easier to make sure he is guilty of what he is being accused of. You can always render justice, you can never "un-lynch" someone. Mean while this guy abusing elderly HUMAN BEINGS goes virtually unaddressed by the "Spofi lynch mob". Follow the link to compare how much more concerned some Spofites are over dogs not eating vs. old folks getting robbed. This begs the question, is it the crime that offends us, or the person committing it?

posted by Bishop at 03:49 AM on February 09, 2007

I'm no Artest fan,but "left w/out food or water for months at a time"?What kept them alive?Dogs probably were just barking non stop!!!Reason enough to call the animal cops & reason enough to take 'em away for good!woof woof!

posted by mdavidsf at 04:54 AM on February 09, 2007

I really hope you're not trying to turn this into a race issue, Bishop.

posted by jerseygirl at 05:04 AM on February 09, 2007

This begs the question, is it the crime that offends us, or the person committing it? Which is the point I was trying to make in the first place. I really hope you're not trying to turn this into a race issue, Bishop No where was there a mention of race, it's just that when the name Ron Artest is brought up, people automatically think, "asshole, scumbag, retard, idiot and/or guilty" all because of the way the media has portrayed him to be the last few years. I agree that he seems somewhat off-centered at times but that doesn't mean that he intentionally meant to hurt these animals. I'm just trying to look at the whole spectrum here and take what the media says with a grain of salt.

posted by BornIcon at 05:47 AM on February 09, 2007

I apologize for the confusion caused to you, BornIcon. My comment was directed at Bishop, not you.

posted by jerseygirl at 06:09 AM on February 09, 2007

Danjel, actually, I would hope a person reading this who travels often and lives alone would be convinced NOT to get a dog. Unless you have close family or super-reliable neighbors, it just isn't right (As demonstrated by this story). You might be able to volunteer with a rescue organization to be a foster home, thereby providing space for a dog at a no-kill that may have been put down elsewhere. Maybe an agreement could be reached where they could take the dog when you're away. Dogs need a lot of care. As stated above, you'd be better off with a cat. They need rescuing too.

posted by SummersEve at 06:14 AM on February 09, 2007

BornIcon's got it right. Ron Artest is a sad, sad man. But still, sometimes you pick a person you think you can trust to take care of the animals and they flake out on you. Happened to me before. I choose to judge Artest by the things I know he's done and not by some rumor in the media.

posted by ridadie2005 at 06:15 AM on February 09, 2007

No need to apologize jerseygirl, it's quite alright. Although there was no confusion on my part, I know who your comments were intended for.

posted by BornIcon at 06:29 AM on February 09, 2007

Then you're likely not in a position to speak on his behalf about his intentions.

posted by jerseygirl at 06:44 AM on February 09, 2007

all because of the way the media has portrayed him to be the last few years. Yeah, when the media portayed him as the kind of guy who goes rushing into the stands to attack fans, that really swayed me. And when the media forced him to say, on camera, that he'd like his team to give him time off because he wants to make a rap album instead of playing basketball, I just couldn't believe how low the media had stooped. Yep, it's the media's fault. Ron Artest is actually a saint. I'd like to propose that we add "because of the media" and all of its vapid permutations to the SportsFilter Stable of Banned Stupidity.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 06:56 AM on February 09, 2007

I'd like to propose that we add "because of the media" and all of its vapid permutations to the SportsFilter Stable of Banned Stupidity. Seconded.

posted by SummersEve at 07:10 AM on February 09, 2007

JG, how about you comment on the very logical counter-points I made. WTF, every time I make a valid counterpoint concerning the accused being Black, it becomes a race issue just because I'm Black. Read what I wrote. It makes sense, whether he is green, blue, or Jewish. Please present to me your own specific thoughts on why you feel this thread warrants so much attention vs. the thread I linked to. The majority of white people are discussing a black subject. 1 or 2 mention that they wish he was dead, and 1 mentions "lynching" (jokingly or what have you). Maybe race played a small part in this thread before I even got here. Me pointing it out doesn't mean I created it. You said yourself: I don't watch basketball. I hate it. So this thread can't be because Artest is a big basketball star. Maybe it's the animal factor drawing out the animal lovers. My thing is, where were all these comments on the other thread I linked to? If someone has an affinity for animals, surely there might be a special place in their heart for, I don't know.....PEOPLE? I'm sure all of us here have or have had grandparents. So my point is not necessarily about race, I would just honestly like to know where all the moral folk were when it came to the thread I linked to? Can you answer that? These people were robbed of over $100,00.00. If Ron Artest was the culprit, that thread would have been well over 100 posts and you know it. Hell, Maurice Clarett stole a cell phone (his 1st offense before the gun incident) and there was 2 threads about it. So please don't sit there all smug like and act as if race doesn't play some part in some of the negative or bashing threads that go on here. I'm not saying this thread exists because Artest is black. I'm simply saying it's a contributing factor to a few of the people who wouldn't otherwise comment. If this was about a hated white guy, say Pete Rose or Jeremy Shocky, I doubt there would be anyone saying: Will somebody please kill this cocksucker or HOW THE GOOD LORD ALLOWS ANY MAN,WOMAN,OR DOG,TO CO-HABITATE WITH THIS RETARDED BEAST Now, before you try to turn this around and point it at me, can you please give me your opinion on why the other thread I linked to was so short compared to this one?

