If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Remember the soldier that had his dog, Baxter, sold by his girlfriend while he was deployed? The family that bought Baxter have agreed to return him to his rightful owner   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 178
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

7737 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jun 2014 at 5:30 AM (9 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



178 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-06-18 11:56:21 PM
Baxter is a really cute dog. I'm glad he's being reunited with his owner. :-)
 
2014-06-19 12:05:28 AM
No shiat.

"Remember that guy who bought your stolen car? He's agreed to give it back."
 
2014-06-19 12:05:36 AM
Good.
 
2014-06-19 12:12:59 AM

iamrex: Good.


cdn.grumpycats.com
i concur
 
2014-06-19 12:29:39 AM
Yay!!
 
2014-06-19 12:42:05 AM
media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com

Approves.
 
2014-06-19 01:09:33 AM
However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.
'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.
 
2014-06-19 03:44:49 AM

Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.
'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.


I'm sure they had their white knights, too.

1.media.dorkly.cvcdn.com
 
2014-06-19 05:34:23 AM
No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.
 
2014-06-19 05:37:11 AM
I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.
 
2014-06-19 05:42:54 AM

taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.


We could sell her on Craigslist.
 
2014-06-19 05:44:43 AM
I kinda agree the ex-girlfriend needs some "karma" enacted upon her too. Especially now that the dog is going home.
 
2014-06-19 05:45:38 AM

ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.


How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.
 
2014-06-19 05:57:29 AM
It is dangerous enough leaving a wife in control of your stuff when you deploy but giving a mere girl friend that control is weapons grade stupid.
 
2014-06-19 06:02:30 AM
Death threats can be very compelling.
 
2014-06-19 06:04:41 AM
At least he has a steadfast, caring and supportive girl he can, oh... huh, really?  She did?  I see.  At least he's getting his dog back.
 
2014-06-19 06:04:58 AM

Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.


So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck
 
2014-06-19 06:13:25 AM

MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck


I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING douchy about that.
 
2014-06-19 06:16:37 AM
BTW - if I was the family, I would make the guy press charges against the GF to get the dog back.
 
2014-06-19 06:17:00 AM

Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.


Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.
 
2014-06-19 06:17:56 AM

Publikwerks: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING douchy about that.


I kind of think it's pretty douchey to buy your kids a trend-dog off craigslist, but that's not really what we're talking about here.
 
2014-06-19 06:25:09 AM

doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.


Would you really want your kids to be miserable because you took away the family pet they'd grown to love?

I mean, it's clearly the right thing to do, but I can't really call someone a douche for not wanting to do it.
 
2014-06-19 06:25:29 AM
I'm thinking it's now his ex-girlfriend.  What a biatch.  If his father was willing to watch the dog she was a total biatch for not sending to him.  Selling the dog while he's deployed?  That's a pretty shiatty thing to do.  What a coont.

I don't blame the family for purchasing the dog...how could they know it was sold without the owner's permission.  However, once they heard that the dog was sold without the owners permission, they should have returned him immediately.  He could have pressed charges for Receiving and Concealing stolen property against the family.
 
2014-06-19 06:25:31 AM

doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.


But I can also understand about telling him to go f off after finding yourself in the middle of an episode of "My Crazy farking GF". Hence why I would say, you want the dog back, press charges. Her crazyness is not only affecting you, but us now. And if we are going to get our money back, we need this to be a case of stolen property.
 
2014-06-19 06:27:32 AM
I like how the picture captions sneak doge in there. "Very dangerous" "such patriotism" "wow" "such heartache"
 
2014-06-19 06:45:56 AM

MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck


I have to agree. I don't care for the people harassing them, but it's sad it took that for these idiots to (in my opinion) do the right thing.

A woman I knew was given her husband's dog in the divorce settlement, and to get back at her ex, had the dog put down.

Two cases of don't stick it in crazy.
 
2014-06-19 06:47:20 AM
i.chzbgr.com
 
2014-06-19 06:56:29 AM

Publikwerks: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog stolen property, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING EVERYTHING douchy about that.


/FTFY
 
2014-06-19 06:56:42 AM
The kids are the ones who will suffer the most here

Its a shame, a damn shame

While I am glad that the dog has been returned, I still feel bad for those kids.
 
2014-06-19 07:00:40 AM

AMonkey'sUncle: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I have to agree. I don't care for the people harassing them, but it's sad it took that for these idiots to (in my opinion) do the right thing.

A woman I knew was given her husband's dog in the divorce settlement, and to get back at her ex, had the dog put down.

Two cases of don't stick it in crazy.


biatch would never be found... the everglades is full of natural garbage disposals....
 
2014-06-19 07:03:48 AM

Gunther: Would you really want your kids to be miserable because you took away the family pet they'd grown to love?

I mean, it's clearly the right thing to do, but I can't really call someone a douche for not wanting to do it.


Would you really want to raise your kids to find their happiness at the expense of someone else's?  Would you really want to have your kids learn to be selfish bastards?
 
2014-06-19 07:03:53 AM
i.dailymail.co.uk

That picture is not helping his case
 
2014-06-19 07:04:39 AM
I came here to make sure there was enough hate for the ex-girlfriend. Not enough, by my estimate.

What bothers me most is that this act of absolute malice, selfishness, and coldness will disappear from her dating resume. The next poor jackass will not know what she is capable of.

I'm going to go hug my dogs.
 
2014-06-19 07:05:04 AM

BeesNuts: Publikwerks: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING douchy about that.

I kind of think it's pretty douchey to buy your kids a trend-dog off craigslist, but that's not really what we're talking about here.


This is going to be a long running argument in this thread. Let's just agree that everyone everywhere are douchebags - when everyone is a douchebag, no one will be!

/drunk person logic, embrace it.
 
2014-06-19 07:05:22 AM

cman: The kids are the ones who will suffer the most here

Its a shame, a damn shame

While I am glad that the dog has been returned, I still feel bad for those kids.


They'll get over it.
 
msP
2014-06-19 07:10:55 AM
What a biatch. I would sell her on craigslist if she tried doing that shiat to me.

Why does the article not say "ex" girlfriend?!
 
2014-06-19 07:13:12 AM
YaY!! Great on Fark and other media that pressed the parents to do the right thing. Way to go everyone. I retract my previous post about the parents being assholes. Nice job, and you just made a man very happy by returning his dog. HI5. The girlfriend is still a coont though, I'm not taking that back.
 
2014-06-19 07:25:36 AM

Bit'O'Gristle: YaY!! Great on Fark and other media that pressed the parents to do the right thing. Way to go everyone. I retract my previous post about the parents being assholes. Nice job, and you just made a man very happy by returning his dog. HI5. The girlfriend is still a coont though, I'm not taking that back.


Once the dust settles and the pup is reunited, that GF should be publicly outed.
Oh, and can the family in CO not learn the absolute joy of adopting a Rescue?

/RIP Brando
//best damned decision I ever made
///lost to old age but never forgotten
 
2014-06-19 07:32:30 AM
From what I read on another article, they "relented" only after a $1400 offer was put out there, so my guess is that's about double of what they paid for Baxter... So I still say the buyers were still being a douche, even though I know how tight money can be, while trying to raise a family on poverty wages...

I still think the ex needs to be boiled in oil... Farking coont...
 
2014-06-19 07:45:49 AM
csb

    Back in the day when I practiced family law, I represented the husband in a divorce case (no kids, older couple).  He and wife were fighting about the property split and debts incurred after the separation.  One of the issues was who gets the dog.  Husband wanted dog; so did wife.  It was a small potatoes case, so no depositions were taken since the parties couldn't afford it.
   We go to trial, taking the position that the dog was "marital" property (which must divided between the spouses) rather than "separate" property (which stayswith the owning spouse).  I hear, at trial, for the first time, wife's testimony that the dog was a gift to her by husband; therefore, it was "separate property."
   If true, she'd win that.
   Not wanting to lose that point, I quickly devised a rejoinder.  There's a rule that says that if separate property is mixed with marital, it becomes marital (e.g., inheritance is separate property, unless it's put in the marital bank account, then it becomes marital).  My argument:  the dog was marital property now because it had been mixed with marital property, i.e., marital funds had been used to feed the dog, pay its vet bills, etc.
   The judge didn't buy it; he ruled against my client and gave the wife her dog.

/ I'm not real proud of that story.

/csb
 
2014-06-19 07:46:11 AM

fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

That picture is not helping his case


Devil's Advocate:

Guy buys a really 'trendy' breed, shows pictures of him not behaving responsibly with it. Guy gets dog KNOWING he is going to be deploying for months at a time. This breed is known to be NOT easy dogs to care for.  He leaves it with his girlfriend who may or may not have dog experience (like his Dad does).

The articles are lean on what was wrong with the dog when the girlfriend was taking it. We also do not know how promptly he replied to concerns, only just at 'one point' he told her he would ship it to his dad. Whether he responded to her quickly or sort of let it slide we don't know.

Secondly, she sold the dog. She did not leave it at a shelter where there it is a chance of it  being put down. She also didn't give it away, making sure whomever buys it actually likely would take care of it.

Perhaps it was malicious on her part and he did nothing wrong. But, shiat...all of it is pretty lean on facts and the article seems pretty slanted to make sure to share only one point of view.
 
2014-06-19 07:47:28 AM

Gunboat: csb

    Back in the day when I practiced family law, I represented the husband in a divorce case (no kids, older couple).  He and wife were fighting about the property split and debts incurred after the separation.  One of the issues was who gets the dog.  Husband wanted dog; so did wife.  It was a small potatoes case, so no depositions were taken since the parties couldn't afford it.
   We go to trial, taking the position that the dog was "marital" property (which must divided between the spouses) rather than "separate" property (which stayswith the owning spouse).  I hear, at trial, for the first time, wife's testimony that the dog was a gift to her by husband; therefore, it was "separate property."
   If true, she'd win that.
   Not wanting to lose that point, I quickly devised a rejoinder.  There's a rule that says that if separate property is mixed with marital, it becomes marital (e.g., inheritance is separate property, unless it's put in the marital bank account, then it becomes marital).  My argument:  the dog was marital property now because it had been mixed with marital property, i.e., marital funds had been used to feed the dog, pay its vet bills, etc.
   The judge didn't buy it; he ruled against my client and gave the wife her dog.

/ I'm not real proud of that story.

/csb


Umm...what?
 
2014-06-19 07:49:45 AM
They were bona fido purchasers for value. Unless they knew the dog was not the girl's at the time of purchase, it was likely theirs to keep.
 
2014-06-19 07:53:41 AM

cman: Umm...what?


Not sure what you're asking... I'm happy to explain / elaborate
 
2014-06-19 07:56:34 AM

Gunther: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Would you really want your kids to be miserable because you took away the family pet they'd grown to love?

I mean, it's clearly the right thing to do, but I can't really call someone a douche for not wanting to do it.


It was a week! Hell, use it as a teaching lesson. I call semi-douche, or just spineless.
 
2014-06-19 07:57:44 AM

kronicfeld: They were bona fido purchasers for value. Unless they knew the dog was not the girl's at the time of purchase, it was likely theirs to keep.


We're talking morally, here. But that said, I bet that argument works for pawn shop owners and scrap metal dealers too.
 
2014-06-19 08:00:18 AM
They could get a shelter dog or 7 with the $1400 bucks and their kids would fall in love with the dog(s) in short order.

As for the ex-girlfriend - BURN THE WITCH!
 
2014-06-19 08:00:45 AM

Gunboat: cman: Umm...what?

