Barking dogs are reminders of similar police-state tactics and obsessive Gestapo behavior under the National Socialist German Workers Party.
Pledge of Allegiance to the flag The USA's Pledge of Allegiance (& the military salute) was the origin of Adolf Hitler's "Nazi" salute under the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazis).

The swastika was used by the military and by socialists in the USA and in the USSR, before it was used by the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP).
The swastika, although an ancient symbol, was also used to represent "S" letters joined for "socialism" under the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazis), similar to the alphabetical symbolism for the SS Division, the SA, the NSV, and the VW logo (the letters "V" and "W" joined for "Volkswagen").
Francis Bellamy & Edward Bellamy touted National Socialism and the police state in the USA decades before their dogma was imported into Germany. They influenced the NSDAP, its dogma, symbols and rituals.

Barking Dogs Nuisance Training, Animal Behaviorist Dr. Rex Curry
The photos show activity at Abu Ghraib. However, a Guantanamo detainee was also subjected  torture, including via a dog: Mohammed al-Qahtani was threatened with a military working dog named Zeus, according to a military report.  In history, vicious dogs have been used at
concentration camps, gulags, et cetera.

YOUTUBE VIDEOS on anti barking shock collars. Show these videos to sociopathic neighbors, animal control boobs, stupid police, twit mediators, and bad judges, etc.  There are no reasons for barking dog problems other than bad owners who do nothing or who actively use dogs for harassment and threats.

Sociopaths who own dogs are the type of people who, if the dog accidentally dies, sue for "loss of consortium" if you know what I mean (and I think you do).

Visit a doctor to document in your medical records that your illness is directly caused by barking dogs (e.g. exposure for an extended amount of time). Sickness due to barking dogs is a tort case. That is personal injury. Then conslt personal injury attorneys.


Dear Judge, Mediator, Animal Control Officer:

This letter is sent to help you with "barking dog" cases. New discoveries show that many "barking dog" cases are actually cases of threats, harassment and stalking by criminals who use dogs as weapons.

Research shows that no reason exists for accidental barking-dog problems because dogs are easily trained not to bark. Barking-dog problems exist because dogs are deliberately used for persecution.

Here is an important fact that is often overlooked by public officials who deal with sociopaths who use dogs to harass others: It is EASY to train dogs to stop barking.  It can take as little as a half-hour followed by reinforcement of the training as shown by the animal behaviorist Dr. Rex Curry, an expert about training dogs (especially in the area of drug detection, due to his work in suppression motions and other dog-related defense work in Court). Dr. Curry's knowledge about drug-dogs has expanded with knowledge about training dogs to stop behavior that is threatening and harassing. As a pro bono public service, Dr. Curry helps victims. As a Canine Advocate, Dr. Curry is an expert witness and provides expert testimony.

There are many ways to stop barking dogs and many instruction aids (e.g. the For example, anti-bark training is easy with a shock-collar with remote control that is manual.  When a dog barks, a shock is activated by pressing a button on a remote-control pad (and a verbal command is given simultaneously, e.g. "SSHHhh!" Or "Quiet.").  Within less than a half hour almost any dog will stop barking. Thereafter, the collar is only activated rarely when the dog regresses (which would be more than usual for dogs abused by sociopaths who have trained dogs to bark and provoked them to do so).

Another method involves electronic bark collars that are automatic. Automatic electronic collars are more sophisticated than when they were first introduced. In some models, the first bark of the dog is met with the first warning which is a mild shock. If the dog barks again within 30 seconds the shock is intensified slightly.   The shock is gradually stepped up to its 6th and final level if the dog continues to bark. Safety measures are designed to prevent cruelty: for example, if the dog barks more than 15 times in 50 seconds then the collar shuts down for 3 minutes and then resets.

With the bark training above, dogs will actually become security dogs because they will still bark when it is important to bark (as opposed to being non-security dogs that bark all the time at everything, making the barks of no security value). 