posted by Bishop at 07:27 AM on February 09, 2007

Mean while this guy abusing elderly HUMAN BEINGS goes virtually unaddressed by the "Spofi lynch mob". Follow the link to compare how much more concerned some Spofites are over dogs not eating vs. old folks getting robbed There's always a huge outcry for pets/animals because they aren't in a position to fend for themselves. Leave a dog tied out without food or water, what's it supposed to do? Place a phone call? Unhook themselves and go to the store? Get a job? Advertise for new owners? They require care, and that's what pet owners with any sense of responsibility sign up for. The story you reference about the old couple is sad, but everything they did was, unfortunately, done by choice (theirs), and they got duped by a fellow human being. This is quite common, which is why I seriously doubt I'd be taken by a guy with a line like he had, and if he started asking me to hand out cash, I'd be a bit concerned. Humans have the ability to reason. Pets only have their instincts. While I feel sorry for the couple in the other link, the picture at least seems to prove the man in question is still able to find plenty of food and nourishment.

posted by dyams at 07:32 AM on February 09, 2007

I posted this earlier than deleted it in hopes of this thread not spiraling into the abyss of racism like so many of it's predecessors . Too late for that so I'll just cut-and-paste and repost it... Mean while this guy abusing elderly HUMAN BEINGS goes virtually unaddressed by the "Spofi lynch mob". Had you ever heard of the Portland Timbers before? Seriously. The Timbers? I read the story and I'm still not 100% sure what sport they play. I assume it's soccer. So the apathy isn't because the guy wasn't black, it was because he's a nobody. I could give a poo if this were Ron Artest or Ron Howard, Danny Ainge or Danny Glover, Bill Clinton or Bill Cosby. It's about the dogs not about Artest.

posted by SummersEve at 07:33 AM on February 09, 2007

I wasn't speaking on behalf of Bishop, I was just pointing out that race wasn't a factor on his statement like you implied, nothing more nothing less. So you can take it for what it's worth since we all pretty much comment on other people's opinions here in the first place but your making it seems as if that's now taboo. Yep, it's the media's fault What is the media's fault is not that these animals were left without food or water but that their opinions are valued more so than the average joe, like all us here. Why is it unfair to think that the media hasn't been a factor in why people automatically believe that Ron Artest would do such a thing to an animal? Is it because the media is always correct? We are all human and are sensitive to certain topics but to act as if Ron Artest is most certainly guilty of this heinous crime is most certainly unfair. I could give a poo if this were Ron Artest or Ron Howard, Danny Ainge or Danny Glover, Bill Clinton or Bill Cosby. It's about the dogs not about Artest. You might not care that the story involved Ron Artest and these poor dog(s) but I can assure you that most people here did. As soon as the name Ron Artest was mentioned, the floodgates opened right up. I personally only care about the animals that were mistreated and if Ron Artest had anything to do with that, then of course he should be punished.

posted by BornIcon at 07:51 AM on February 09, 2007

WTF, every time I make a valid counterpoint concerning the accused being Black, it becomes a race issue just because I'm Black. You presume I know you're black. I didn't. I think I was out sick the day we did SpoFi Color Day. Jesus Bishop, I don't care what color you or anyone here is. I don't think in those terms at all because it doesn't fucking matter to me here, there, anywhere. Please present to me your own specific thoughts on why you feel this thread warrants so much attention vs. the thread I linked to. Your linked story: Elderly couple not physically harmed, just duped out of money. Emotionally and fiscally taken advantage of by unfortunate choices they made letting someone in to their lives. Sad? Without a doubt. However, they weren't chained in that dude's backyard with no water and food. They were flimflammed by some random person I had never heard of on some team I didn't know existed in soccer thread that I didn't read. This story: Repeated animal abuse and neglect by a basketball player with a recognizable name. They animals didn't make a decision that resulted in their abuse. So please don't sit there all smug like and act as if race doesn't play some part in some of the negative or bashing threads that go on here. The guy that flimflammed the elderly couple was Middle Eastern. Where are the racist remarks for him? No one called him Al Quada, no one cited the Taliban. Oh, right.

posted by jerseygirl at 08:18 AM on February 09, 2007

dyams: There's always a huge outcry for pets/animals because they aren't in a position to fend for themselves. Yeah, but it's also true -- in general, not in this case -- that many elderly human beings aren't in a position to fend for themselves, either. They need help just to get by, and my sense is that in many cases of elder abuse -- as in other cases of abuse -- the victims put up with it because they know they can't take care of themselves and fear that the situation could get worse. I think that when you look at people's different reactions to two different issues, you're always on shaky ground when you propose simple reasons for the difference. For one thing, two threads on SportsFilter isn't exactly a great set of data: it's a small sample, timing is a factor in thread participation, etc. For another, lack of engagement in an issue can mean a lack of caring...or it can mean the exact opposite. Speaking only for myself, I certainly feel much more passionately about elder abuse than I do about animal abuse; it's a much more upsetting issue to me. I chose not to follow that link or read the thread for that reason. Along the same lines, I have a feeling that issues of elder care and elder abuse are very close to the bone for many of us: we know that we will all be elderly sometime, and many of us suspect that we will be living in a world where elders are cared for even less well than they are today. We know that our parents, if we still have them, are getting older, and that we will have to make decisions about their care. With animals, the issue is simple: having a pet is a choice, and in my position, I have simply chosen not to have one. I can't choose not to have parents. I have already been through the trials that I suspect many others dread, that of dealing with my parents' failing health. It is, perhaps, that dread that makes people less eager to engage on these issues in a context where they're an abstraction: we all know that we'll have to deal with them soon enough. One thing that I would like to ask -- ask -- of SpoFi members: let's consider not using the term "lynch" any more. Although the term is older, and has been used to describe murder or violence against people of all races, it has come to have its strongest associations as a form of terrorism and intimidation through violence perpetrated against African-Americans. The term "lynching" is the legacy of a time when African-Americans lived under a reign of terror. To use the term casually is the same as to speak casually of having people "gassed": if you knew a Holocaust survivor were present, or someone who had lost their family in the Holocaust, would you feel okay using it? Would you feel that you could use it in jest? Speaking of "lynching", it seems to me, is the same thing. I don't know how we can hope to use it and expect that it's not going to have a strong negative charge for any African-American who reads it. Please, let's consider using some other phrases.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:23 AM on February 09, 2007