Not sure what you're asking... I'm happy to explain / elaborate


Treat me like my age, you know, explain it like you would to a five year old
 
2014-06-19 08:01:43 AM
yeah, that family sure was mean and evil for keeping the dog.  not like those nice, friendly internet people who threatened to murder their children.  that was surely a reasoned, rational response to the situation.  i didn't hear about anyone threatening to kill the girlfriend who actually sold the dog, you know, the person actually to blame.  but the family who did nothing but give the dog a nice new home are worthy of death threats.  they should have called the cops, kept the dog, and told that guy to go fark himself.

if that guy had gone to prison and gave the dog to his girlfriend and she sold it, no one would have cared at all about that guy.  but he's a soldier?  oh well then, let's just do whatever he wants.  if this guy was such a hero, he would have graciously let the family keep the dog because their kids loved it so much.  the villain here is the girlfriend, not the family.
 
2014-06-19 08:06:38 AM

taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.


Sounds like a job for 4chan.
 
2014-06-19 08:12:22 AM
He's just going to leave it again on his next deployment.
 
2014-06-19 08:12:58 AM
The family in the article is douchy.  This would have been a good lesson to teach the kids the dangers of Craigslist and buying things that aren't supposed to be sold.  Also could have gotten a rescue dog from a shelter.

Both of my dogs are rescues -- one found as a sick puppy, vet didn't think she'd make the night 9 years ago; the other was an overheard phone call about taking a dog to the shelter, said nope, bring her here, my other dog needs a better friend than a cat, 7 years ago.

This was a good teachable moment and the family used "Think about the children" as their defense.  That's douchy.  My Dad, when similar situations happened to me growing up, taught me to give people what's theirs and to not feel bad about giving the animal up because it's going home with the family it loves; not "my son's attached to your animal, not giving it up, nope, now piss off".
 
2014-06-19 08:13:39 AM

cman: Gunboat: cman: Umm...what?

Not sure what you're asking... I'm happy to explain / elaborate

Treat me like my age, you know, explain it like you would to a five year old


In the jurisdiction I practiced in, all property owned by a husband and wife is classified as either "marital" or "separate."  As a general rule, marital property is split 50/50, but separate property goes to the owning spouse.  Property is marital if it was acquired during the marriage.  Property is separate if it was owned before the marriage or it was a gift/inheritance during the marriage.

Thus, if husband buys tools after he's married, while he may think of them as "his" tools, in fact they are marital property since they were acquired during the marriage; if the couple later divorces, wife gets half the tools.
  If husband owned the tools before getting married, they remain his as "separate" property.

A frequently litigated issue is when separate property gets converted to marital.  If, during the marriage, husband inherits a bunch of money from an aunt, and he puts the money in a separate bank account and keeps it there, that money stays as his separate property.  But if the husband were to take the same money and put it into the family checking account, then at that point it's been mixed with marital assets and becomes "marital" property, subject to equal division if couple divorces.

In my case, wife was claiming dog as separate property because it was a gift to her.  My only out to allow my client to get a piece of the dog was to argue that the dog became marital property, as it had been "mixed" with marital property, i.e., food bought with marital funds.
 
2014-06-19 08:19:02 AM
"After a month, our kids became too attached to the dog"

Boo-farkin-hoo.
 
2014-06-19 08:23:54 AM

skeevy420: the other was an overheard phone call about taking a dog to the shelter, said nope, bring her here, my other dog needs a better friend than a cat, 7 years ago.


That's racist.
 
2014-06-19 08:38:50 AM

fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

That picture is not helping his case


I saw that picture and wondered if the dog would be better off with that family.  Besides, I think its selfish to get a dog knowing that you are going to be away for the vast majority of its life.
 
2014-06-19 08:42:48 AM

BenJammin: fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

That picture is not helping his case

I saw that picture and wondered if the dog would be better off with that family.  Besides, I think its selfish to get a dog knowing that you are going to be away for the vast majority of its life.


That too.  By the time he gets it back, he'll be deployed again.
 
2014-06-19 08:42:49 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: Publikwerks: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog stolen property, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING EVERYTHING douchy about that.

/FTFY


Did he file a police report, and get her arrested? If not, then it's not stolen property

The problem here, as I see it, is that we are all going off half cocked with no solid info. Did he press charges? Did he offer to pay the family back what they paid for the dog? Because, as I see it, the mistake here is on him - he gave his psycho GF the dog to take care of. He misjudged her, and so while I feel bad for him, I don't like that he sicked the internet on people for his mistake.
 
2014-06-19 08:43:21 AM

hillary: taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.

We could sell her on Craigslist Silk Road.


FTFY
 
2014-06-19 08:44:31 AM

Gunther: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Would you really want your kids to be miserable because you took away the family pet they'd grown to love?

I mean, it's clearly the right thing to do, but I can't really call someone a douche for not wanting to do it.


Happened to me when we were kids.  We found a cute little beagle puppy in the neighborhood, took care of it for a week or little longer, named him Scooter I think.  Then the little girl a few doors down saw us with it and said "that's my dog!".  Dad made us return it.  We were sad for like a minute, but we already had one dog and we conned Dad into letting us get another a year or two later.
 
2014-06-19 08:45:31 AM

enderthexenocide: yeah, that family sure was mean and evil for keeping the dog.  not like those nice, friendly internet people who threatened to murder their children.  that was surely a reasoned, rational response to the situation.  i didn't hear about anyone threatening to kill the girlfriend who actually sold the dog, you know, the person actually to blame.  but the family who did nothing but give the dog a nice new home are worthy of death threats.  they should have called the cops, kept the dog, and told that guy to go fark himself.

if that guy had gone to prison and gave the dog to his girlfriend and she sold it, no one would have cared at all about that guy.  but he's a soldier?  oh well then, let's just do whatever he wants.  if this guy was such a hero, he would have graciously let the family keep the dog because their kids loved it so much.  the villain here is the girlfriend, not the family.


Stolen property doesn't work that way. You don't get to keep it just because you really really like it. Fark the family. It was never their dog. They brought all of their own headaches on themselves the moment they claimed that the stolen property was theirs.
 
2014-06-19 08:47:03 AM

Publikwerks: HindiDiscoMonster: Publikwerks: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog stolen property, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING EVERYTHING douchy about that.

/FTFY

Did he file a police report, and get her arrested? If not, then it's not stolen property

The problem here, as I see it, is that we are all going off half cocked with no solid info. Did he press charges? Did he offer to pay the family back what they paid for the dog? Because, as I see it, the mistake here is on him - he gave his psycho GF the dog to take care of. He misjudged her, and so while I feel bad for him, I don't like that he sicked the internet on people for his mistake.


So like, if I go out of town for the week, and I ask my neighbors who I'm good friends with "can you guys keep an eye on the house and car while I'm gone?  Here are the keys to both."  They can sell both my house and car and that would be my bad because I misjudged them.
 
2014-06-19 08:47:41 AM

umad: enderthexenocide: yeah, that family sure was mean and evil for keeping the dog.  not like those nice, friendly internet people who threatened to murder their children.  that was surely a reasoned, rational response to the situation.  i didn't hear about anyone threatening to kill the girlfriend who actually sold the dog, you know, the person actually to blame.  but the family who did nothing but give the dog a nice new home are worthy of death threats.  they should have called the cops, kept the dog, and told that guy to go fark himself.

if that guy had gone to prison and gave the dog to his girlfriend and she sold it, no one would have cared at all about that guy.  but he's a soldier?  oh well then, let's just do whatever he wants.  if this guy was such a hero, he would have graciously let the family keep the dog because their kids loved it so much.  the villain here is the girlfriend, not the family.

Stolen property doesn't work that way. You don't get to keep it just because you really really like it. Fark the family. It was never their dog. They brought all of their own headaches on themselves the moment they claimed that the stolen property was theirs.


Again, it's only stolen if he presses charges.
Has he done that?
 
2014-06-19 08:48:48 AM
There is a biatch in this story, and it's not Baxter (obviously, he's a male dog).

I hope the soldier is not still with that girlfriend?
 
2014-06-19 08:49:04 AM

Publikwerks: Again, it's only stolen if he presses charges.


Bullshiat. Is it only rape when a woman presses charges?
 
2014-06-19 08:49:14 AM

Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.


Um, If I'd found out I was duped into receiving stolen goods, I'd want to give that back ASAP.  And I'd be suing the shiat out of the person who sold it to me (a) for selling me stolen goods, (b) Fraud, (c) breach of contract, (d) liable and the big one (e) mental anguish.  My lawyers would be told to extract everything they can - go nuts.  I'd also be cooperating with the prosecutor through my lawyer so I don't get charged with receipt of stolen goods.  Doing anything else is being a douche, and a criminal.
 
2014-06-19 08:52:45 AM

umad: Publikwerks: Again, it's only stolen if he presses charges.

Bullshiat. Is it only rape when a woman presses charges?


This.  The soldier is being a really stand up guy for not dropping the family that bought stolen goods into a world of shiat by not pressing charges against the ex just yet.  But the dog was stolen - pressing charges does not change it from "not stolen" to "stolen".  It changes it from "I'm trying not to ruin other people's lives, give me my stuff back" to "Now I want some retribution - and I'm going to use the government to get it, and I don't care what the collateral damage is".
 
2014-06-19 08:53:13 AM

Carn: Publikwerks: HindiDiscoMonster: Publikwerks: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog stolen property, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING EVERYTHING douchy about that.

/FTFY

Did he file a police report, and get her arrested? If not, then it's not stolen property

The problem here, as I see it, is that we are all going off half cocked with no solid info. Did he press charges? Did he offer to pay the family back what they paid for the dog? Because, as I see it, the mistake here is on him - he gave his psycho GF the dog to take care of. He misjudged her, and so while I feel bad for him, I don't like that he sicked the internet on people for his mistake.

So like, if I go out of town for the week, and I ask my neighbors who I'm good friends with "can you guys keep an eye on the house and car while I'm gone?  Here are the keys to both."  They can sell both my house and car and that would be my bad because I misjudged them.


No, but lets not use items that require paperwork, like cars and houses... Lets say he stole your computer out of your house, and sold it. Do I condemn the dude on craigslist who bought it? No. He wasn't seeking to buy a stolen computer. Now, if the cops get involved, you hand over the computer.

But I haven't read anything about the cops getting involved. I haven't read about the GF getting arrested. To me, it sounds like he doesn't want to punish the GF, but wants his dog back.

Hence why he got the internet involved.

Matter of fact, I haven't read anything about her in the stories or about him breaking up with her. This is why I am VERY suspecious
 
2014-06-19 08:54:03 AM

MadHatter500: Um, If I'd found out I was duped into receiving stolen goods, I'd want to give that back ASAP. And I'd be suing the shiat out of the person who sold it to me (a) for selling me stolen goods, (b) Fraud, (c) breach of contract, (d) liable and the big one (e) mental anguish. My lawyers would be told to extract everything they can - go nuts


You'd spend a lot of money, have most of your causes of action and categories of claimed damages dismissed, and collect nothing on whatever nominal judgment you were awarded. Congratulations, ITG.
 
2014-06-19 08:57:24 AM
BY the way - Just read up a bit more on this:

1. The guy didn't out the family, so good on him
2. One story did say they broke up
3. It sounds like everyone will be made whole, so everything is going to work out.
 
2014-06-19 09:02:00 AM

Publikwerks: No, but lets not use items that require paperwork, like cars and houses... Lets say he stole your computer out of your house, and sold it. Do I condemn the dude on craigslist who bought it? No. He wasn't seeking to buy a stolen computer. Now, if the cops get involved, you hand over the computer.