Sociopaths will not simply quiet their dogs (as above) because they use their dogs as threats and harassment. That failure to act (and everything else) shows that the dogs are used for threats and harassment.

The authorities have the ability to help and to stop an offender's harassment of people (and their abuse of dogs).

Training dogs to stop barking is quick and easy. Many public officials are ignorant of the process or they erroneously imagine that it is difficult. 

Are people with barking dogs mentally ill and/or violent people?

Dogs are used for torture and to produce fear.

Some of the worst murderers and serial killers began as people who abuse dogs and other animals.

There was a case where a person who committed the crime of assault (via dogs) had a brother serving a lengthy sentence in federal prison for child pornography and his unsuccessful appeal asked for relief based on "... a history of physical and sexual abuse, as well as mental illness." Who knows what personal hells drive people to threaten neighbors with vicious barking dogs?

There have been cases where the dog-owner had an alcoholic parent who abandoned him There have been cases where the dog-owner was a drug addict and dealer. There was even a case where the dog-owner was a drug addict and dealer who had been abandoned by an alcoholic parent.

There have been many examples of drug dealers using dogs to "protect" their activities or to assuage their drug-induced paranoia.  Many are convicted felons who have had their 2nd amendment rights removed due to their supposed potential for violence. They use dogs as substitutes for guns (on a similar topic see the Diane Whipple case ).

Thus, there are two concepts of "drug dogs": 1) Dogs used by police to sniff drugs and arrest people for recreational non-violent activity between consenting adults and; 2) Vicious dogs used by drug dealers to threaten violence against non-consenting adults (those victims are often people who live near the drug dealer). 

Police officers often have to shoot such dogs in self defense (for examples google "police officer shoots dog").

A news from Indiana story states: "Last year, Elkhart's noise control officer did more drug busts than any other Elkhart police officer and he was looking for noise violators, not drugs. Elkhart's experience demonstrates the strong link between noise, guns, drugs, gangs, and crime." [and sociopathic behavior]

Animal Control bureaucracies are ineffective and their bureaucrats serve as enablers for sociopaths who threaten and harass people with dogs. Instead of advising and aiding victims, Animal Control bureaucrats mislead and misinform victims. When used by the government, the phrase "Animal Control" means that animals control humans (Animal Control of Humans).

Many owners are criminals with felony records and may be on active probation. They behave as if they or their dogs were shouting "Pay attention to me! Research me! Investigate me!"  Their dogs are surrogates for their own inferiority complex and/or persecution complex in which they wish to be the territorial alpha dog intimidating others.

Have you ever heard of someone accused of the imaginary crime of being "felony stupid"? How about "America's Dumbest Criminals"? There is stupid and there is scary stupid.

Probation is the government's way of training humans who behave badly. The government often fails miserably in its training efforts. Sometimes the government seems to train bad people to behave more badly.

In one case an investigation resulted in the discovery that a dog-owner was a convicted drug-dealer felon on active federal probation with a history of mental health issues, drug arrests, and long-term addictions to more than five substances (most of those substances were illegal). In that case, his use of dogs was consistent with his history of felony drug dealing and mental health issues.

Perhaps the constant viciousness and barking of his own dogs added to the convict's addiction to drugs (as it pushes normal neighbors to need drugs to cope with the addict's sociopathic behavior).

In another case the dog-owner had served three years in prison for cocaine, been re-arrested for cocaine, and was on active state probation. Both cases developed into contenders for "America's Dumbest Criminals."

In yet another case, a person who permitted and provoked dogs to bark had multiple DUI arrests/convictions, a revoked driver's license, and his wife had left him and taken his kids and moved to a northern state, where legal proceedings were filed in an effort to have his daughter adopted by another man, and stating as grounds therefore that the biological father failed to maintain contact/involvement. He was too busy with dogs and making dogs bark in another state?