The majority of white people are discussing a black subject. 1 or 2 mention that they wish he was dead, and 1 mentions "lynching" (jokingly or what have you). Maybe race played a small part in this thread before I even got here. Me pointing it out doesn't mean I created it. Seriously, bishop, I think it would be at least wise to pick who you are defending. I defended Artest after the brawl because I thought the penalty was far too harsh. However, I decided to stop after he said he thought it would be best if he were traded after the Pacers stood behind him through that whole thing (Bird even posed on the cover of ESPN mag with him). Now, he has been fined multiple times for not taking care of his dogs. He admits that his dog was underweight, but blames someone else. You have to know after all the Barbaro comments that people feel really strongly about animals, so that is where most of the animosity comes from on this thread. Artest seems a really poor choice for arguing that racism or the media are at fault. Some times black athletes are just stupid and assholes. And, when people of whatever race point that out, it ain't racism.

posted by bperk at 09:07 AM on February 09, 2007

As soon as the name Ron Artest was mentioned, the floodgates opened right up. I don't want to beat this to death any more than it's already been, but some people just can't seem to fathom that nothing exists in a vacuum. Artest has a history of making an ass of himself, and according to records, of screwing up the care of his dogs. Some people take it to an extreme, that;s to be expected when dealing with anything. But in this case, the guy keeps proving he's an ass. let's consider not using the term "lynch" any more. I honestly never knew. I'm on board with finding a new word. Perhaps "Irate" or "really really angry"... On preview: What bperk said. There are stupid assholes of every race.

posted by SummersEve at 09:20 AM on February 09, 2007

I'd like to propose that we add "because of the media" and all of its vapid permutations to the SportsFilter Stable of Banned Stupidity. All in favor say "Aye." "Aye."

posted by hawkguy at 09:22 AM on February 09, 2007

On review: Let's go pop a fork in his ass.

posted by MrFrisby at 09:26 AM on February 09, 2007

Some times black athletes are just stupid and assholes. And, when people of whatever race point that out, it ain't racism. Actually, I agree with how SummersEve put it. On preview: What bperk said. There are stupid assholes of every race

posted by BornIcon at 09:32 AM on February 09, 2007

I honestly never knew. I'm on board with finding a new word. Perhaps "Irate" or "really really angry"... Yeah, I think it's like the "monkey" discussion we had a while back: some white Americans, and I suspect many white people in other countries, really don't know about this history, because it is history for us -- and not a personal one. It happened before our time and/or out of eyesight, and not to anyone we knew; we lack the family stories of an uncle or grandfather who was lynched or who barely escaped. This website is a real eye-opener, however. Warning: don't visit it before you have to do anything requiring a calm spirit, because it'll anger and sicken you.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 09:44 AM on February 09, 2007

Wow LBB, I've never seen that website before. Thanks.

posted by BornIcon at 09:53 AM on February 09, 2007

He is an ass and would be if he was black white or green. they should let the dogs eat him NOW CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG..

posted by Debo270 at 09:59 AM on February 09, 2007

If this was about a hated white guy, say Pete Rose or Jeremy Shocky, I doubt there would be anyone saying: Will somebody please kill this cocksucker or HOW THE GOOD LORD ALLOWS ANY MAN,WOMAN,OR DOG,TO CO-HABITATE WITH THIS RETARDED BEAST Now, before you try to turn this around and point it at me, can you please give me your opinion on why the other thread I linked to was so short compared to this one? posted by Bishop Bishop, that comment was from a member who signed up that very day (feb 8) to make that one comment. He then made another similar comment in all caps that was deleted and he was banned. Not deleting that first comment was an oversight. There's a lot of idiots out there and a lot of people that just want to troll. Signing up one day and spouting of nonsense is not representative of sportsfilter. You'd be better off just ignoring them and letting us take care of them. No sense wasting the energy. They do it to just get a reaction.

posted by justgary at 10:04 AM on February 09, 2007

What is the deal with great rebounders being mentally retarded. We should have Ron and Dennis Rodman play some one on one. They could discuss important life issues and the stress involved with being such well respected role models and upstanding citizens in their communities.

posted by Debo270 at 10:07 AM on February 09, 2007

Mean while this guy abusing elderly HUMAN BEINGS goes virtually unaddressed by the "Spofi lynch mob". Follow the link to compare how much more concerned some Spofites are over dogs not eating vs. old folks getting robbed. posted by Bishop at 3:49 AM CST on February 9 Please present to me your own specific thoughts on why you feel this thread warrants so much attention vs. the thread I linked to. posted by Bishop at 7:27 AM CST on February 9 I think there are more members on this site that can relate to animal cruelty than being swindled for 100k. I own a dog. This story struck a nerve with me. It does not matter to me that the dogs belonged to Ron Artest. I would be equally as concerned if the dogs belonged to Peyton Manning. Race ins't an issue here for me. Also, I don't have 100k. While I feel it is disturbing that someone was bilked out of that kind of money, I can't emotionally relate to the loss.