But I haven't read anything about the cops getting involved. I haven't read about the GF getting arrested. To me, it sounds like he doesn't want to punish the GF, but wants his dog back.

Hence why he got the internet involved.

Matter of fact, I haven't read anything about her in the stories or about him breaking up with her. This is why I am VERY suspecious


Oh totally, I wouldn't fault them for the initial purchase, but after somebody tells you "oh, so that person who sold you that dog, it wasn't hers to sell" you gotta give it up.  Even if it wasn't officially stealing and no cops involved.  Saying "but my kids are in love with it!" isn't a valid reason.  They'll be just as in love with the next puppy too.
 
2014-06-19 09:02:10 AM

kronicfeld: They were bona fido purchasers for value. Unless they knew the dog was not the girl's at the time of purchase, it was likely theirs to keep.


bona fido huh?

I see what you did there - almost got me.
 
2014-06-19 09:03:42 AM

Gunboat: cman: Gunboat: cman: Umm...what?

Not sure what you're asking... I'm happy to explain / elaborate

Treat me like my age, you know, explain it like you would to a five year old

In the jurisdiction I practiced in, all property owned by a husband and wife is classified as either "marital" or "separate."  As a general rule, marital property is split 50/50, but separate property goes to the owning spouse.  Property is marital if it was acquired during the marriage.  Property is separate if it was owned before the marriage or it was a gift/inheritance during the marriage.

Thus, if husband buys tools after he's married, while he may think of them as "his" tools, in fact they are marital property since they were acquired during the marriage; if the couple later divorces, wife gets half the tools.
  If husband owned the tools before getting married, they remain his as "separate" property.

A frequently litigated issue is when separate property gets converted to marital.  If, during the marriage, husband inherits a bunch of money from an aunt, and he puts the money in a separate bank account and keeps it there, that money stays as his separate property.  But if the husband were to take the same money and put it into the family checking account, then at that point it's been mixed with marital assets and becomes "marital" property, subject to equal division if couple divorces.

In my case, wife was claiming dog as separate property because it was a gift to her.  My only out to allow my client to get a piece of the dog was to argue that the dog became marital property, as it had been "mixed" with marital property, i.e., food bought with marital funds.


If I understand correctly then the dog (separate property) should become marital property because it was "maintained" with marital property (food bought with marital funds.)

Now take this from above:  If, during the marriage, husband inherits a bunch of money from an aunt, and he puts the money in a separate bank account and keeps it there, that money stays as his separate property.

Question:  Could it be argued that the inheritance became marital property if the bank fee for the account that held it was paid for with marital funds?

That would essentially be what was happening with the dog.
 
2014-06-19 09:03:43 AM

kronicfeld: MadHatter500: Um, If I'd found out I was duped into receiving stolen goods, I'd want to give that back ASAP. And I'd be suing the shiat out of the person who sold it to me (a) for selling me stolen goods, (b) Fraud, (c) breach of contract, (d) liable and the big one (e) mental anguish. My lawyers would be told to extract everything they can - go nuts

You'd spend a lot of money, have most of your causes of action and categories of claimed damages dismissed, and collect nothing on whatever nominal judgment you were awarded. Congratulations, ITG.


Since I've been involved at the edges of just such a case, I'm going to go with my experience rather than your trolling.
 
2014-06-19 09:05:11 AM

fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

That picture is not helping his case


i1280.photobucket.com
Better?
 
2014-06-19 09:06:15 AM

Publikwerks: The problem here, as I see it, is that we are all going off half cocked with no solid info



Quite true and universally human.  The more uncertain the information, the more certain people are of their conclusion.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.3960010105/abstract

"Confidence ratings in each experiment were actually higher on incomplete information trials..."
 
2014-06-19 09:09:44 AM

Benjimin_Dover: If I understand correctly then the dog (separate property) should become marital property because it was "maintained" with marital property (food bought with marital funds.)

Now take this from above: If, during the marriage, husband inherits a bunch of money from an aunt, and he puts the money in a separate bank account and keeps it there, that money stays as his separate property.

Question: Could it be argued that the inheritance became marital property if the bank fee for the account that held it was paid for with marital funds?

That would essentially be what was happening with the dog.


All correct.
As for the bank fee, yes that argument could be made.  The argument is stronger if the bank fee (or other maintenance fee) is substantial; the argument is weaker if the bank fee (or other maintenance fee) is de minimus or easily calculated and separable.  This sometimes happened with houses; one spouse comes in with home owned prior to marriage.  During course of marriage, using marital funds, substantial renovations are made to house.  Parties now argue if house has gone from "separate" to "marital."
 
2014-06-19 09:10:04 AM

Carn: Oh totally, I wouldn't fault them for the initial purchase, but after somebody tells you "oh, so that person who sold you that dog, it wasn't hers to sell" you gotta give it up. Even if it wasn't officially stealing and no cops involved. Saying "but my kids are in love with it!" isn't a valid reason. They'll be just as in love with the next puppy too.


Wow, that sounds like a REALLY handy way a couple could run a pretty easy money scam, then. Especially if you feel pressing charges is unnecessary.

/Not saying this is the case-
//But can also understand why the family would og "OK. If it's stolen property, press charges so we,you know, know it's legit.
 
2014-06-19 09:12:48 AM

enderthexenocide: yeah, that family sure was mean and evil for keeping the dog.  not like those nice, friendly internet people who threatened to murder their children.


No one should feel bad for a family that teaches their children to behave like assholes, which is what you are if you do not return stolen property to the rightful owner.

enderthexenocide: i didn't hear about anyone threatening to kill the girlfriend who actually sold the dog


Post her info on here and you'll get your wish, it is my understanding she has not been outed.  That's a smart thing these days what with the internet public shaming, as this shiatty family found out.

enderthexenocide: but the family who did nothing but give the dog a nice new home are worthy of death threats.


You mean nothing except receive stolen property, refuse to return it and then blame their kids for their deplorable mindset?

enderthexenocide: they He should have called the cops, kept got back  the dog, and told that guy family to go after his ex for their money.


FTFY

enderthexenocide: if that guy had gone to prison and gave the dog to his girlfriend and she sold it, no one would have cared at all about that guy.  but he's a soldier?  oh well then, let's just do whatever he wants.


What if it was a teacher on sabbatical?  Would we care then?  How about an illegal alien on holiday? How would the public react to that situation?  I am surprised to see someone who thinks we should treat our military men like convicted criminals, a select group who we purposefully deprive of personal possessions.  A question closer to the mark would be, "If I secured boarding for my dog before a trip, and the dog is sold by the boarding agency, I should just shut the hell up and take it ......why??", because that's what happened.

enderthexenocide: if this guy was such a hero, he would have graciously let the family keep the dog because their kids loved it so much.  the villain here is the girlfriend, not the family.


Sure, he should just give them the dog he raised from a pup because he is in the military and hasn't given the people in this country enough, we want his dog too.  You are right the girlfriend is the villain here.  However the family dynamic sounds like two pieces of shiat decided to have a few turdlings together and are upset that the majority of the country doesn't like smelling their noxious funk.
 
2014-06-19 09:15:45 AM

Carn: Publikwerks: No, but lets not use items that require paperwork, like cars and houses... Lets say he stole your computer out of your house, and sold it. Do I condemn the dude on craigslist who bought it? No. He wasn't seeking to buy a stolen computer. Now, if the cops get involved, you hand over the computer.

But I haven't read anything about the cops getting involved. I haven't read about the GF getting arrested. To me, it sounds like he doesn't want to punish the GF, but wants his dog back.

Hence why he got the internet involved.

Matter of fact, I haven't read anything about her in the stories or about him breaking up with her. This is why I am VERY suspecious

Oh totally, I wouldn't fault them for the initial purchase, but after somebody tells you "oh, so that person who sold you that dog, it wasn't hers to sell" you gotta give it up.  Even if it wasn't officially stealing and no cops involved.  Saying "but my kids are in love with it!" isn't a valid reason.  They'll be just as in love with the next puppy too.


I disagree with you, but only on the cop part. The GF did wrong by the guy AND the family. She should have to be punished, but I don't think the family has standing unless he claims the dog was stolen.

I'm not sure the legal issues on how it moves forward, but that's why we have police and a judicial system. The guy decided to form a mob and pressure the family. Now, he didn't out them, so I am less angry about the mob, but it was still a mob.

I don't like mob justice.
 
2014-06-19 09:15:51 AM

Felgraf: Carn: Oh totally, I wouldn't fault them for the initial purchase, but after somebody tells you "oh, so that person who sold you that dog, it wasn't hers to sell" you gotta give it up. Even if it wasn't officially stealing and no cops involved. Saying "but my kids are in love with it!" isn't a valid reason. They'll be just as in love with the next puppy too.

Wow, that sounds like a REALLY handy way a couple could run a pretty easy money scam, then. Especially if you feel pressing charges is unnecessary.

/Not saying this is the case-
//But can also understand why the family would og "OK. If it's stolen property, press charges so we,you know, know it's legit.


Well I aint saying anybody should return anything without getting their money back either.  "Hey random stranger, here's a few thousand bucks because your girlfriend is an ass."
 
2014-06-19 09:19:40 AM

August11: I came here to make sure there was enough hate for the ex-girlfriend. Not enough, by my estimate.

What bothers me most is that this act of absolute malice, selfishness, and coldness will disappear from her dating resume. The next poor jackass will not know what she is capable of.

I'm going to go hug my dogs.


Unless, of course, her name and picture should happen to circulate on the Internet.
 
2014-06-19 09:20:31 AM
Avery614: Sure, he should just give them the dog he raised from a pup because he is in the military and hasn't given the people in this country enough, we want his dog too.  You are right the girlfriend is the villain here.  However the family dynamic sounds like two pieces of shiat decided to have a few turdlings together and are upset that the majority of the country doesn't like smelling their noxious funk.

How the fark do you know anything about the family? As it stands, he isn't getting the police involved, so until he does, it wasn't stolen. And thats alot of hostility towards people who seem to be caught in a bad situation.
 
2014-06-19 09:23:08 AM

Gunther: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Would you really want your kids to be miserable because you took away the family pet they'd grown to love?

I mean, it's clearly the right thing to do, but I can't really call someone a douche for not wanting to do it.


Kids learn the lesson: people are selling shiat on Craigslist that doesn't belong to them.

/that is all
 
2014-06-19 09:23:40 AM

studman 69: "After a month, our kids became too attached to the dog"

Boo-farkin-hoo.


no.  just no.

one thing you guys are missing here.

IT WAS A farkING DOG.  One that the guy is not even going to be around all the time to care for.  The girlfriend probably did the right thing in selling it, and the guy that demanded the dog back was an incredible asshole for making it a spectacle.
 
2014-06-19 09:24:37 AM

bunner: At least he has a steadfast, caring and supportive girl he can, oh... huh, really?  She did?  I see.  At least he's getting his dog back.


At least you can always 100% count on the Dog not to do something sh*tty and underhanded.
 
2014-06-19 09:25:46 AM

Avery614: Sure, he should just give them the dog he raised from a pup because he is in the military and hasn't given the people in this country enough, we want his dog too.


A person in the military that knows he will be deployed for long periods of time has no business owning a dog.

They miss you when you are gone, it hurts them, and they get depressed.

The dog was better off with the family that bought it.
 
2014-06-19 09:26:47 AM

gulogulo: fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

That picture is not helping his case

Devil's Advocate:

Guy buys a really 'trendy' breed, shows pictures of him not behaving responsibly with it. Guy gets dog KNOWING he is going to be deploying for months at a time. This breed is known to be NOT easy dogs to care for.  He leaves it with his girlfriend who may or may not have dog experience (like his Dad does).

