Does anyone know where one can procure one of these excellent bumper stickers? 

Yes, I hate New Jersey

I’ve lived in the state of New Jersey since about 1976, but to this day, I will not proclaim myself a native New Jerseyan (as many have attempted to force me to do), nor a native of the East Coast. Although I was born in the Midwest (where most of my family still lives), I’ve grown used to this peculiar state (and I do like some parts better than others). I’ve always found it to be a very strange, somewhat off-kilter place to live. Many of the land-marks and peculiarities detailed in an online periodical that has recently achieved a lot of national acclaim (http://www.weirdnj.com/) are things that I grew up near and have seen often, even recently. And the people . . . there’s generally something really strange (in a negative way) about the average long-time New Jersey citizen (other than the extreme and blatant rudeness and selfishness that these people seem to be so proud of). The one thing I can say without hesitation is that the state generally strikes me as one big, giant second-hand store built between a huge salvage yard and a mental institution for the criminally insane/intellectually challenged (with the except of Mercer County). But the past couple of years, and especially the past few weeks, I’ve started to become downright annoyed and angered with the citizens of this state.

My last post goes into a little of why I feel so blatantly negative about the citizens of this state that I currently dwell in. But a couple of days ago I was made aware of yet one more bizarre and hideously barbaric incident that just reinforces my feelings. And to tie it in to the last post, it provides yet one more example of why human rights are just a smidgeon higher on the list of my priorities than animal rights . . . just a smidgeon.

Dig these two official public accounts of the same occurrence:

http://www.njsp.org/news/pr012705.html

http://www.state.nj.us/lps/newsreleases05/pr20050127b.html

Goddamn sick. And this stuff goes on all over the state CONSTANTLY!!! There’s something really wrong with these people.

http://www.njsp.org/info/reg_sexoffend.html

So to those of you who feel just a wee bit over-zealous about animal rights, what of the poor 5-year-old human male rape victim who, in addition to having to endure such a horrific and debilitation crime, is now being made the subject of ogling and sick curiosity by disjointed New Jersey teens and rich, middle-aged conservative dysfunctional corporate middle-management assholes a like. I’m sorry this poor boy isn’t a dog or a rabbit or a cat, but goddammit, he’s got rights too, right? C’mon. . . .

Anyway, while you chew on that bit of fat, I gotta figure out how to get outta here!

-R.k.S.

As an aside, it turns out that one of the perpetrators who was charged with posession and ditribution of the videotape which shows the rape of a 5-year-old male by an adult male, just happens to live in the same neighborhood as my two school-aged sons, who are currently in the residential custody of their mother. One Christopher McGovern, age 21 , resides at 96 Liberty Court in Galloway, Atlantic County, NJ.

http://www.njsp.org/news/pdf/pr012705_opguard.pdf

I sure hope this poor bastard doesn't live in New Jersey. Otherwise, he'd better keep his tail down and watch his doggy ass. 

The Trans-Species Intergalactic Freak Show in New Jersey

Well folks, it’s been a while since my last post, but I’m sure this next one will get me into some mischief or other. But what the hell, here it goes.

A few weeks ago, I happened across this little media gem in a local news publication:

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/middlesex/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1105084559312620.xml#continue

To sum it up, the article is a public account of one Jose Rodriguez, a 39-year-old married-with-children male Perth Amboy New Jersey citizen who was apprehended for trespassing on his neighbor’s property and having sexual relations with her 5-year-old rottweiler named “Precious”. This apparently happened on several occasions over a period of over a year before the man was finally caught, literally with his pants down, by the Perth Amboy police. I actually sent this article and a couple of duplicates to the editor of http://www.thesmokinggun.com/.

No reply yet, and they haven’t run the story. Their loss.

I didn’t particularly find this article so much amusing as perplexing to say the least. I’m infinitely fascinated with the more defective inner workings of human behavior, so I distributed this to a small group of friends to see how they weighed in on the issue. Yesterday, a friend of mine who has a relative who serves on a chapter of the SPCA distributed this bit of information in response to my E-mail distribution:

“A Focus on Sex with Animals in New Jersey: The Perth Amboy Rottweiler Sodomy investigation and 6 charges by our agency really brought out the reality that Bestiality still continues, even though the state's bestiality laws were tossed out. Is anyone else aware of the bestiality case that happened on 11/11/2002 in South Brunswick? Joseph Cocho, 47, of Maple Avenue was being held at the Middlesex County Adult Corrections Center in lieu of $25,000 bail on charges of torturing a dog and owning a dagger for an unlawful purpose. He told police he had a conventional bomb enhanced by radioactive materials in the mobile home where he lived, said Detective James Ryan of the South Brunswick Police Department. Mr. Cocho was charged with torturing an animal and illegal possession of a weapon after a woman he sublet a trailer from told police she saw him having sex with her dog, police said. Mr. Cocho rented space inside the woman's trailer. Police found dog hair matching the dog's coat on Mr. Cocho's jeans, and was charged with torture/torment of animals and unlawful possession of a weapon. On February 24, 2003 Judge Dowgin imposed a 60-day jail term, $1,500in fines, and a year of supervised probation on Cocho. Cocho pleaded guilty to one count of criminal torture of an animal and two civil counts of animal torture and cruelty. Anyone know of any other cases either here in NJ or elsewhere?”