posted by danjel at 10:25 AM on February 09, 2007

I'd like to propose that we add "because of the media" and all of its vapid permutations to the SportsFilter Stable of Banned Stupidity. I completely disagree. The media can put a twist on any issue, portray anyone in an unflattering or flattering light. Because it's the media's job to sell stories and not necessarily to be fair, I think it's valid to examine the media's impact on any story we run across. Am I missing the point here?

posted by tron7 at 10:29 AM on February 09, 2007

Good point, danjel. Also, if anyone has 100k that they'd like to be bamboozled out of, my email is in the profile. Thanks!

posted by jerseygirl at 10:40 AM on February 09, 2007

PEOPLE As someone who showed up late to the conversation allow me to offer an impartial 3rd person point of view. Since we are typing and not speaking to each other it is very hard to get the tone of some people. That being said, since i have been coming on I see at least once a week someone take offense to something as racism. any comment can be taken as racist or prejudice in some way. You all know taht white people have been lynched too. This is like the Prince conversation a few days ago. someone said he "dances like monkey and everyone went on the defensive because Prince is black and someone said monkey. that thread then turned into an arguement about who was racist. NEWS FLASH Ron Artest is black. If Roger Clements was abusing his dogs we would be just as mad but somewhere along the line someone took something someone said and made this a racial issue. It is not 1930 people. If you want to be offended thats fine say"I am offended by that comment"but stop starting shit because you think what someone said may offend someone else. People need to relax!!!! All the anger this is generating is just because it is a slow sports news day. The media has made Ron hated so don't be mad cause people hate him(media job well done)Out of the now 100 plus comments, almost half have nothing to do with the article. People just want to argue about why we hate Ron artest. He would be a dick in any race. Sorry if my comments offended anyone or not really. CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG ---someone please feel free to disect my grammar and spelling now.

posted by Debo270 at 10:54 AM on February 09, 2007

Can we put a SpoFi moratorium on the black people are too sensitive and need to get over it argument?

posted by bperk at 11:04 AM on February 09, 2007

Now that I'm down with.

posted by tron7 at 11:06 AM on February 09, 2007

As stated above, you'd be better off with a cat. They need rescuing too. Of course, cats are smart enough and vindictive enough to make you pay for being away, but that's another story. Cats are fascinating creatures. I prefer them to dogs myself. Nothing says "I missed you" like a hairball on your pillow. And nothing says, "I love you" like having a dead rodent dropped at your feet. Here's an article on the benefits of having pets.

posted by MrFrisby at 11:09 AM on February 09, 2007

The media has made Ron hated so don't be mad cause people hate him(media job well done)....... People just want to argue about why we hate Ron Artest. Which I what I've been saying (or trying to say) all along. Can we put a SpoFi moratorium on the black people are too sensitive and need to get over it argument? That was a total unnecessary comment, bperk. Considering that I'm not black, I still took offense to that one...or maybe I'm just too sensitive?

posted by BornIcon at 11:15 AM on February 09, 2007

Can we put a SpoFi moratorium on the black people are too sensitive and need to get over it argument? I'll vote for that, and suggest as well a moratorium on the use of the phrase CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG to stifle discussions of race and racism. And to Debo270, coming late to the debate doesn't make your comments "an impartial 3rd person point of view". It makes you no more likely to be impartial, and somewhat less likely to be all caught up on the points that have already been discussed; it's pretty common for those jumping in late to toss out some stuff that's already been done to death. However, given that you want to toss in your two cents, doesn't it strike you as ironic that your second contribution to the thread is a strongly worded suggestion that other people ought to keep their two cents to themselves and shut up already about an aspect of the topic that they care about? (on preview: BornIcon: That was a total unnecessary comment, bperk. Considering that I'm not black, I still took offense to that one...or maybe I'm just too sensitive? I think you misunderstand here. bperk is saying that people of other races should stop telling black people that they're too sensitive and need to get over it.)

posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:19 AM on February 09, 2007

I agree with Tron that media bias can be at times be a topic, but: The media has made Ron hated Is a wonderful example of why I agree with: I'd like to propose that we add "because of the media" and all of its vapid permutations to the SportsFilter Stable of Banned Stupidity. Ron made Ron hated. The media were just along for the ride.

posted by SummersEve at 11:31 AM on February 09, 2007

LBB, I am not saying keep it to yourself I am saying stop being offended for other people. If you were offended by something fine and i am sorry but what right do you have to decide that something someone wrote may be offensive to someone else. You have the right to your opinion You don't have the right to tell others what their opinion should be

posted by Debo270 at 11:35 AM on February 09, 2007

You have the right to your opinion There's no hope for the world. I give up.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:38 AM on February 09, 2007

Don't give up LBB, there's always hope. Not everyone will undertsand your meaning unless it's clarified. I know that you meant no harm in diagreeing with my point of views but also realize that I meant none as well. As far as: Can we put a SpoFi moratorium on the black people are too sensitive and need to get over it argument? You're right, I did misunderstand what he meant. See, there is hope.