The articles are lean on what was wrong with the dog when the girlfriend was taking it. We also do not know how promptly he replied to concerns, only just at 'one point' he told her he would ship it to his dad. Whether he responded to her quickly or sort of let it slide we don't know.

Secondly, she sold the dog. She did not leave it at a shelter where there it is a chance of it  being put down. She also didn't give it away, making sure whomever buys it actually likely would take care of it.

Perhaps it was malicious on her part and he did nothing wrong. But, shiat...all of it is pretty lean on facts and the article seems pretty slanted to make sure to share only one point of view.


The dog wasn't hers to sell. It had been left in her custody. If you house-sit for someone and get sick of watering their plants or dusting their books, are you entitled to sell the plants or the books? The boyfriend's father-in-law offered to take the dog - at his expense - and she preferred to sell it.

I say OUT her.
 
2014-06-19 09:30:28 AM
fark those kids.
 
2014-06-19 09:38:44 AM

Publikwerks: How the fark do you know anything about the family?


I don't, I made a few assumptions based on the shiatty reaction of that family and the idiocy they spewed about why they were keeping the dog originally

Publikwerks: he isn't getting the police involved, so until he does, it wasn't stolen.


The idea that no item is stolen unless the police are involved is just asinine.

Publikwerks: And thats alot of hostility towards people who seem to be caught in a bad situation.


No hostility, just disdain for people who don't act right.  I don't wish any of them harm but I do reserve my right to think of a family of shiatheads as a family of shiatheads.

If you find out what you bought is stolen, you give the property back to the rightful owner and contact the authorities yourself.  This family has legal recourse against the gf and does not need the soldier to go after her for them to be made whole.  I'll even concede that the family should get a bit more than they paid for the dog,  if they cared for the dog while the soldier was deployed, for boarding costs.

/although I do happen agree with the guy up-thread who said it's pretty irresponsible to own a dog if you're away all of the time
 
2014-06-19 09:41:47 AM

MadHatter500: kronicfeld: MadHatter500: Um, If I'd found out I was duped into receiving stolen goods, I'd want to give that back ASAP. And I'd be suing the shiat out of the person who sold it to me (a) for selling me stolen goods, (b) Fraud, (c) breach of contract, (d) liable and the big one (e) mental anguish. My lawyers would be told to extract everything they can - go nuts

You'd spend a lot of money, have most of your causes of action and categories of claimed damages dismissed, and collect nothing on whatever nominal judgment you were awarded. Congratulations, ITG.

Since I've been involved at the edges of just such a case, I'm going to go with my experience rather than your trolling.


Since he's a lawyer and you can't even spell libel correctly, I'm going to go with his experience rather than your "experience".
 
2014-06-19 09:43:14 AM

Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.
'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.


I'm just gonna take my 10/10 points here and say shame on all of you who didn't bother reading the article.
 
2014-06-19 09:45:59 AM

fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

That picture is not helping his case


My sympathy for the guy kind of dried up when I saw that photo. Michael Jackson dangles his kid out a window and most sane people agree that's an insane thing to do. This guy dangles his supposedly beloved dog over a cliff and we're supposed to want him to get it back? This guy doesn't have the best judgment in the world, does he. I'm guessing he has equally poor judgment in people. We should probably expect this type of thing from any woman this guy chooses to date.
 
2014-06-19 09:53:29 AM

AMonkey'sUncle: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I have to agree. I don't care for the people harassing them, but it's sad it took that for these idiots to (in my opinion) do the right thing.

A woman I knew was given her husband's dog in the divorce settlement, and to get back at her ex, had the dog put down.

Two cases of don't stick it in crazy.


itsaidwhat: Gunther: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Would you really want your kids to be miserable because you took away the family pet they'd grown to love?

I mean, it's clearly the right thing to do, but I can't really call someone a douche for not wanting to do it.

Kids learn the lesson: people are selling shiat on Craigslist that doesn't belong to them.

/that is all


This needed to be said.  If you go to Craigslist for your purchases, you pretty much deserve whatever happens.  Who hasn't heard of all the thievery, murder and garden variety scams that have occurred compliments of Craigslist.  For YEARS.
 
2014-06-19 09:53:32 AM

Nogale: The dog wasn't hers to sell. It had been left in her custody. If you house-sit for someone and get sick of watering their plants or dusting their books, are you entitled to sell the plants or the books? The boyfriend's father-in-law offered to take the dog - at his expense - and she preferred to sell it.


You are entitled to leave the house and plants. It's not indentured servitude. Again, you are running full-cocked with a half of the information. Do we know how 'prompt' that offer came? Days, a few weeks, a few months after she first said it wasn't work? If i had a nightmare pooch on my hands that some douche got knowing full well he was going to be gone for a months at a time, contacted him and he failed to in a timely manner make arrangements to take it off my hands, I might too resort to tryng to rehome it since it clearly isn't his priority : why should it be mine?

I'm not saying that IS what happened, but that is just as plausible as your scenario. The only difference is my scenario doesn't call for a witch hunt. But you know, I don't expect much 'critical thinking' skills from joe public.
 
2014-06-19 09:55:59 AM

Avery614: Publikwerks: How the fark do you know anything about the family?

I don't, I made a few assumptions based on the shiatty reaction of that family and the idiocy they spewed about why they were keeping the dog originally

Publikwerks: he isn't getting the police involved, so until he does, it wasn't stolen.

The idea that no item is stolen unless the police are involved is just asinine.

Publikwerks: And thats alot of hostility towards people who seem to be caught in a bad situation.

No hostility, just disdain for people who don't act right.  I don't wish any of them harm but I do reserve my right to think of a family of shiatheads as a family of shiatheads.

If you find out what you bought is stolen, you give the property back to the rightful owner and contact the authorities yourself.  This family has legal recourse against the gf and does not need the soldier to go after her for them to be made whole.  I'll even concede that the family should get a bit more than they paid for the dog,  if they cared for the dog while the soldier was deployed, for boarding costs.

/although I do happen agree with the guy up-thread who said it's pretty irresponsible to own a dog if you're away all of the time


But my whole point is that the dog isn't stolen unless it reported stolen. And until that moment, the family is NOT in possession of stolen goods.

The family can't get their money back from her unless she returns it, or they can prove they were sold stolen goods. Which the do isn't until he reports it stolen. And from the article, it sounds like Gabbert doesn't want to do that.

So they they don't want to give back the dog they legally purchased? Surprised? If he presses charges, it's one thing, but it sounds like he isn't doing that.
 
2014-06-19 09:56:21 AM
Next time he deploys, he needs to use these people.  I'm boarding for a girl who is at Officer Candidate School right now (second time I've boarded a dog for a military member).
 
2014-06-19 10:07:18 AM
fusillade762:
That picture is not helping his case

It reminds me of that Michael Jackson picture...
 
2014-06-19 10:13:29 AM
I am glad Baxter is back with his Dad.  You could tell they had a special bond.  I hope Karma gets his ex.
 
2014-06-19 10:21:26 AM

taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.


Like sending her to Afghanistan?
 
2014-06-19 10:26:05 AM

SeaMan Stainz: taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.


Why does the minute someone puts on a uniform it's like their a farking saint? My brotherinlaw used his deployment to cheat on my sister. Moved her cross country for his military career, left her high and dry when he deployed, and cheated on her with a female in his unit. Guy has a picture of him holding his 'beloved' dog over a cliff. Now he's sic'd the 'internet' on his girlfriend who in no way has been given the opportunity to tell her side of the story so people can send her deaththreats and make her life a living hell.
 
2014-06-19 10:29:04 AM

gulogulo: SeaMan Stainz: taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.

Why does the minute someone puts on a uniform it's like their a farking saint? My brotherinlaw used his deployment to cheat on my sister. Moved her cross country for his military career, left her high and dry when he deployed, and cheated on her with a female in his unit. Guy has a picture of him holding his 'beloved' dog over a cliff. Now he's sic'd the 'internet' on his girlfriend who in no way has been given the opportunity to tell her side of the story so people can send her deaththreats and make her life a living hell.


Substitute girlfriend for family not wanting to part with their pet

And fark this guys dad for cheering and encouraging vigilantism against the family
 
2014-06-19 10:33:10 AM

taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.


I'm surprised her name isn't in the article.  Every time this story is discussed, the biatches name should be in it.

The family that bought the dog shouldn't have any choice about giving it back.  "Yes, I bought stolen merchandise, but I've decided to keep it.  Sucks to be you."  I don't see that holding up in court.  But I'm sure pawn shops would love it.
 
2014-06-19 10:39:08 AM

Publikwerks: MechaPyx: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

So they gave up the dog not because they wanted to but to stop the harassment. The gf is a douchebag. So is the family and the people harassing them.

/people suck

I'm sorry, no. The family wasn't being douchy. They bought a dog, and wanted to keep him. There is NOTHING douchy about that.


Legally a stolen dog.
 
2014-06-19 10:44:36 AM

Publikwerks: umad: enderthexenocide: yeah, that family sure was mean and evil for keeping the dog.  not like those nice, friendly internet people who threatened to murder their children.  that was surely a reasoned, rational response to the situation.  i didn't hear about anyone threatening to kill the girlfriend who actually sold the dog, you know, the person actually to blame.  but the family who did nothing but give the dog a nice new home are worthy of death threats.  they should have called the cops, kept the dog, and told that guy to go fark himself.

if that guy had gone to prison and gave the dog to his girlfriend and she sold it, no one would have cared at all about that guy.  but he's a soldier?  oh well then, let's just do whatever he wants.  if this guy was such a hero, he would have graciously let the family keep the dog because their kids loved it so much.  the villain here is the girlfriend, not the family.

Stolen property doesn't work that way. You don't get to keep it just because you really really like it. Fark the family. It was never their dog. They brought all of their own headaches on themselves the moment they claimed that the stolen property was theirs.

Again, it's only stolen if he presses charges.
Has he done that?


No, you are wrong. You don't have to press charges for it to be stolen. If he wanted to he could have sued the family for the return of the dog.

It's only a crime if you are caught is a mantra made up by thieves.
 
2014-06-19 10:45:37 AM

doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.


Make that THREE separate signals.  The soldier lights up the scope like a Christmas tree too.  What kind of heartless douche would take a dog away from kids who had grown to love their pet?  Yeah, he's legally in the right, but you'd expect an adult to be able to handle the loss better than a bunch of kids.
 
2014-06-19 10:46:21 AM

kronicfeld: They were bona fido purchasers for value. Unless they knew the dog was not the girl's at the time of purchase, it was likely theirs to keep.


No.

I have a story about a used car I could tell..and what happened to the person who eventually bought it from me..and what happened to me after that..

Stolen goods are stolen goods..  "Good Faith" means exactly 'Jack' and 'Shiat'..
 
2014-06-19 10:48:18 AM

Publikwerks: Avery614: Publikwerks: How the fark do you know anything about the family?

I don't, I made a few assumptions based on the shiatty reaction of that family and the idiocy they spewed about why they were keeping the dog originally

Publikwerks: he isn't getting the police involved, so until he does, it wasn't stolen.

The idea that no item is stolen unless the police are involved is just asinine.

Publikwerks: And thats alot of hostility towards people who seem to be caught in a bad situation.

No hostility, just disdain for people who don't act right.  I don't wish any of them harm but I do reserve my right to think of a family of shiatheads as a family of shiatheads.