What is up with the fair citizens of New Jersey? But that’s a whole other rant. That previous piece was originally posted on an animal rights newsgroup (Usenet).

I have questions. This poster is actually LOOKING for bestiality cases? Hmmmmm. Interesting. . . . I personally am not all that concerned that there are no bestiality laws on the books in NJ anymore. I think this makes sense. Law enforcement has much more pressing issues (i.e. abuse and neglect of children, and other sorts of cruel and unusual treatment toward humans of all ages.) Although I certainly don't advocate cruelty to animals, I'm more concerned with cruelty to humans. But that's just me. And besides, in the case of Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Cocho, I think if the dogs in question thought they were being treated in a cruel fashion, or even noticed what was going on at all, they would've probably severely injured the perpetrators. But I’m a human, not a dog. I don't think it's particularly intelligent or appealing or even safe and hygienic (to the human or the animal) to engage in intimate relations with other species, but then again, anyone who knows me well would think that my martial history may suggest otherwise. Bad joke.

But at any rate, I'm sure my friend’s SPCA relative feels very strongly about/against the issue of bestiality. I however tend to look at things from a pragmatist perspective. Although there are no longer any laws left on the books in New Jersey that address bestiality (those Pineys in South Jersey must be really happy about that!), "sodomy" laws have also been lifted so at least I know that if my fiancé and I ever decide to have "anal relations" within the privacy of our domicile, I won't get arrested ("rectum? Damn near killed 'em!" Not since 1979 have there been anti sodomy laws in New Jersey.) And since many of the nation's "social engineering" legislation was repealed in the 50's and 60's, at least I know I won't get arrested anymore for just being with her either (considering the difference in our ethnicities, as it were.) Essentially, I think legislation that criminalizes certain relationships or sexual activity between consenting adults is certainly frivolous and invades the concept of personal freedom and privacy (take the inane issue of gay marriage, for example).

I think in the case of Rodriguez in particular, the more prevailing
issue than whether or not he was perceived to be "cruel" to his neighbor’s dog (and no one asked the dog, notice) is that his behavior was dangerous and predatory and, if left unchecked, could escalate to
include harm or fatality toward humans, perhaps even his own family. Animal torture is an early behavior in the development of serial killers. Although it's fair to assume that torturing animals is certainly an offensive and barbaric behavior that should be punished harshly and strictly for a multitude of reasons (some which benefit animals, some which, I hate to say it, benefit humans), I think a
specific piece of legislation that targets "bestiality" probably is too specific. In this Perth Amboy case there was question about the animal cruelty issue and how to charge Rodriguez, but no one seemed to consider the multitude of other charges that could have been levied against the perp/perv that have nothing to do with animals at all. Lemme just throw some down that come off the top of my head:

Criminal trespassing
Public indecency
Public nudity
Public lewdness
Defacing property (dogs are considered property)

I would hope that a creative prosecutor could come up with more that have nothing to do with animal rights at all and deal much more with actual criminal activity. To my mind, this Rodriguez is a sexual predator who should be made to go door to door introducing himself to the neighbors and asking for signatures, with a Sheriff’s department escort. But I guess my attentions have strayed too far in the direction of protecting the people of the community and not far enough in the direction of the dog’s rights (and again, no one asked the dog if it was being treated in a cruel fashion.) To play devil’s advocate, I’m sure the Rottweiler that was the target of Rodriguez’s “passions” may have dealt with worse at the hands (or should I say paws) of her male dog suitors. Have you ever seen dogs have sex? In the case of wild dogs or stray dogs, it’s friggin violent gang rape! And I won’t go into the anatomy of the situation, but from what I understand about the odd nature of a male dog’s anatomy. . . . They get stuck in there for a while, which apparently becomes quite painful to both parties - http://www.petbitsforyou.com/male_ana.html).

And then it comes to my mind that there's a double standard when it comes to sex crimes in general. Just like in sexual assault/rape/molestation cases that involve minors, for some reason if a woman commits acts of bestiality, this is considered a novelty and even a turn-on (people actually travel to Mexico to see this done "professionally" I understand - http://www.worldsexguide.org/nuevo-laredo.txt.html), but if a man does it (like the cases that we've been
discussing), then it's perverse and disgusting. I actually knew a guy whose (now) wife would (and probably still does) "fool around with" her sister's male Labrador retriever. And this guy went ahead and married the sick bitch (no pun intended). But I digress. If an adult male has relations with a minor female, it is considered perverse predatory, and disgusting (as well it should be) but in the reverse scenario, it's considered and act of good fortune for the minor male who's been raped or sexually assaulted/exploited by an adult female (http://www.courttv.com/archive/trials/friedman/otherteachers.html). I submit that in all aforementioned cases, it's perverse, predatory and disgusting. I don't think women should sleep with animals or molest children any more than men should. And I think that anyone that does either of those things needs to be removed from the general population, evaluated quite closely, and punished quite harshly. And this has absolutely nothing to do with “moral” concerns. It’s strictly a common-sense thing.

Big up to Bren for serendipitously motivating me to post yet another rant.

-R.k.S.