posted by BornIcon at 11:55 AM on February 09, 2007

I completely disagree. The media can put a twist on any issue, portray anyone in an unflattering or flattering light. Because it's the media's job to sell stories and not necessarily to be fair, I think it's valid to examine the media's impact on any story we run across. My reaction exactly. If we drop the media discussion altogether, are we to work under the assumption that everyone is aware of the media influence on an issue, or pretend that the media has no influence on it at all? If you want to drop it from the thread because Artest (who I don't follow at all) is the "real deal" I have no problem with that (on edit: although I do have to question why anyone in the media is looking into an athlete so closely that they are coming up with animal abuse reports). I do have a problem, though, if you drop media influence from discussions on Bonds, for example. That said, I will vote in favor of the ban if it means I never again have to hear whining about how the media felates Derek Jeter, or how his talents are overblown. I vote in favor of banning "lynch," "black people are too sensitive," "Can't we all get along," discussions that relate at all to whether or not anyone has a right to their opinion (as patently obvious), and stories which lead to one sports-related comment* to every 60 "Guy X is a jerk" or similar non-sports-related comments (animal abuse is not a sport, not in this country anyway). *I think somebody mentioned that Artest is a good rebounder.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 12:29 PM on February 09, 2007

*I think somebody mentioned that Artest is a good rebounder Actually, Ron Artest is a great basketball player. The guy has the size, quickness and toughness that a good rebounder needs in order to play in the paint. Outside of all the BS that has happened, he's a star in the league. I don't think that anyone can truly question that. But still, if indeed it's true that these dogs were neglected by Ron Artest, it's up to the court of law to decide the outcome.

posted by BornIcon at 12:36 PM on February 09, 2007

So it is settled Good player by day Asshole by night

posted by Debo270 at 01:01 PM on February 09, 2007

Debo, were you sleeping during the reading comprehension portion of English class? You don't have the right to tell others what their opinion should be Please, dissect lbb's posts and show us exactly where she did this. Maybe I'm the one who was sleeping during class because I'm missing what you're comprehending. I am not saying keep it to yourself I am saying stop being offended for other people. People who care for other people have every right to be upset when they see, read or hear about unjust acts. Some people take things to heart more than others. If you're not one of those people, rock on, and consider yourself lucky that you don't carry the burden of sympathy. I wonder what happens to the unsold pets at the retail store. Your implication that all domesticated animals need homes is spot on, TCS. 2 weeks ago I was standing outside the shelter when a woman in her mid-30's and who I assumed to be her daughter came by to look into pet adoption. As they walked towards the front door, I couldn't help but notice that mother and daughter had perfect hair, make-up, etc., looking for all the world like they were going to Sunday brunch at some trendy new restaurant with the cast from Desperate Houswives. It was a nice day out and the front door was open to let some fresh air in. There are around 350 pets in this 800 square foot shelter and the smell is enough to bother some people. As they stood there with their arms crossed outside the door, a vet tech walked up to greet them. The trophy-wife woman said "You know, I don't think this is the place for us to get a pet; I think we'll go into the city." The tech just stood there with her mouth open. They never went inside. They never saw any of the animals. All they knew is that there was the smell of animals coming out the door and that their home was not a place for a creature who lived in THAT. I feel certain that this woman took her daughter straight to the mall to buy that little doggy in the window, assuming they weren't turned off completely from their traumatic experience. People like this will always keep pet-selling retail stores in business. Hell, I was once one of those people and bought the best pet I ever had from a mall 22 years ago. The fact is I didn't know much about shelters or what it meant to truly rescue an animal. With age, I've grown a bit of a conscience. When I wrote Sometimes we have to do the right thing, my hope was that I was writing to either like-mined folks and more importantly, those people who are interested in an alternative to which they may not have been aware or truly considered.

posted by Texan_lost_in_NY at 01:19 PM on February 09, 2007

Ron made Ron hated. The media were just along for the ride. I agree with that for Artest, but I think we should examine the media's influence on why we hate him. He deffinately has supervillain status on ESPN and talk radio, has he been malicious enough to earn it? I dunno, the dude just seems crazy to me. Nothing he does seems premeditated, he just reacts and it just never seems to be the right way. He wasn't right in the head. As far as the dog thing, I just don't care enough about animals to get as burned about this as everyone else seems to be.

posted by tron7 at 01:48 PM on February 09, 2007

I don't understand why he has so many dogs if he can't take care of one! If it were up to me, I would take all the dogs away, fine him and bar him from owning pets until he retires and can properly care for animals.

posted by Warrior50 at 01:48 PM on February 09, 2007

I see where you're coming from Texan. Thing is, I don't think the pets at the retail store are saying, "Well, this cage sucks, but at least I'm not at a shelter." Cage is a cage. If some snooty 90210'er wants to get their pet from a retail store, well, that's one more pet in a home in my book. More power to them for getting a fresher smelling roommate, and to the pet who will undoubtedly feast on gourmet food for the rest of its life. I have two cats from a foster home that I was sent to by a shelter. I wanted one white cat (apparently because I wanted all of my clothes to look like white cashmere from a distance) and I left with a pair. The woman wanted me to take three, but I put my foot down. There's a societal line that is drawn between single guy with two cats and single guy with "several" cats. Cats are a symbol of power in Egypt. Somehow, in a loft apartment with a single guy and stacks of old "Baseball Weekly" newspapers lying around, they lose that mystique. Chicks dig 'em, though.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 01:49 PM on February 09, 2007

I see no reason to ban the word 'lynch', from my search it appears I am the only one to use it in what could be viewed as a distasteful manner. Like SE, I didn't know either, but I have no problem with lbb telling me why I probably shouldn't use it. I had a very dull monotone history teacher, so I slept through most of his classes.