If you find out what you bought is stolen, you give the property back to the rightful owner and contact the authorities yourself.  This family has legal recourse against the gf and does not need the soldier to go after her for them to be made whole.  I'll even concede that the family should get a bit more than they paid for the dog,  if they cared for the dog while the soldier was deployed, for boarding costs.

/although I do happen agree with the guy up-thread who said it's pretty irresponsible to own a dog if you're away all of the time

But my whole point is that the dog isn't stolen unless it reported stolen. And until that moment, the family is NOT in possession of stolen goods.

The family can't get their money back from her unless she returns it, or they can prove they were sold stolen goods. Which the do isn't until he reports it stolen. And from the article, it sounds like Gabbert doesn't want to do that.

So they they don't want to give back the dog they legally purchased? Surprised? If he presses charges, it's one thing, but it sounds like he isn't doing that.


Wrong. In civil it is more difficult to prove without a police report. For example, stores have sued shoplifters without reporting the case to the police. They have won also.
 
2014-06-19 10:53:22 AM

tillerman35: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Make that THREE separate signals.  The soldier lights up the scope like a Christmas tree too.  What kind of heartless douche would take a dog away from kids who had grown to love their pet?  Yeah, he's legally in the right, but you'd expect an adult to be able to handle the loss better than a bunch of kids.


Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.
 
2014-06-19 10:55:11 AM
Would it be correct to assume she is now an ex-girlfriend?
 
2014-06-19 10:55:22 AM

KatjaMouse: tillerman35: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Make that THREE separate signals.  The soldier lights up the scope like a Christmas tree too.  What kind of heartless douche would take a dog away from kids who had grown to love their pet?  Yeah, he's legally in the right, but you'd expect an adult to be able to handle the loss better than a bunch of kids.

Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.


This.
 
2014-06-19 10:55:33 AM

youmightberight: hillary: taurusowner: I'm more interested in that piece of shiat ex girlfriend and if there's a way for the internet to make her life hell for a biatchicks who pull that shiat on soldiers who are deployed deserve their own special place in hell.

We could sell her on Craigslist Silk Road.

FTFY


Quite right, quite right. Much better idea.
 
2014-06-19 10:56:19 AM
Also, I just want to shout out to my fellow ladies who may be in this thread. Believe it or not but there are some b*tchy women out there who will drop a guy if he and her dog don't get along.

/The dog sleeps on the bed if s/he wants
//Don't like it? There's a couch.
 
2014-06-19 10:59:33 AM
It's a happy ending - I'll take it, and screw the biatching.
 
2014-06-19 10:59:58 AM
About effen time, assholes!
 
2014-06-19 11:03:45 AM

Theaetetus: Theaetetus: However, after Mr Gabbert's plight elicited a social media campaign and news stories, the family changed course.
'I think the people that bought the dog and read the stories had started receiving hang-up phone calls, late night drive-bys, and emailed death threats, including particularly gruesome ones about their children. God bless the Internet,' Mr Gabbert's father Robert Sr told MailOnline.

I'm just gonna take my 10/10 points here and say shame on all of you who didn't bother reading the article.


Your post really stirred up the internet hornets nest.

10/10 indeed.
 
2014-06-19 11:06:05 AM

CAT-LIKE TYPING DETECTED: kronicfeld: They were bona fido purchasers for value. Unless they knew the dog was not the girl's at the time of purchase, it was likely theirs to keep.

No.

I have a story about a used car I could tell..and what happened to the person who eventually bought it from me..and what happened to me after that..

Stolen goods are stolen goods..  "Good Faith" means exactly 'Jack' and 'Shiat'..


That would be a story worth reading.  Post it.  Change the bits that need changing to preserve privacy and all that stuff, but post it.
 
2014-06-19 11:06:06 AM

fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

That picture is not helping his case


Jesus christ man, he and that dog are very lucky.  Many dogs, small dogs especially, can't handle being picked up - either it hurts them, or they can't breathe, or they just don't like it - and they twist and fight and squirm to get out of your grip, even if it means falling to the ground and hurting themselves.  I really hope his right hand was like tucked into and gripping the collar, or something.
 
2014-06-19 11:09:03 AM

Gunther: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Would you really want your kids to be miserable because you took away the family pet they'd grown to love?

I mean, it's clearly the right thing to do, but I can't really call someone a douche for not wanting to do it.


I can call it douchey.  They were told the girlfriend didn't have the right to sell the dog and that the dog's actual owner wanted the dog back.  They acted like douches by initially refusing to return what properly belonged to someone else.  Their kids be damned.  It's not their dog, they don't get to keep it.
 
2014-06-19 11:13:20 AM

mschwenk: Wrong. In civil it is more difficult to prove without a police report.


Ask me how I know that you are not now, nor have you ever been, a trial lawyer.
 
2014-06-19 11:15:34 AM

Benjimin_Dover: CAT-LIKE TYPING DETECTED: kronicfeld: They were bona fido purchasers for value. Unless they knew the dog was not the girl's at the time of purchase, it was likely theirs to keep.

No.

I have a story about a used car I could tell..and what happened to the person who eventually bought it from me..and what happened to me after that..

Stolen goods are stolen goods..  "Good Faith" means exactly 'Jack' and 'Shiat'..

That would be a story worth reading.  Post it.  Change the bits that need changing to preserve privacy and all that stuff, but post it.


I work 12-hour overnights and am just about to go to sleep..  Will post here come t'morrow morn', iff'n the thread's still open..else, don't mind bein' hit in email..  EIP..  Use the 'tahlmorra' one..
 
2014-06-19 11:18:19 AM

mschwenk: Legally a stolen dog.


Cold_Sassy: KatjaMouse: tillerman35: doctor wu: Publikwerks: ecmoRandomNumbers: No rest for the wicked. This was only going to get worse if they didn't stop being douches.

How was the family being douches?

The douche was the GF, not the family. If I was the family, I would sue the shiat out of her, see if you can press charges.

Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.

Make that THREE separate signals.  The soldier lights up the scope like a Christmas tree too.  What kind of heartless douche would take a dog away from kids who had grown to love their pet?  Yeah, he's legally in the right, but you'd expect an adult to be able to handle the loss better than a bunch of kids.

Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.

This.


I This this This
 
2014-06-19 11:18:31 AM

KatjaMouse: Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.


said about the guy raising a huge stink because his dog was sold to a family with kids that loved the dog.  "MINE, fark YOU".  This was a great opportunity for the guy to grow as a person and do something that was good for a family and good for the dog in question.  Especially since he has no business owning a dog.

"MINE, fark YOU."

All this taught the kids was that people farking suck, and to look out for number one.

Now, don't misunderstand me here.  The guy was legally in the right. That doesn't mean that taking the dog from the family was right.  Because it was NOT.
 
2014-06-19 11:19:46 AM
its shiat like this that makes me glad that there is almost no way for people to track me down if i got involved in shiat like this.

id troll the shiat out of the stalkers for shiats and grins.

/yeah, security on the web is kind of what i do
//no, there are no footprints of me on google
///im that careful :)
 
2014-06-19 11:23:18 AM

frepnog: KatjaMouse: Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.

said about the guy raising a huge stink because his dog was sold to a family with kids that loved the dog.  "MINE, fark YOU".  This was a great opportunity for the guy to grow as a person and do something that was good for a family and good for the dog in question.  Especially since he has no business owning a dog.

"MINE, fark YOU."

All this taught the kids was that people farking suck, and to look out for number one.

Now, don't misunderstand me here.  The guy was legally in the right. That doesn't mean that taking the dog from the family was right.  Because it was NOT.


I love the dollars in your bank account. This is the perfect opportunity for you to grow as a person and do something that is good for me. Now pay up.
 
2014-06-19 11:36:00 AM

xtech: its shiat like this that makes me glad that there is almost no way for people to track me down if i got involved in shiat like this.

id troll the shiat out of the stalkers for shiats and grins.

/yeah, security on the web is kind of what i do
//no, there are no footprints of me on google
///im that careful :)


Oh look..how cute..

<----  Comp/Net/IT Engineer since 1984

Wanna' bet a dollar on that..?    :D


/..now, REALLY have t'go t'sleep..
//..couldn't resist..
///..three slashies..
 
2014-06-19 11:38:47 AM

frepnog: KatjaMouse: Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.

said about the guy raising a huge stink because his dog was sold to a family with kids that loved the dog.  "MINE, fark YOU".  This was a great opportunity for the guy to grow as a person and do something that was good for a family and good for the dog in question.  Especially since he has no business owning a dog.

"MINE, fark YOU."

All this taught the kids was that people farking suck, and to look out for number one.

Now, don't misunderstand me here.  The guy was legally in the right. That doesn't mean that taking the dog from the family was right.  Because it was NOT.


How the fark do you rationalize him keeping his own dog as wrong? Do you really think "finders keepers" is a justified and moral way to determine what belongs to whom? Or are you laboring under the belief that because this family was the last one to have the dog (for a whole month) that the dog somehow totally forgot who his real owner is and would be traumatized by going back to a guy who the dog now thinks is a stranger?  Or is this just a "think of the children" nonsense moment?

I'm really curious about your reasoning. You stated that it's wrong for him to want his dog back. Ok, can you tell us why you think that?
 
2014-06-19 11:41:37 AM

umad: I love the dollars in your bank account. This is the perfect opportunity for you to grow as a person and do something that is good for me. Now pay up.


well, that's just farking stupid.
 
2014-06-19 11:45:10 AM

frepnog: KatjaMouse: Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.

said about the guy raising a huge stink because his dog was sold to a family with kids that loved the dog.  "MINE, fark YOU".  This was a great opportunity for the guy to grow as a person and do something that was good for a family and good for the dog in question.  Especially since he has no business owning a dog.

"MINE, fark YOU."

All this taught the kids was that people farking suck, and to look out for number one.

Now, don't misunderstand me here.  The guy was legally in the right. That doesn't mean that taking the dog from the family was right.  Because it was NOT.


Was he? Because the fact that he hasn't go after the ex or go to the police  says to me there is more to this.
 
2014-06-19 11:46:17 AM

taurusowner: I'm really curious about your reasoning. You stated that it's wrong for him to want his dog back. Ok, can you tell us why you think that?


Because he is a military man, obviously prone to deployments.  That means he doesn't really own a dog, he has a dog that he sees from time to time.  Also, based on the pic of him holding the dog over a goddamn cliff, he has no idea how to treat a pet.  Also based on the stink raised in getting the dog back, he has no values other than MINE, fark YOU.

Is he legally in the right to take back his dog, sold with out his permission?  Sure.  But SHOULD HE?  Just because you CAN do a thing, doesn't always mean you SHOULD.  It's a dog.  He could get another dog, if he felt so inclined.  Don't give me the emotional attachment shiat either.  This was all about MINE, fark YOU.  If he really loved the dog...  he would have let the dog go.  And you know it.
 
2014-06-19 11:46:41 AM

CAT-LIKE TYPING DETECTED: xtech: its shiat like this that makes me glad that there is almost no way for people to track me down if i got involved in shiat like this.

id troll the shiat out of the stalkers for shiats and grins.

/yeah, security on the web is kind of what i do
//no, there are no footprints of me on google
///im that careful :)

Oh look..how cute..

<----  Comp/Net/IT Engineer since 1984

Wanna' bet a dollar on that..?    :D


/..now, REALLY have t'go t'sleep..
//..couldn't resist..
///..three slashies..


age doesnt make you smart hoss. just because you've been a bad tech since 84 doesnt mean youre a good tech now.

bye.
 