In one case, the defendant, after his arrest, had narced/snitched on one or more "friends" and/or associates in his drug dealing trade (had cooperated with police in setting up others who were thereafter arrested) in an effort to receive a lighter sentence. A defendant's fear of repercussions would exponentially increase paranoia that the defendant already endured from his drug dealing and abuse, and it would fuel his drive to use vicious dogs for threats of violence.

In one of those cases the felon had no prior convictions for violence and had been arrested for a recreational drug in a sting (where a police officer buys or sells drugs to a person and then arrests him).  He faced years in prison even though there was no "victim," no one had complained and the arrest occurred due to a set-up created by police. Later, while the defendant was on probation, he engaged in constant harassment, torture and terrorism of new neighbors (the defendant moved to a new location) with vicious barking dogs (that he had used during his lengthy drug-dealing career and that he had kept after his arrest and while on probation).

Complaints to his probation officer and to the judge fell on deaf ears even though the defendant engaged in daily threats of violence through his vicious dogs and produced real victims with real complaints. It is a reminder of the case of Phillip Garrido who was under federal and state supervision for ten years while he allegedly imprisoned a girl. That case also involved numerous complaints to the authorities who did nothing so doggedly that it should raise questions as to whether any of the government officials were deliberately assisting Garrido. If not, then it shows that Garrido (and the dog-owning probationer here) considered his "guards" to be jokes.

The government spends tax dollars fabricating crimes out of non-violent activity between consenting adults. The government ignores true crimes of violence against complaining victims. Government bureaucrats were blind to the fact that the defendant's use of vicious dogs probably spanned his long career of drug-dealing (that the two activities were related).

People with threatening dogs are people who want to use dogs for attacks and physical violence (that is their logical "progression").

Through their threats and harassment they show that they are dangerous. They are reminders of the Michael Vick case and the Diane Whipple case (the lady in San Francisco who was killed by her neighbor's vicious dogs). Neighbors are not only threatened and harassed, their lives are in danger around such sociopathic misanthropes.

Some dog owners may suffer from bonafide mental health issues and might be subjected to injunctions against repeat threats/violence or various state statutes for the involuntary admission/commitment of people for socially dysfunctional behavior as a danger to themselves and/or others (for substance abuse and/or psychological problems) (in Florida that is the Marchman Act and the Baker Act).

In one case, a dog-owner who had used dogs for threats was being sentenced (for drugs, his second time). At sentencing, the defendant's own sister (who was also a lawyer) told the judge that she had, in the past, thought about involuntarily committing the defendant under the Marchman Act. She told the judge this in the belief that the judge would be lenient.

Paranoia and schizophrenia are bonafide side effects of long-term drug abuse.

In one case the dog-owner had "mental health issues" and took prescription drugs for "anxiety attacks." He seemed to seek out anxiety attacks and he behaved in ways that seemed designed to induce anxiety attacks in his family, friends and neighbors. He was a felon and his problems caused him to continue to threaten people even though the dog-owner experienced repercussions far worse from his victims, who took action against him.  The dog-owner's behavior was so compulsive that he could not stop himself.

One day, the felon's enormous female pit bull dog was incessently barking at a neighbor who was sitting quietly in his yard with a small dog (the small dog was completely quiet and motionless). The pit bull was repeatedly charging the chain link fence and repeatedly attempted to dig its way under the fence to attack the neighbor and his dog. The felon's human female enabler/cohabitant came out (the felon was too cowardly and remained in hiding) and she proceeded to scream at the neighbor as he sat there not making a sound. The felon uses the dog to terrorize people into fleeing into their homes.The felon's female enabler was outraged that anyone would not comply. She and the felon live in "upside-down" world where all logic is reversed: They will not stop their dog, you are supposed to flee. As one fan of this page quipped "So, there were 2 bitch-dogs barking?"
And that shows that the dog is actually an extension of the humans: They want to scream threats of violence at the neighbor but they use the dog to do it, and in this case, when the dog fails to dispatch the neighbor, then the human decides to come out and do the barking herself.  The dog is her, she is the dog.