posted by MrFrisby at 02:01 PM on February 09, 2007

I'm not voting for a ban of the word "lynch" either. I was just thinking that the term is probably a lot more painful for African-Americans than many people of other races may realize, and that being conscious of its history when using it would probably help mitigate some aggrieved feelings. I'd definitely use the word when talking about Emmett Till, because that is what happened to him, but I wouldn't use it to refer to a verbal spat or an internet disagreement, because that (to me) is disrespectful to the memory of those who were literally lynched. Sorry to get so preachy...it's beer-thirty, I'll cut it out now.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:54 PM on February 09, 2007

Lbb, That was a truly shocking website you linked to. I am certainly aware of the history of lynching, but I had no idea they use to make postcards about them. I also noticed that while the majority of the victims were African Americans, there were also a few White men lynched as well. I also noticed that the website seem to combine what use to be considered death penalties for criminals (carried out by Law men) and just plain lynching in general carried out by lynch mobs. I appreciated your posts. Some times black athletes are just stupid and assholes. And, when people of whatever race point that out, it ain't racism Do yourself a favor and read my posts completely. All I did is offer a different perspective. I also said: I'm not saying this thread exists because Artest is black. And I certainly didn't defend him because he is black. If he did have a bad dog-sitter, what the hell does his race have to do with it? I also referenced the recent Mike Vick thread that went on and on about how he screwed up, and how he must be an idiot for carrying his own weed, when it turned out there was no weed at all, and the thread was linked to a story that wasn't true. If Artest was guilty of animal cruelty "5 times" as some suggest, and if the following are true statements: In the last 8 months, Animal Control has had to come out to his house 5 times. Animal Control had to impound his animals. Take them away from him because they were not getting the proper care at the Artest house. If the animals were in good shape with proper food, water and shelter, they wouldn't take the animals, According to the article, there is a pattern of this behavior, he has been reported several times for neglect and already been fined once before Then why does animal control CONTINUE TO RETURN HIS DOGS? He has been reported several times and FINED ONCE. The only PATTERN is him being reported. If he has a bad dog handler then it is his responsibility to get a good one. But if saying a person who got fined ONCE for his dog handler not feeding his dogs correctly warrants "Will somebody please kill this cocksucker", I don't think the problem rests with my reaction to the situation. Seriously, bishop, I think it would be at least wise to pick who you are defending Are you serious? The majority who have responded here are taking the neighbors word for it. A few of them are the same folk who took the TSA's word for it when they said Mike Vick had weed. All I said was maybe Artest is telling the truth about his dog handler. If not and his animals are taken away ( and not returned) because of his own wrong doing, then animal lovers unite and have at him. bperk:Some times black athletes are just stupid and assholes. And, when people of whatever race point that out, it ain't racism I don't think it is either. However, if we honestly take a look at the percentage of "Black athlete is an asshole and I hope he dies" threads vs. "White athlete is an asshole and I hope he dies" threads, I think you'll find the same alarming White vs. Black disparity that was found in the link about lynching that LBB provided. And if you count the posts in the threads, the disparity becomes even greater, and if you say race doesn't play a part in that, then you need to honestly think about what you are defending.

posted by Bishop at 06:22 AM on February 10, 2007

Then why does animal control CONTINUE TO RETURN HIS DOGS? If I'm not mistaken, animal control is only a branch of the police force in most cities. If you actually want a pet protected and saved from abuse, and not given back to the abusive owners, you have to contact the SPCA or Human Society.

posted by dyams at 01:32 PM on February 10, 2007

Bishop, Artest's dogs have spent 77 nights in the pound since July. He admits that his dog was skinny from not being fed. There are plenty of quotes from him about there having been problems with his dogs and that he is trying to take care of it. He even blogged about it. He never once mentions a neighbor conspiracy against him. That sounds like a pattern to me. I find his excuse about the dogwatcher unpersuasive since he is the one responsible for hiring a reputable and reliable sitter, which now he claims to have done. It should have been done from the start. I also don't find it persuasive that his dogs were returned. That's how our system works after all. Abused children are reconciled with their parents all the time. It is not an indication that the kids were not abused in the first place. There are probably more threads talking about black players doing something wrong, but there are probably more threads about black players doing something right as well. There are just lots of star athletes that are black and what they do for good and bad is big news. I think that you are inevitably going to find racism in some of the theads. I see no point in discussing the constant battle against racism in dubious instances as this one. It only makes the argument less persuasive in those threads when the problem is glaring. People get pretty crazy when animals are involved. A writer for the LA Times wrote an article about people taking this Barbaro stuff to seriously, and he received death threats worse than anything you will find in this thread. No racism, just some people react strongly when animals are harmed.

posted by bperk at 08:23 AM on February 12, 2007

It's plain and simple. The dogs were returned because, upon investigation by animal control, they know it was Artest's dog-sitter and not him directly. They also know Artest poses no threat to his dogs and that he genuinely wants to get the issue resolved. Since you compared abused children being reconciled to parents to this situation, it's safe to say that the same children would NOT be returned to the parents if there was a PATTERN of abuse that would lead to the children being abused even further or killed. If any animal group continued to return these animals, they must be certain their lives are not in danger, or they would become partly responsible. Just like the case in Florida where the state removed a child from care due to abuse, only to return the child and then have the child get killed. This thread was created (and some responded) as if animals have died in Artest's care and that is not the case. Either way, no matter how it's put, Artest having a bad dog handler doesn't warrant, "would someone kill this cocksucker". This comment doesn't seem to be directed at him because he has a bad dog handler. This comment was most likely made because this person genuinely doesn't like Artest for what ever reason. In response to that comment I merely suggested waiting for all the facts before the "lynch mob" went lynching due to the mistake that was made in the Mike Vick thread. Regardless of the persons race, I suggested getting all the facts first, that's all. As far as the ratio of black athlete does good to black athlete does bad threads being anywhere near close here, I would say you are either just saying that or you are sadly mistaken. I would guess the ratio is about 40-1, bad vs. good.