2014-06-19 11:55:38 AM
Publikwerks: ...we are all going off half cocked with no solid info...
Because, as I see it, the mistake here is on him - he gave his gf the dog to take care of.
He misjudged her, and so while I feel bad for him, I don't like that he sic'ed the internet on people for his mistake.
^^^^
` this

The fact that she went the extra mile to sell it makes you wonder what else was going on in their relationship.
Did he only call his gf to check up on his dog?... and then was ungrateful if she wasn't treating his dog right?
Did she get stuck for its high vet & food bills?
Maybe she wasn't psycho - just fed up w/ paying big doggie bill$ for an ingrate, and wanted to get paid back.


/My dog costs plenty - I'd never leave him w/ anyone who didn't like him, and I'd make sure I paid his bills
 
2014-06-19 11:58:58 AM

frepnog: KatjaMouse: Haven't you ever heard of the New Age phrase "Teachable Moment"? This is an opportunity for the parents to sit the kids down and tell them about right and wrong and life's disappointments. This guy has raised this dog and invested himself way more emotionally over the years than these kids who had it for one month.

said about the guy raising a huge stink because his dog was sold to a family with kids that loved the dog.  "MINE, fark YOU".  This was a great opportunity for the guy to grow as a person and do something that was good for a family and good for the dog in question.  Especially since he has no business owning a dog.

"MINE, fark YOU."

All this taught the kids was that people farking suck, and to look out for number one.

Now, don't misunderstand me here.  The guy was legally in the right. That doesn't mean that taking the dog from the family was right.  Because it was NOT.


Oh, puhlllllllleeeeeeeeze!
 
2014-06-19 11:59:53 AM

frepnog: taurusowner: I'm really curious about your reasoning. You stated that it's wrong for him to want his dog back. Ok, can you tell us why you think that?

Because he is a military man, obviously prone to deployments.  That means he doesn't really own a dog, he has a dog that he sees from time to time.  Also, based on the pic of him holding the dog over a goddamn cliff, he has no idea how to treat a pet.  Also based on the stink raised in getting the dog back, he has no values other than MINE, fark YOU.

Is he legally in the right to take back his dog, sold with out his permission?  Sure.  But SHOULD HE?  Just because you CAN do a thing, doesn't always mean you SHOULD.  It's a dog.  He could get another dog, if he felt so inclined.  Don't give me the emotional attachment shiat either.  This was all about MINE, fark YOU.  If he really loved the dog...  he would have let the dog go.  And you know it.


Sorry but that's one of the biggest loads of horseshiat I've seen on Fark in a  while. Congratulations. First, I had no idea you were a mind reader. You really wanna sit there and claim he didn't love the dog or you know why he did something? Sorry, but don't give me that shiat. You have no farking idea what he is or was feeling or why he did anything. Maybe that dog was all he had. His girlfriend obviously wasn't someone he could rely on. You don't know what he went through overseas, and to come back to your girlfriend pulling that shiat and losing your pet? And you seem to have a severely misguided opinion that being in the military means you shouldn't expect to have a real life in the US until you're done. I've been on three deployments myself, and coming home to your real life is the only thing you look forward to while you're gone. Of course he not only has the right to expect his dog to be waiting for him when he gets back, he deserve to have that dog waiting for him. It's his pet. His friend. His family. You have no farking idea what bond he may have with that dog. And he should just sit there and suffer through a deployment, a breakup and betrayal, and the the loss of his pet just because some kids had the dog for a month? A farking month? Sorry, but again, that's just horseshiat. And you know it.
 
2014-06-19 12:03:10 PM

frepnog: umad: I love the dollars in your bank account. This is the perfect opportunity for you to grow as a person and do something that is good for me. Now pay up.

well, that's just farking stupid.


Are you claiming ownership of these dollars that I have grown attached to? You're a farking monster. I hope your children see what kind of scum you are.
 
2014-06-19 12:14:51 PM

taurusowner: frepnog: taurusowner: I'm really curious about your reasoning. You stated that it's wrong for him to want his dog back. Ok, can you tell us why you think that?

Because he is a military man, obviously prone to deployments.  That means he doesn't really own a dog, he has a dog that he sees from time to time.  Also, based on the pic of him holding the dog over a goddamn cliff, he has no idea how to treat a pet.  Also based on the stink raised in getting the dog back, he has no values other than MINE, fark YOU.

Is he legally in the right to take back his dog, sold with out his permission?  Sure.  But SHOULD HE?  Just because you CAN do a thing, doesn't always mean you SHOULD.  It's a dog.  He could get another dog, if he felt so inclined.  Don't give me the emotional attachment shiat either.  This was all about MINE, fark YOU.  If he really loved the dog...  he would have let the dog go.  And you know it.

Sorry but that's one of the biggest loads of horseshiat I've seen on Fark in a  while. Congratulations. First, I had no idea you were a mind reader. You really wanna sit there and claim he didn't love the dog or you know why he did something? Sorry, but don't give me that shiat. You have no farking idea what he is or was feeling or why he did anything. Maybe that dog was all he had. His girlfriend obviously wasn't someone he could rely on. You don't know what he went through overseas, and to come back to your girlfriend pulling that shiat and losing your pet? And you seem to have a severely misguided opinion that being in the military means you shouldn't expect to have a real life in the US until you're done. I've been on three deployments myself, and coming home to your real life is the only thing you look forward to while you're gone. Of course he not only has the right to expect his dog to be waiting for him when he gets back, he deserve to have that dog waiting for him. It's his pet. His friend. His family. You have no farking idea what bond he may have with that dog. And he should just sit there and suffer through a deployment, a breakup and betrayal, and the the loss of his pet just because some kids had the dog for a month? A farking month? Sorry, but again, that's just horseshiat. And you know it.


Oh dear lord. Call the waaahbulance. The guy is a first class douchebag, and if that was not obvious from the get-go, I dont really know what to tell you. It is a dog. First rule of pet ownership- you need to be able to let go, since they are very temporary.
 
2014-06-19 12:15:31 PM

gulogulo: Nogale: The dog wasn't hers to sell. It had been left in her custody. If you house-sit for someone and get sick of watering their plants or dusting their books, are you entitled to sell the plants or the books? The boyfriend's father-in-law offered to take the dog - at his expense - and she preferred to sell it.

You are entitled to leave the house and plants. It's not indentured servitude. Again, you are running full-cocked with a half of the information. Do we know how 'prompt' that offer came? Days, a few weeks, a few months after she first said it wasn't work? If i had a nightmare pooch on my hands that some douche got knowing full well he was going to be gone for a months at a time, contacted him and he failed to in a timely manner make arrangements to take it off my hands, I might too resort to tryng to rehome it since it clearly isn't his priority : why should it be mine?

I'm not saying that IS what happened, but that is just as plausible as your scenario. The only difference is my scenario doesn't call for a witch hunt. But you know, I don't expect much 'critical thinking' skills from joe public.


Some response from someone who obviously didn't read that the guy's father contacted the woman and offered to take the dog off her hands AT HIS EXPENSE. She didn't respond and opted to unload poochie on Craigslist.

Regardless, she sold something that belonged to someone else that she had agreed to care for. Why do you find it difficult to see the problem with this?

Some house-sitting agreements include basic upkeep; many people are happy to get a free place in a high-demand area for the bargain basement price of watering plants and feeding the cat.

(Unless they're my friend who stayed in my place for six weeks last year and complained that the loud garbage trucks came by just at her daughter's bedtime. But that's another story.)
 
2014-06-19 12:16:58 PM

frepnog: First rule of pet ownership- you need to be able to let go, since they are very temporary.


That is the only smart thing you've said so far. Absolutely perfect advice for that family to took possession of stolen property.
 
2014-06-19 12:21:31 PM

taurusowner: Sorry but that's one of the biggest loads of horseshiat I've seen on Fark in a while. Congratulations. First, I had no idea you were a mind reader. You really wanna sit there and claim he didn't love the dog or you know why he did something? Sorry, but don't give me that shiat. You have no farking idea what he is or was feeling or why he did anything. Maybe that dog was all he had. His girlfriend obviously wasn't someone he could rely on. You don't know what he went through overseas, and to come back to your girlfriend pulling that shiat and losing your pet? And you seem to have a severely misguided opinion that being in the military means you shouldn't expect to have a real life in the US until you're done. I've been on three deployments myself, and coming home to your real life is the only thing you look forward to while you're gone. Of course he not only has the right to expect his dog to be waiting for him when he gets back, he deserve to have that dog waiting for him. It's his pet. His friend. His family. You have no farking idea what bond he may have with that dog. And he should just sit there and suffer through a deployment, a breakup and betrayal, and the the loss of his pet just because some kids had the dog for a month? A farking month? Sorry, but again, that's just horseshiat. And you know it.


So..you know the girlfriend or something to speak on such authority about what's horseshiat or what's not?
 
2014-06-19 12:32:31 PM

Nogale: gulogulo: Nogale: The dog wasn't hers to sell. It had been left in her custody. If you house-sit for someone and get sick of watering their plants or dusting their books, are you entitled to sell the plants or the books? The boyfriend's father-in-law offered to take the dog - at his expense - and she preferred to sell it.

You are entitled to leave the house and plants. It's not indentured servitude. Again, you are running full-cocked with a half of the information. Do we know how 'prompt' that offer came? Days, a few weeks, a few months after she first said it wasn't work? If i had a nightmare pooch on my hands that some douche got knowing full well he was going to be gone for a months at a time, contacted him and he failed to in a timely manner make arrangements to take it off my hands, I might too resort to tryng to rehome it since it clearly isn't his priority : why should it be mine?

I'm not saying that IS what happened, but that is just as plausible as your scenario. The only difference is my scenario doesn't call for a witch hunt. But you know, I don't expect much 'critical thinking' skills from joe public.

Some response from someone who obviously didn't read that the guy's father contacted the woman and offered to take the dog off her hands AT HIS EXPENSE. She didn't respond and opted to unload poochie on Craigslist.

Regardless, she sold something that belonged to someone else that she had agreed to care for. Why do you find it difficult to see the problem with this?

Some house-sitting agreements include basic upkeep; many people are happy to get a free place in a high-demand area for the bargain basement price of watering plants and feeding the cat.

(Unless they're my friend who stayed in my place for six weeks last year and complained that the loud garbage trucks came by just at her daughter's bedtime. But that's another story.)



On whose authority do you know this is what happened and the sequence and timing of events? The jilted soldier and his dad? You don't think there might be a LITTLE bias there, do you? All of this is coming from exactly one source. Carry on with your witch hunt, I suppose and act like the 'crazed public' he appealed to for help. Like I said, critical thinking skills are lacking here, and I'm sure he kind of knew that is exactly how people would react to his sob story.

This wasn't a house sitting arrangement so I'm not sure what exactly she was getting in return for vet/food/upkeep and possible destruction of her own property.  Do you?

I reserve judgement until I hear from her.
 
2014-06-19 12:33:00 PM

nanim: The fact that she went the extra mile to sell it makes you wonder what else was going on in their relationship.
Did he only call his gf to check up on his dog?... and then was ungrateful if she wasn't treating his dog right?
Did she get stuck for its high vet & food bills?
Maybe she wasn't psycho - just fed up w/ paying big doggie bill$ for an ingrate, and wanted to get paid back.


According to TFA she told him that she was having issues with the dog so he sent her his dad's contact information and offered to pay for shipping the dog off to stay with him. Gave his dad and head's up that he should be expecting this, found out later that dad never heard from the GF or got the dog. Basically she just didn't want to be bothered with the effort.
 