It is sad to note that children resided with the felon and his cohabitant while the above (and similar behavior) occurred. Are the children on their way to learning sociopathic behavior?

As one victim of persecution via dogs stated: “When we (the neighbors) compare notes in the morning, we’ve all had the same problems.” He added: “I don’t think it’s a dog problem. It’s an owner problem.”

Some people are so vile and/or ignorant that they will not take the simple short measure of teaching their dogs not to bark.

They become enraged if someone tells them that their dog barks and asks them to train it to stop. It's the same reaction as telling someone that their child misbehaves because they are a lousy parent. It's not rational, although it explains much about those many dog-owners who have a history of drug use and abuse with felony convictions and probation. In other words, they WERE misbehaving youths with lousy parents. Now they are sociopaths.

It is unfortunate that some public officials have the mis-impression that dogs should be allowed to bark, and even suggest "schedules" as a resolution between victims and the sociopaths who own dogs.  It is wrong to coerce victims into accepting a schedule for daily threats and harassment.

Sociopaths who want a daily schedule for their dogs to bark reveal their sociopathic goals: they want their dogs for harassment. They could leave their dogs out at any time and all the time if they would simply teach the dogs to stop barking.  They prefer to abuse their dogs and maintain the bad behavior. Again, they are dog-haters who hate their own dogs, at least in that sense.

If their own teenage son ran up and down the property line shouting threats of violence at the neighbors, they would take no action if they believed they would suffer no response.  Indeed the behavior of some dog owners is worse than if they took no action; some of them provoke their teenagers to run up and down the property line shouting threats. The dog-owners would do it themselves if they thought they would suffer no response.

There is no relevant difference between the dogs and their sons. They would say "Oh my son likes to do that. For him its normal. I tried, but I can't get him to stop. Just ignore him."  The dog-owner would say that about themselves: "Oh we like to run up and down the property line shouting threats of violence at you. For us its normal behavior. We tried to stop, but we can't. Just ignore us (if you can, ha, ha)." (Here one begins to see the value of shock collars... if the dog-owner wore it and the neighbor had the remote control. Then the persecutor would find the wherewithal to stop the threats from the dog/son/himself).

Sociopathic dog-owners use dogs for the same end, because they believe that no one will stop it.

The use of barking dogs for psychological torture is known by military and law enforcement globally. Review a web search for images of dogs used at Abu Ghraib.

Sociopaths are notorious for using dogs in the concentration camps and ghettos of the socialist Wholecaust (of which the Holocaust was a part): the National Socialist German Workers Party (with Adolf Hilter and ~20 million people slaughtered); the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (V. I. Lenin and Joseph Stalin and ~60 million slaughtered); and the Peoples' Republic of China (Chairman Mao and ~50 million slaughtered).

Some modern victims of that behavior literally cannot crack their doors to step out without a barrage of violent threats from dogs that want to attack them.  They become prisoners in their own homes as if their homes were concentration camps.

Long term abuse by dogs also produces post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) - a malady most commonly associated with combat veterans.

Flashbacks, inability to concentrate, depression, exhaustion and eating disorders are common symptoms of PTSD.

The incompetence of the legal system to stop dog-criminals also leads to Legal Abuse Syndrome (LAS).  Dog-criminals make fools of the legal system through prolonged litigation. LAS and related psychological problems are  one of the many scars of the prolonged litigation.

Coined by a Las Vegas therapist, it is virtually unknown in medical or legal circles. But it has been embraced by people across the country who say that messy lawsuits turned them into emotional, physical and, in most cases, financial wrecks.

Therapist Karin Huffer says she began her research into the problem after watching her husband's suffering in an ugly contract dispute. She discovered those involved in lengthy litigation often suffer the effects of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Using the Americans With Disabilities Act, Huffer has asked that in one case that a victim receive accommodations so representing herself in court is less traumatic.