posted by Bishop at 02:50 AM on February 13, 2007

Bishop: I fully support your efforts to challenge the members of this site on this issue, and I respect your viewpoint, but I think you hurt your cause in two ways. 1) You seem to latch onto a small number of comments to defend your assertions. The comment you referenced above, which you have now quoted several times, was immediately challenged by the two comments that followed it. Furthermore, I seriously doubt that you can provide evidence that the person who made the comment has a history of derogatory comments directed toward any particular race. As has been stated, a good deal of the emotion exhibited in this thread comes from a visceral reaction to animal abuse. 2) On the front page at this moment are four threads involving black athletes: one discussing a black female athlete and her weight, which has revealed no negative comments on the athlete; one a discussion that is a celebration of the players in the Negro Leagues; one on the difficult relationship between a black former-NFL player and his son which is decidedly protective of the young man and his mother; and this one. This is the only one of those threads to which you've contributed. If you have an agenda of defending the black athlete -- and, again, I respect your position on this -- it might help your cause to give a modicum of attention to the threads about black athletes that don't contain the odd comments that you determine to be racist. Otherwise, it just looks like your goal is in trying to pick a fight. Nobody is denying that racism exists, and it certainly rears it head from time to time here despite the best intentions of the admins to contain it, but if you're not interested in contributing to the positive threads on black athletes, your perspective, including claims of a 40-1 ratio, are probably not going to be taken seriously.

posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 03:59 AM on February 13, 2007

I think that Bishop has a point though. The more the thread is about a black athlete that may or may not have done something wrong, people are quick to pounce on him before all of the facts are even out. I'm not saying that anyone here is being baised based on the person's skin color by any means but still, more comments are made when an individual is of a certain nationality. I understand that their are people of all races that do some dumbass things but whether it's Michael Vick, Donovan McNabb, Terrell Owens or in this case, Ron Artest, they end up being made to look like if they are the catalyst of all that is wrong in the world. Look, I know that I am going to get people that agree/disagree with my opinion and that's great but this seems to be the way it is everywhere, not just here. I respect most everyone that expresses their opinions on here because I know that we all love to talk about everything sports, but I can't disagree with what Bishop had to say except that maybe the ration was a little high though. 40-1? That's pretty high.

posted by BornIcon at 07:31 AM on February 13, 2007

That's certainly true, BornIcon, about black athletes (and black people) getting the benefit of the doubt less than their white counterparts. It is pretty much the shape that racism comes in these days. It doesn't follow, however, that this thread is an example of that. That's my point. The facts of this case are such that the vehement defense of Artest sounds illogical. Placing all of the blame on one of his employees for problems with his dogs dating back at least until July is a real stretch. So wishing ill of Artest for both his history of misbehavior and current instance of dog neglect, while distasteful, doesn't necessarily indicate that racism is involved. There are cases when this discussion is useful, especially in the "Bonds is the root of all evil" threads, but here it sounds like bullshit.

posted by bperk at 09:24 AM on February 13, 2007

I appreciate well thought out responses to my comments. Sousepaw, you'll find in my history of comments that I don't follow a lot of links, and I certainly do not feel the need to comment on every link associated with African Americans. I also do not read everything posted here. I have a few links that show up on a yahoo home page, therefore I don't even see everything on the front page ( I stopped reading the entire front page a while back). I try not to burden the community by posting on every single thread. I also tend to follow links that have a lot of posts (this usually indicates a discussion of interest to the majority of the community). I see you are a fairly new member, and the things I speak of go back a little bit. As far as your second and third point go, I just don't have the time right now to start linking to a bunch of threads that would prove my point in a heartbeat, however, stick around and eventually you will see for yourself how true the point I make is. BornIcon, thank you for taking the time to understand. Bperk, again, please read my first comment. It was hardly a "vehement defense" of Artest. I started my comment with offering a "different perspective". The reason I did so was due to the recent disgrace called the "ron mexico" thread, that wrongfully accused him of being in possession of weed. (please note only 2, yes 2 people returned to the thread to acknowledge that he was innocent of the charges), and there was no new thread discussing his innocence (I could have started one, but what would have been the point of me doing it, I would just be accused of "vehemently defending" him because he was black, not because he was innocent). Again, NOBODY knows if Artest had a bad dog handler, but note he is automatically guilty of "dog neglect". He was investigated 5 times and fined once, so I will reiterate, I don't think that warrants, "will somebody please kill this cocksucker". Do you know how many 5-6-7-8 game road trips Artest has been on in the past 5-6-7 years? Why haven't we read about any of his animals dying if he "neglects them so"? This is not news worth at all and I stand by my claim that this wouldn't be posted here if it was anyone other than Artest, T.O, Bonds, Tyson, Vick, Clarett....etc. And, If it were anyone else, Farve, Brady, Manning etc, we certainly wouldn't have been discussing the terms used such as "LYNCH" or "pitchfork" or "KILL" OR "BEAST", when referring to the accused. Spousepaw I invite you to search the archives for the following: Mike Tyson Vick T.O./Terrel Owens Maurice Clarett Barry Bonds Ron Artest Or search any reference of "jail", "prison", "arrested", "shot", "shooting" ,"felony", "fight" or "brawl" and begin to compare your findings if you are indeed interested in the allegations I have made. Please do not contend that I am wrong without being willing to search for actual evidence yourself.