2014-06-19 12:34:59 PM

KatjaMouse: nanim: The fact that she went the extra mile to sell it makes you wonder what else was going on in their relationship.
Did he only call his gf to check up on his dog?... and then was ungrateful if she wasn't treating his dog right?
Did she get stuck for its high vet & food bills?
Maybe she wasn't psycho - just fed up w/ paying big doggie bill$ for an ingrate, and wanted to get paid back.

According to TFA she told him that she was having issues with the dog so he sent her his dad's contact information and offered to pay for shipping the dog off to stay with him. Gave his dad and head's up that he should be expecting this, found out later that dad never heard from the GF or got the dog. Basically she just didn't want to be bothered with the effort.


If it went down exactly as he claims it went. How immediate was his response to the GF concerning her concerns? Y'all believe everything anyone ever tells you on the internet? Gullible lot.
 
2014-06-19 12:49:05 PM

taurusowner: frepnog: First rule of pet ownership- you need to be able to let go, since they are very temporary.

That is the only smart thing you've said so far. Absolutely perfect advice for that family to took possession of stolen property.


Funny, I thought we were discussing a living creature here, not a toaster.
 
2014-06-19 12:53:28 PM

fusillade762: That picture is not helping his case


I'm glad there was something about this story that was obviously not wrong about this guy for all the haters to grab onto.
 
2014-06-19 12:54:35 PM

freetomato: They could get a shelter dog or 7 with the $1400 bucks and their kids would fall in love with the dog(s) in short order.

As for the ex-girlfriend - BURN THE WITCH!


Why not build a bridge out of her? More useful.
 
2014-06-19 12:58:02 PM

frepnog: taurusowner: frepnog: First rule of pet ownership- you need to be able to let go, since they are very temporary.

That is the only smart thing you've said so far. Absolutely perfect advice for that family to took possession of stolen property.

Funny, I thought we were discussing a living creature here, not a toaster.


Well if you want to go that route, that living creature spent far more time with the soldier than it ever did with the family, and thus if we're relying on the attachment aspect, the soldier has a much better claim to being emotionally attached to the dog than that family ever could.
 
2014-06-19 12:59:23 PM
The soldier has a lot more patience than me. I would have already filed a Police report and sent a lawyer after the family member who purchased the property and the girl friend.

The family are selfish douche bags for being in possession of stolen property and refusing to return it. The girlfriend is a douche bag for stealing and selling the guys dog.

This is how it was explained to me from a lawyer in Colorado. (A real lawyer with a degree from Harvard not Fark)

Once the girlfriend stopped caring for the dog and transacted a sale the dog became stolen property. The family purchased stolen property.
The girlfriend willingly broke the law and can be prosecuted by law.

The family member who was part of the sales transaction is in the clear due to legal criteria unless he was aware at the time of purchase the property was stolen.

(He also sent me this link containing the following)

Obtaining Control Over Any Stolen Thing of Value 18-4-404 and Theft By Receiving Stolen Property -  If you obtain control over a a stolen thing of value - even if you did not steal the item yourself - you can be convicted of the crime of Receiving Stolen Property.

§ 18-4-404. Obtaining control over any stolen thing of value - conviction

Required criteria to convict:
First - That the property in question was in fact - stolen,
Second - That you actually "received" and possessed the stolen property,
and
Finally - That having possessed or received the stolen property- you KNEW that the property was actually stolen.



The last one is the one that allows for prosecution of the family member who purchased the stolen property. He/She was made aware the property was stolen when the owner returned to the states and still refused to return the property.
What he should have done was explained to his children the dog was stolen and needed to go back home to his owner. (He missed an opportunity to teach his children imo) Then file a police report on the girlfriend and sent a lawyer after her. That's the right way to do it.
 
2014-06-19 01:13:15 PM

nyseattitude: The soldier has a lot more patience than me. I............


Well that was informative, well thought out and reasonable.

Why are you here?
 
2014-06-19 01:23:30 PM
frepnog:If I go find a cat in my neighborhood and keep it in my apartment for a month, would the owners of that cat be morally obligated to just let me keep it? We're not talking about the legal aspects, since you have already admitted this soldier has the legal right to get his dog back. You're claiming that while he has the legal right, he should have just let the family keep it since they became attached to it over a month. So does that apply all the time? Is there some magic time limit that one can keep someone else's pet and the owner then "should" just let that person have it forever?
 
2014-06-19 01:25:46 PM

Avery614: nyseattitude: The soldier has a lot more patience than me. I............

Well that was informative, well thought out and reasonable.

Why are you here?


Do you understand what a blog is?

Why are you here?
 
2014-06-19 01:39:26 PM

nyseattitude: Do you understand what a blog is?


blog (a truncation of the expression  web log)  is a discussion or informational site published on the World Wide Web and consisting of discrete entries ("posts") typically displayed in reverse chronological order (the most recent post appears first).

Why are you here?

Me? I'm bored and the rabid stupidity of a fark thread is one of the most entertaining, time killing things on the internet.  Not to mention the few intelligent people like yourself who post interesting and (I didn't fact check) informative gems amidst all the hur-dur.


/the Boobies was a compliment, dude
//no snark
 
2014-06-19 01:48:17 PM

Avery614: nyseattitude: Do you understand what a blog is?

A  blog (a truncation of the expression  web log)  is a discussion or informational site published on the World Wide Web and consisting of discrete entries ("posts") typically displayed in reverse chronological order (the most recent post appears first).

Why are you here?

Me? I'm bored and the rabid stupidity of a fark thread is one of the most entertaining, time killing things on the internet.  Not to mention the few intelligent people like yourself who post interesting and (I didn't fact check) informative gems amidst all the hur-dur.


/the Boobies was a compliment, dude
//no snark


I thought it was all snark. My apologies.

Cheers
 
2014-06-19 01:53:10 PM

nyseattitude: Avery614: nyseattitude: Do you understand what a blog is?

A  blog (a truncation of the expression  web log)  is a discussion or informational site published on the World Wide Web and consisting of discrete entries ("posts") typically displayed in reverse chronological order (the most recent post appears first).

Why are you here?

Me? I'm bored and the rabid stupidity of a fark thread is one of the most entertaining, time killing things on the internet.  Not to mention the few intelligent people like yourself who post interesting and (I didn't fact check) informative gems amidst all the hur-dur.


/the Boobies was a compliment, dude
//no snark

I thought it was all snark. My apologies.

Cheers


Happens all the time around here, think nothing of it!

/All part of the fun.
 
2014-06-19 02:06:42 PM

nyseattitude: The soldier has a lot more patience than me. I would have already filed a Police report and sent a lawyer after the family member who purchased the property and the girl friend.

The family are selfish douche bags for being in possession of stolen property and refusing to return it. The girlfriend is a douche bag for stealing and selling the guys dog.

This is how it was explained to me from a lawyer in Colorado. (A real lawyer with a degree from Harvard not Fark)

Once the girlfriend stopped caring for the dog and transacted a sale the dog became stolen property. The family purchased stolen property.
The girlfriend willingly broke the law and can be prosecuted by law.

The family member who was part of the sales transaction is in the clear due to legal criteria unless he was aware at the time of purchase the property was stolen.

(He also sent me this link containing the following)

Obtaining Control Over Any Stolen Thing of Value 18-4-404 and Theft By Receiving Stolen Property -  If you obtain control over a a stolen thing of value - even if you did not steal the item yourself - you can be convicted of the crime of Receiving Stolen Property.

§ 18-4-404. Obtaining control over any stolen thing of value - conviction

Required criteria to convict:
First - That the property in question was in fact - stolen,
Second - That you actually "received" and possessed the stolen property,
and
Finally - That having possessed or received the stolen property- you KNEW that the property was actually stolen.


The last one is the one that allows for prosecution of the family member who purchased the stolen property. He/She was made aware the property was stolen when the owner returned to the states and still refused to return the property.
What he should have done was explained to his children the dog was stolen and needed to go back home to his owner. (He missed an opportunity to teach his children imo) Then file a police report on the girlfriend and sent a lawyer after her. That' ...


That was pretty interesting. Thanks for posting that. My only question(and if you can ask the lawyer friend, very cool) would be at what point would the family be considered aware they had stolen property. Just because some dude came to your door saying "Yo, the dogs mine" doesn't mean much. Does he have to contact police first?
 
2014-06-19 02:20:33 PM

Avery614: nyseattitude: Avery614: nyseattitude: Do you understand what a blog is?

A  blog (a truncation of the expression  web log)  is a discussion or informational site published on the World Wide Web and consisting of discrete entries ("posts") typically displayed in reverse chronological order (the most recent post appears first).

Why are you here?

Me? I'm bored and the rabid stupidity of a fark thread is one of the most entertaining, time killing things on the internet.  Not to mention the few intelligent people like yourself who post interesting and (I didn't fact check) informative gems amidst all the hur-dur.


/the Boobies was a compliment, dude
//no snark

I thought it was all snark. My apologies.

Cheers

Happens all the time around here, think nothing of it!

/All part of the fun.


Cigarette anyone?
 
2014-06-19 02:27:10 PM

Publikwerks: Just because some dude came to your door saying "Yo, the dogs mine" doesn't mean much. Does he have to contact police first?


I have dogs. Trust me - their reaction when I get home from work makes it clear they love me.  When my husband got home from the middle east, they tackled him and were whimpering with joy.
 
2014-06-19 02:42:57 PM

freetomato: Publikwerks: Just because some dude came to your door saying "Yo, the dogs mine" doesn't mean much. Does he have to contact police first?

I have dogs. Trust me - their reaction when I get home from work makes it clear they love me.  When my husband got home from the middle east, they tackled him and were whimpering with joy.


I have a dog too, and while I can demonstrate he listens to commands from me, that doesn't mean I own him. He loves my mom even more - does that mean she owns him?

I'm curious, because you could run into other problems. What if she had permission to sell him, and then he changes his mind? I'm not saying that happened, I'm just saying it's a possibility, so there would need to be some level of proof other than the dog licking your face.

Like my dog is micro chipped, so I have a leg up on anyone trying anything like this.
 
2014-06-19 02:57:59 PM
Yeah... If he's not going to be around the dog, then him getting it back was just bad for the dog and bad for the family. On top of that, the photos show he wasn't particularly good with the whole "don't endanger your pets" thing, either.
 
2014-06-19 03:04:49 PM

frepnog: First rule of pet ownership- you need to be able to let go, since they are very temporary.


I am sorry.  (yeah I am canadian, why do you ask?) I can't let this go without saying something.
"you need to be able to let go, since they are very temporary."
That, without doubt, is the saddest thing I have heard in a long, long time.
You have issues and I gently suggest you look into them.
I am old now, and for many years I thought I was a tough guy too, but what you do not see, or refuse to see, is that LIFE itself is very temporary.  Yours as well as mine and every other creature on this planet.  So, no, you do not need to be able to let go, you grasp, hug, and fight to hold.
Every day.
Life is too short.

/stepping off my soapbox now
//adjusting the onions
 
2014-06-19 03:23:12 PM

Nix Nightbird: On top of that, the photos show he wasn't particularly good with the whole "don't endanger your pets" thing, either.


From what I have read, this guy worshipped that pup.
I just know he had that pup under his full control.
I think everyone here has for gotten the "Lion King" scene.

/I liked the image
 
2014-06-19 03:27:00 PM

Best Princess Celestia: freetomato: They could get a shelter dog or 7 with the $1400 bucks and their kids would fall in love with the dog(s) in short order.

As for the ex-girlfriend - BURN THE WITCH!

Why not build a bridge out of her? More useful.


Oh no it isn't! I mean sure...she says she'll support you the entire way across, but the next thing you know she bails on you, and what if you can't swim/fly? You're as screwed as the pooch she agreed to care for.
 
