Is Your Mayor a Murderer?


Who is responsible for the deaths of animals in shelters?

Certainly the breeder or the irresponsible pet owner is guilty, but so are the local politicians who care more about taxes and expenditures than they do about life. They hire the people to kill the dogs and cats. They refuse to spend the money to provide outreach, adoption initiatives, long term care.

Companion animals are incapable of fending for themselves in the wild. Humans created them to be companions. Humans are responsible for them. Human society should provide for them.

The people who kill shelter animals are all of us. Most are part of the killing through ignorance. But the local politicians, the bureaucrats, and those who stab the dogs and cats with needles are all scum.

If someone abandoned a child on your doorstep you would certainly think the person reprehensible. But would you kill the child because it was inconvenient to keep him or to find her a home?

That is exactly what local governments do across the country. And every vote cast by a city councilman or county supervisor that permits the murders of innocent animals is the reason animals die in shelters. Very convenient for these politicians to blame others for the number of stray dogs and cats. But they are the murderers of those dogs and cats.

They are among the most despicable humans on the planet.

Solving the problem of animals without homes and caretakers is solely a financial one. Money is needed to provide free spaying and neutering, to recruit fosters, to advertise for forever homes, to educate the public, to develop school curricula, to provide long term care, to prosecute breeders and puppy mills, to pass legislation requiring landlords to rent to people with pets, to increase the number of dogs and cats allowed per residence

The conventional model is just to kill animals that exceed the ability of the shelters to house. And many shelters do not even attempt to meet capacity as a way of economizing on staff and expenses.

Animal activists can make a difference in animal lives by participating in every level of government, from local races for councils and mayor where animal shelters are run, to state government which can require renting to people with pets, can ban trapping, limit hunting, protect wildlife, to the presidency, which can set animal policies, like banning wild horse roundups and abolishing Wildlife Services, prohibiting animal testing and experimentation, stop the use of animals for target practice in the military, stop the Navy killing whales and dolphins.

We don’t have a voice unless we vote. And the general rule is to vote for the most liberal or leftist candidate you can find.



Author’s Notes:

I am unaware of any other blog with the Armory’s mission of radicalizing the animal movement. I certainly hope I am not alone, and that there are similar sentiments being expressed by comrades unknown to me.

If you know of other blogs dedicated to animal rights and the defeat of capitalism, please comment with a link.

• Be sure to follow the Armory and share it with your Facebook friends and email contacts, as well as on Twitter, Google, and all other social media platforms. Our influence and effectiveness is dependent upon you!

Natasha Sainsbury, of Good Karma Graphic Design, has joined Armory of the Revolution as Editor, and is responsible for the transformation of the blog’s appearance. Visit and follow her blog V Kind.

If you are not already subscribed to the Armory, please do so before you leave.

There’s a button to Follow us in the upper right sidebar.

• Be sure to visit Armory of the Revolution’s new commissary and bookstore: The Supply Depot

You will find recommended reading on Animal Rights, revolutionary theory, politics, economics, religion, science, and atheism. There is also a section of supplies for animal liberationists, hunt saboteurs, and social revolutionaries. This is all brand new, and we will be adding lots more merchandise in the near future!

Feel free to comment. I encourage open discussion and welcome other opinions. I moderate comments because this blog has been attacked by hunters and right wing trolls. I approve comments that are critical as well as those which agree with me. Comments that I will not tolerate are those that are spam, threatening, disrespectful, or which promote animal abuse and cruelty.

If you support the Amory’s work and mission, please help us grow.

Just $3 per month will allow us to advertise!



12 thoughts on “Is Your Mayor a Murderer?

  1. Unfortunately, some of the mayors are responding to members of the community who do not want their taxes raised to pay for animal shelters or who object to the money going to animals while people are in need. The same argument we all hear and are sick of.

    I believe in no-kill shelters, but the community must be willing to pay for decent ones. The problem with some is that the no-kill becomes more important than the comfort and well-being of the animals being sheltered. If dogs and cats (and rabbits, rats, etc.) are caged in small enclosures for life, without good care, just to keep them breathing, I believe that is wrong and abusive. Another problem is that in order to avoid the “stacking up” of shelter occupants, managers will select the most adoptable animals, hoping they will move out to homes. That means the ones that most need the help, the unfortunates who are not young enough, cute enough, friendly enough, or healthy enough may be left out in the street to fend for themselves against traffic, abusive people, and lack of food and medical care.