In 2008, U.S. Judge Paul Hyman approved most of the requests, which included taking frequent breaks, giving the victim extra time to file court briefs and having an advocate beside her in the courtroom.

Similar requests were granted by a Miami-Dade court by Judge Cohen.


Move the dogs (and pen) as far as possible from the victim's house, or remove the dogs from the property.

Make the dogs in-door dogs exclusively and paper-trained;

Walk the dogs instead of placing them in a pen to threaten and harass others;

Muzzle the dogs at all times in such a way that it prevents barking or other noises.

Utilized anti-bark surgery (simple and painless).

Another point of view from a victim: Years ago I had neighbors who had barking dogs. I worked out of my home and they barked all day long. The neighbors were apologetic but said they had to stay out during the day since both worked and ask me to turn on some fans to quell the noise. After about 2 months of this I took a small tape recorder and recorded the dogs barking for about 2 hours. When my neigbors came home they started to barbecue. I had 2 speakers pointing towards their house and replayed the barking dogs for 2 hours. I never had barking problems again.

The idea above has also been tried by victims who simply record the dogs barking for a much shorter period of time and put it on a CD and then use almost any CD player on the "repeat" mode, which plays until someone stops the CD. 

Another victim had a similar idea: Has anyone ever tried using a CD in repeat mode with a recorded statement such as "Stop harassing people with your dogs. Teach your dogs to stop barking. It is easy. Use a shock collar." Or some similarly helpful message. There is actually some attraction to the last one in that it might arguably have greater First Amendment protection (as compared with the replayed barking dogs), it actually provides advice/solution, and presumably, if the sociopath/dog-owner complains, any intelligent person will respond with "Well, you should teach your dogs to stop barking. It is easy. Use a shock collar. Duh."  (and then the intelligent person could begin repeating that over and over again).

Another point of view from a victim: Cesar Millan's show, the "Dog Whisperer" on the National Geographic channel assisted me greatly in understanding dog psychology. I am no expert but I do know that just by giving my dog a good, brisk, 30 minute walk every day does WONDERS for his attitude. We do have some VERY frustrated dogs in our neighborhood who spend all of their time in a small, cramped space or NEVER leaving their yard. I ask all of you dog owners: How frustrated would you be if you lived your life never leaving a pen or your yard????? Many of the owners have been arrested and have been in prison or jail.

Remote controlled shock collars for owners of barking dogs.
WND HOMELAND INSECURITY Latest buzz: Shock bracelets for all airline passengers. 'Just when you thought you've heard it all'

There are so many things sociopaths could do but don't because their intent is threats and harassment via abuse of dogs. Instead of doing any of the above, some sociopahts spend enormous amounts of time provoking dogs to bark and engaging in threatening and harassing behavior.


Perhaps the kids in high school (and adults) should carry around a pet that barks when left unattended like they have to carry for 24/7 those pretend babies that cry when left unattended. That is how they are taught  responsibility.

It would make as much sense or more to have responsible pet ownership classes, similar to classes for responsible parenting.


A fan writes: "The distress caused by barking is proportional to the recipient's intelligence. More intelligent people are more distressed by noise pollution and harassment. The dog-owners always have very low intelligence. They can't even stop their dogs from barking."