2014-06-19 03:32:34 PM

taurusowner: frepnog:If I go find a cat in my neighborhood and keep it in my apartment for a month, would the owners of that cat be morally obligated to just let me keep it? We're not talking about the legal aspects, since you have already admitted this soldier has the legal right to get his dog back. You're claiming that while he has the legal right, he should have just let the family keep it since they became attached to it over a month. So does that apply all the time? Is there some magic time limit that one can keep someone else's pet and the owner then "should" just let that person have it forever?


you make a good point.  it is however dodging the issue.  my issue is not whether or not the guy has a legal right to his pet.  He does.  my issue is whether taking the pet back was in the best interest of the pet.  the guy is in the military.  he was deployed.  he will likely deploy again, and again be forced to leave the pet for months with someone, burdening them with caring for his pet.  the dog here was sold to people with kids and the dog would have a better life there.  as I said before - sure, he CAN take the dog.  but should he?

poot42: That, without doubt, is the saddest thing I have heard in a long, long time.
You have issues and I gently suggest you look into them.


not at all.  I currently own two dogs and two cats.  I love them.  However, pets are temporary.  They don't live long.  They die.  they get hit by cars.  they run away, they get stolen.  over the years I have had and loved MANY pets, but I don't pretend that they are people and I don't let the death or loss of one break me down into grief, because there is ALWAYS another damn dog or kitty.  I get that lots of people get far too emotionally attached to pets, but it isn't really healthy to do so.  be good to your animals, but don't get so attached that losing one is akin to losing a kid or parent.  because it isn't.
 
2014-06-19 03:37:58 PM
The story made me think of this:


cdn.ebaumsworld.com

 
2014-06-19 04:13:21 PM

gadian: He's just going to leave it again on his next deployment.


Yep. If you're active duty and single, do NOT get a pet if you even imagine you might be deployed. Hell, I wouldn't even advise having a kid under those circumstances,
for that matter.
 
2014-06-19 04:19:14 PM

frepnog: but don't get so attached that losing one is akin to losing a kid or parent.


Just checked your profile.  (A good one, BTW!)
I see you are still relatively young, or young at heart, which is good.

Over my lifetime, I have lost (in no particular order) dogs, cats, a sister, a mother, later a father (of sorts), a girlfriend, a wife, and a turtle to death.  Some expected, some not.
In retrospect, over the years, I have to say that the losses were for me each as equally devastating as the next.

Except for the turtle.  I never really grew attached to him.
 
2014-06-19 05:28:59 PM
I hope they took the farkin' money.
 
2014-06-19 06:30:00 PM
I'm glad the dog is going back to his owner.
 
2014-06-19 07:30:25 PM

poot42: frepnog: but don't get so attached that losing one is akin to losing a kid or parent.

Just checked your profile.  (A good one, BTW!)
I see you are still relatively young, or young at heart, which is good.

Over my lifetime, I have lost (in no particular order) dogs, cats, a sister, a mother, later a father (of sorts), a girlfriend, a wife, and a turtle to death.  Some expected, some not.
In retrospect, over the years, I have to say that the losses were for me each as equally devastating as the next.

Except for the turtle.  I never really grew attached to him.


That's ok. It didn't give a fark about you either.
 
2014-06-19 07:54:52 PM

xtech: CAT-LIKE TYPING DETECTED: xtech: its shiat like this that makes me glad that there is almost no way for people to track me down if i got involved in shiat like this.

id troll the shiat out of the stalkers for shiats and grins.

/yeah, security on the web is kind of what i do
//no, there are no footprints of me on google
///im that careful :)

Oh look..how cute..

<----  Comp/Net/IT Engineer since 1984

Wanna' bet a dollar on that..?    :D


/..now, REALLY have t'go t'sleep..
//..couldn't resist..
///..three slashies..

age doesnt make you smart hoss. just because you've been a bad tech since 84 doesnt mean youre a good tech now.

bye.


I read your email... and I just have to say.... daaaamn, I didn't know you could contort into those positions... also... clear out your sent items folder... i mean geeze.... 3187 is excessive.

=P
 
2014-06-19 08:12:28 PM

frepnog: taurusowner: frepnog:If I go find a cat in my neighborhood and keep it in my apartment for a month, would the owners of that cat be morally obligated to just let me keep it? We're not talking about the legal aspects, since you have already admitted this soldier has the legal right to get his dog back. You're claiming that while he has the legal right, he should have just let the family keep it since they became attached to it over a month. So does that apply all the time? Is there some magic time limit that one can keep someone else's pet and the owner then "should" just let that person have it forever?

you make a good point.  it is however dodging the issue.  my issue is not whether or not the guy has a legal right to his pet.  He does.  my issue is whether taking the pet back was in the best interest of the pet.  the guy is in the military.  he was deployed.  he will likely deploy again, and again be forced to leave the pet for months with someone, burdening them with caring for his pet.  the dog here was sold to people with kids and the dog would have a better life there.  as I said before - sure, he CAN take the dog.  but should he?

poot42: That, without doubt, is the saddest thing I have heard in a long, long time.
You have issues and I gently suggest you look into them.

not at all.  I currently own two dogs and two cats.  I love them.  However, pets are temporary.  They don't live long.  They die.  they get hit by cars.  they run away, they get stolen.  over the years I have had and loved MANY pets, but I don't pretend that they are people and I don't let the death or loss of one break me down into grief, because there is ALWAYS another damn dog or kitty.  I get that lots of people get far too emotionally attached to pets, but it isn't really healthy to do so.  be good to your animals, but don't get so attached that losing one is akin to losing a kid or parent.  because it isn't.


guess what, dipshiat, people are temporary too.
 
2014-06-19 08:36:53 PM

doctor wu: Nope. Once the guy who bought the dog found out whose dog it really was the only proper thing to do should have been immediately clear. His instinct was to not do the right thing, period. So the douche-ometer definitely picks up two separate signals in this case.


Confirmed, Captain.
 
2014-06-20 12:30:14 AM

Gunboat: Benjimin_Dover: If I understand correctly then the dog (separate property) should become marital property because it was "maintained" with marital property (food bought with marital funds.)

Now take this from above: If, during the marriage, husband inherits a bunch of money from an aunt, and he puts the money in a separate bank account and keeps it there, that money stays as his separate property.

Question: Could it be argued that the inheritance became marital property if the bank fee for the account that held it was paid for with marital funds?

That would essentially be what was happening with the dog.

All correct.
As for the bank fee, yes that argument could be made.  The argument is stronger if the bank fee (or other maintenance fee) is substantial; the argument is weaker if the bank fee (or other maintenance fee) is de minimus or easily calculated and separable.  This sometimes happened with houses; one spouse comes in with home owned prior to marriage.  During course of marriage, using marital funds, substantial renovations are made to house.  Parties now argue if house has gone from "separate" to "marital."


Here's a question: husband owns house prior to marriage, but lets it go into foreclosure. Girlfriend bails it out of foreclosure and refinances it (for some reason, only her name is on the current mortgage, both are on the deed) prior to/in early days of the marriage. Marriage goes south, now they're beginning a divorce. In a state that operates identically to yours in terms of asset division, how's that gonna play out?


Also, I find it more surprising that the internet harassed the family than the ex-girlfriend over the dog. They had no way of knowing he was essentially stolen property when they bought him. Doesn't negate the fact that they absolutely should have done the right thing once they found out, but doesn't warrant harassment and death threats, either. The psycho ex-girlfriend on the other hand...who the hell DOES that?!
 
2014-06-20 07:06:18 AM

Gunboat: cman: Umm...what?

Not sure what you're asking... I'm happy to explain / elaborate


If you argue in court like you type on fark, I think I know why you lost that case.
 
2014-06-20 07:10:53 AM

Gunboat: cman: Gunboat: cman: Umm...what?

Not sure what you're asking... I'm happy to explain / elaborate

Treat me like my age, you know, explain it like you would to a five year old

In the jurisdiction I practiced in, all property owned by a husband and wife is classified as either "marital" or "separate."  As a general rule, marital property is split 50/50, but separate property goes to the owning spouse.  Property is marital if it was acquired during the marriage.  Property is separate if it was owned before the marriage or it was a gift/inheritance during the marriage.

Thus, if husband buys tools after he's married, while he may think of them as "his" tools, in fact they are marital property since they were acquired during the marriage; if the couple later divorces, wife gets half the tools.
  If husband owned the tools before getting married, they remain his as "separate" property.

A frequently litigated issue is when separate property gets converted to marital.  If, during the marriage, husband inherits a bunch of money from an aunt, and he puts the money in a separate bank account and keeps it there, that money stays as his separate property.  But if the husband were to take the same money and put it into the family checking account, then at that point it's been mixed with marital assets and becomes "marital" property, subject to equal division if couple divorces.

In my case, wife was claiming dog as separate property because it was a gift to her.  My only out to allow my client to get a piece of the dog was to argue that the dog became marital property, as it had been "mixed" with marital property, i.e., food bought with marital funds.


Much better.
 
2014-06-20 11:53:40 AM

Aigoo: Here's a question: husband owns house prior to marriage, but lets it go into foreclosure. Girlfriend bails it out of foreclosure and refinances it (for some reason, only her name is on the current mortgage, both are on the deed) prior to/in early days of the marriage. Marriage goes south, now they're beginning a divorce. In a state that operates identically to yours in terms of asset division, how's that gonna play out


Depends on how much got paid towards that house after the marriage (bailing out and ongoing mortgage payments).  If it's a lot and can't be easily separated out of computing the value of the house, then the whole house will be marital property.
  But, if girlfriend can show how much she paid prior to marriage and any after marriage payments are small and separable, then that portion of the value that arises from pre-marriage payments is all hers.

I hope that's clear.  It may not be.
 
2014-06-20 02:29:17 PM
frepnog:

...not at all.  I currently own two dogs and two cats.  I love them.  However, pets are temporary.  They don't live long.  They die.  they get hit by cars.  they run away, they get stolen.  over the years I have had and loved MANY pets, but I don't pretend that they are people and I don't let the death or loss of one break me down into grief, because there is ALWAYS another damn dog or kitty.  I get that lots of people get far too emotionally attached to pets, but it isn't really healthy to do so.  be good to your animals, but don't get so attached that losing one is akin to losing a kid or parent.  because it isn't.

Maybe if you had the smarts and compassion enough to be a conscientious pet owner these things wouldn't happen to you.  I've had 3 cats and two dogs and they all died peacefully at the end of their natural lives because they were properly cared for; cats were kept inside at all times, and the dogs were never allowed to roam unsupervised.

People like you shouldn't be allowed to own animals.  I hope to God you never have children.
 
2014-06-20 02:36:50 PM

zamboni: That's ok. It didn't give a fark about you either


Quid pro quo.
/or something like that
//open to corrections

Actually your comment did elicit a chuckle.
Thanks.
 
2014-06-20 02:46:40 PM

Cold_Sassy: Maybe if you had the smarts and compassion enough to be a conscientious pet owner these things wouldn't happen to you. I've had 3 cats and two dogs and they all died peacefully at the end of their natural lives because they were properly cared for; cats were kept inside at all times, and the dogs were never allowed to roam unsupervised.

People like you shouldn't be allowed to own animals. I hope to God you never have children.


oh dear god.  even the best pet owners have had a pet get loose and run into the road.  even the best pet owners have had a pet get inexplicably sick and die after owning it two weeks.  get farking real.

and I have 3 kids, all boys, one just graduated college, one just graduated high school, one in middle school.
 
Displayed 178 of 178 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report