posted by Bishop at 08:23 PM on February 14, 2007

Quick example: Notice here in this discussion about fighting in an MLB game. You never once see the word thug, punk etc. Also note the general belief (and or mood) about fighting in an MLB game were both combatants are white. It's discussed as if it's approved of. Neither party is a punk, thug, trash, classless, etc. Now note here how more than a few mention that the people involved are punks, thugs, over paid trash or ghetto. Here are 2 of the comments below. I wonder if this is the same vito I quoted above under a different number. well, here we go again. you get these punk ass thugs showin off because they are on tv. ill admit, the foul was uncalled for. but then u get these punks showin off not acting like professionals. stickin out their chest like they are still in the hood, the streets or wherever. these punk ass thugs want the pro s money but they dont act like it. then you have the biggest punk ass of em all, Melo. who now you can call Marsh-Melo! this chump threw a sucker punch, then ran backwards like a little bitch. what a joke. i will say no more on that. Marsh-Melo will get suspended for about 10 games and pay a fine. big deal! if they make the playoffs, he should sit out the playoffs. then maybe these punks will think twice about tryin to be a hardass and showin off on tv. if they dont make the playoffs, suspend his punk ass half of next season. posted by vito938 at 8:47 PM CST on December 17 Over-paid trash. Let the excusses begin. Come on, this is nothing but a classless act and it will be brushed under the carpet; maybe some fines will be handed out, but they will have no impact on people who are multi-millionaires. Just because you are an athlete does not give you the right to attack someone. Imagine if anyone who visits Sportsfilter were to participate in a brawl at their workplace - how long would they continue to be employed? The NBA needs to send a message that these acts will not be tolerated and terminate the player's contracts posted by FonGu at 3:51 AM CST on December 17 Also note here in the thread about the suspensions for the "brawl" someone thinks Carmello had his "weed" taken from him (just like Mike Vick all black men smoke weed) and that's why he punched Collins. Another says Carmello should be put in prison. My point is this, do you see the general attitude I'm referring to? 2 white guys fight, no big deal, it's part of the game. 2 black guys fight, "ban them punk ass thugs forever", "they must be smoking weed", "they should be in jail", "they are over paid trash". Now this wouldn't be race related would it? This is 1 small example of what I'm referring to. You say I have formed my opinions based on something "I determine to be race related"? My friend above is proof that my point is not entirely "made up" or exaggerated. Look further for yourself, you might be shocked at what you find. Then again, with your assumption that I am slightly exaggerating, maybe you won't.

posted by Bishop at 09:37 PM on February 14, 2007

Wow Bishop, you are really hung up on the "will somebody please kill this cocksucker" comment. I can't understand why though, that sounds more like a homophobic comment than a racial one. I also tend to follow links that have a lot of posts So, where is your Sodom and Gomorrah sermon in the Amaechi thread? Or does your bible only have laws against caucasian homosexuals? Which bible are you quoting, the King James, the NIV? I see you are a fairly new member, If you did a little bit more research, you would see that he is not that new. In fact, research those others that you quoted and you would see that the majority of them are just trolls.

posted by MrFrisby at 11:33 PM on February 14, 2007

Mrfrisby, while you are correct about BPP not being new (sorry BPP I over looked that part of your profile) why not comment about what I posted? I speak my mind when and where I feel like it, as do you. If the truth I posted bothers you, don't read it. Why are you asking about what I wrote on a different thread? If you want to attack the subject we are discussing, that's 1 thing, but attacking me is something different. But, as usual, this is the exact response that pops up every time things like this are pointed out. The Bible has never been mentioned in this thread, why are you making this thread about me, because you used the word LYNCH the way you did when discussing a black man? In fact, research those others that you quoted and you would see that the majority of them are just trolls. That deserve to have their racially offensive posts remain here? I have had posts removed with the explanation that something I said was either not about sports or it may have been offensive. So I point out things that are offensive to me with the hopes that the comments maybe removed, especially if they were made by racist trolls. And if they were made by racists trolls, why do you defend them?

posted by Bishop at 01:46 AM on February 15, 2007

Bishop, we delete a lot of racist/ homophobic nonsense, and ban accounts over it quite often. I have no doubt we also miss quite a bit, so something staying around doesn't mean we approve of it. You can always use the admin email to let us know, or you can always email me. We would take care of it or discuss why we disagree with you.

posted by justgary at 10:08 AM on February 15, 2007

Gary, I understand man. I didn't mean to make it seem as if i was calling Admin out or anything. I was merely trying to drive home a point. So, where is your Sodom and Gomorrah sermon in the Amaechi thread? Or does your bible only have laws against caucasian homosexuals? Which bible are you quoting, the King James, the NIV? MrFrisby, Feel free to search this database for all comments I have made, and note that you will NOT find any passing judgement on anyone because they are gay. Not all Christians have a hell to put people, they THEMSELVES judge in. Jesus didn't stone the woman accused of adultery did he? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. I said I TEND to follow links with a lot of posts, I didn't say I ALWAYS follow such links.

posted by Bishop at 02:55 AM on February 16, 2007

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.