    Again, the problem is irresponsible people who will not spay and neuter and who believe in disposable pets that can be turned loose when they are inconvenient, old, or sick.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Pingback: Is Your Mayor a Murderer? | sergiofalcone

  3. You can call your animal-owning human anything you like, but it doesn’t change the arrangement of killing some species for other species. You assert pet animals can’t survive in the wild. Well, that is a good reason to end their existence–period. Why would any sane human continue to breed abominated species who are protected by law and who are often fed wild species who are unprotected by law. This is repugnant!

    Perhaps your next post ought to call out teachers; after this, you can call out police officers; after this, you can call out postal workers; after this, you can call out animal shelter workers, etc….

    Why should any mayor burden the condemnation that ought to be shared by us all. I am no less guilty than the mayor of any city who must make a decision about the fate of animals who have no business existing.

    To continue talking about shelter animals without exposing the sick arrangement we have made for ourselves so we can feel good about being charitable to some animals, while others are condemned is intellectually disingenuous and morally irresponsible.


    • I believe it should be illegal to breed carnivores. I believe omnivorous companion animals should be fed vegan diets. I believe dogs should be provided for by human society. I oppose exterminating animals because they are inconvenient or too expensive to care for, or too difficult to find homes for to be just a reprehensible as killing homeless people.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Well, as long as you believe “dogs should be provided for,” you are supporting a rigged animal system whereby some are cherished, while others are condemned. The keeping of the canine in our insane society is capital intensive. Canines are big business. Canines are profitable to those who know how to pull the distorted heart strings of human souls who delight in bovine meatballs with their preferred canine companions. I actually believe your sentiments about canines is prejudicial.

        Capitalism loves the canine.


  4. Furthermore, as it now stands, most people who adopt canines are murderers for at least two reasons. Why isn’t this observation included in your model?


    • Almost every city and county in the country runs one or more animal shelters. And almost every city and county in the country has a mayor, county executive, city council or board of supervisors who are responsible for those shelters. Join with other animal activists in your area to question incumbent officeholders about stopping the killing. Demand that they become No Kill shelters. Tell them you will be voting against anyone in office who continues the killings. Join forces with insurgent candidates who will make the shelters No Kill. Write letters to the editor of your local newspapers to drum up support. Go to the shelters and enlist the help of animal volunteers who also want to stop the killing. Go online and find friends on Facebook who live nearby and share your views. Contact the local Democratic and Republican parties to learn who is animal friendly among the candidates. Most local offices are non-partisan, so you have to dig to find the good guys.

      Feel free to inquire of us here if we can be of help!


      • I do not endorse this narrative (or model) because it fails to include the death of all the different species fed to those preferred species who are saved or rescued. End the ownership of companion animals, now!

        I’ve said this too many times in the past, but I will say it again with a brief description. I had a human roommate about a decade ago who insisted on keeping felines. In the kitchen cupboard, my human roommate always kept a stock of dozens and dozens of tin cans filled with the dead remains of other species to feed her preferred species. This is the tradeoff with pet ownership: condemnation of one; cherishment for another.

        No-kill really means Yes-kill.

        Furthermore, 60 billion in expenditures in this country every year for our pets has a price tag of death to other wild species and habitats.


      • I support the abolition of animal ownership. People have no more right to own an animal than they have to own a human. But it is unrealistic to think that companion animals would ever cease to be part of human society.

        The very best we could hope for would be a change in legal status from animals becoming wards rather than property and pet owners becoming their conservators.

        Conservatorships require that the conservators act in the best interests of their wards. It is the relationship that exists between parent and child. As a conservator, one cannot decide to euthanize an inconvenient child or an animal. The conservator has a legally enforceable duty to provide the requirements of life to his/her ward, and is barred from being abusive, cruel, exploitive or negligent in caring for the ward.

        It is a basic tenet of Animal Rights that all animals have the same right to live. I do not believe people should own or be conservators for carnivores. I believe it is morally repugnant to murder some animals to feed other ones. Cats, ferrets, snakes, raptors, etc, should not be forced to live in confinement for that reason alone. The same objection can be made to carnivores in zoos, without even reaching the morality of their enslavement.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.