"It's me or the dog" is the program with the British gal Victoria Stilwell

Animal Cops Houston, Miami, Detroit

rotten neighbors

drug dogs

BARK COUNTERS - try web searches for bark counters


   Ultrasonic bark tools are often used as automatic devices triggered by a dog's bark. They often prove ineffective, especially for a neighbors dog (to which you have no hands-on access) and if the dog learns how the device works and becomes accustomed to it, or if the device's settings are poor.
    Hand held ultrasonic tools provide a better method that is often overlooked.  When the dog is having a barking episode (e.g. after it is first put out into a fenced area), approach the dog with the device and command the dog (e.g. "Quiet!") while simultaneously triggering the ultrasound for the same instant. If you ever hear the neighbor chastise the dog to quiet, then use the same command that the neighbor uses (e.g. "Stop!" or "Shhh!").  You might discover the neighbor's command by trying common commands to find the one that works best. When the dog stops barking (even if only for a few short moments) reward it verbally (if you cannot toss it a treat). Say "Good!" or "Good dog!"
    The method can be repeated many times in one episode. If the dog barks when you exit your house, then go back into the house and have the device ready and exit, repeating the same method.  
    The hand-held method requires some personal labor, but it can have lasting and reinforceable improvements. A flaw in automatic devices is that they operate constantly and many dogs quickly become acclimatized and learn to ignore them. 
    With the hand-held method you might gain greater control (and a closer relationship) with the dog then it has with its owner (Some readers might be wondering if they can train the dog to attack its owner).
    The hand-held method can also be used through solid fences where the dog cannot even see the trainer (where the dog barks at sounds).


" ... Car alarm noise is an example of very loud impulse noise. If more than 45 seconds of it is deemed unlawful then the same rule must apply to the barking of dogs, for this is also an example of very loud impulse noise. "Both noises have been engineered to capture attention in a deliberately dramatic way, regardless of the disruption to human life in the vicinity ... " "What's OK for car alarms must also be OK for dog alarms. "The fact that one source of sudden, screaming din is mechanical, and the other is biological, makes no difference to the comparably frightening, measurably adverse effects on human health ... "

There is a difference: When a dog starts barking you do not know if it is loose. You do not know if the criminal-owner will set it loose upon you. Dogs can escape and kill people. It happens. Dogs act upon their owner's command and in defiance of their owner's commands. Dogs can physically overpower their own owners effort to control the dog.



Northwest Barking Mad wordpress blog


It's utterly absurd that anyone enduring an assault should be required to record the number of blows assaulting him. The fact that he is being assaulted AT ALL is where the crime lies. Specious requirements of this nature are merely attempts to deny remedial intervention indefinitely.

In the Australian state of Tasmania there are noise law reform proposals relating to false alarms for cars. The idea is that any vehicle alarm which sounds for more than 45 seconds is deemed an offence.

A great many people use their dogs primarily as alarm systems, so it's quite appropriate to demand that the 45 second rule applies to them also.

Furthermore, any noise whose nature is intermittent (eg beep beep beep) is for legal purposes taken to be continuous.

We Tasmanian anti-barking activists now quite sensibly require that the same definition be applied to barking dogs. This "continuous" rule negates any official's requirement to count the woofs, an illicit requirement that should be shoved right up his naughty word.



Another victim of sociopathic humans writes: "My wife and I lived on the west coast and we liked it there, until two women and a girl moved in next door with a dog that barked for hours, continuously, encouraged so by them, and no matter how much I and 8 of neighbors complained and pleaded, they would get even worse. The mayor of the town was for the dog barking, no matter that my blood pressure had risen to 248/146 & my doctor's letter pleading for my life was given to him and to the Chief of Animal Control, who also would not do anything to help, and she would not even allow those under her to do anything, either. My wife and I had to move. My health got much better. We moved to a foreign country where dogs are not considered "children," and dog barking is a serious police matter, and there is
no Animal Control comedy shop."


 Various case laws state that barking dogs can be a "nuisance".
> For example, in *Rae v. Flynn*, 690 So. 2d 1341(Fla. 3d DCA 1997), the court acknowledged that noise such as barking dogs was indeed a "nuisance"
> and:
> The reason why a certain amount of noise is or may be a nuisance is that it
> is not only disagreeable but it also wears upon the nervous system and
> produces that feeling which we call 'tired.' That the subjection of a human
> being to a continued hearing of loud noises tends to shorten life, I think,
> is beyond all doubt. Another reason is that mankind needs both rest and
> sleep, and noise tends to prevent both*. *
> The Florida Supreme Court has defined "nuisance" as:
> "Anything which annoys or disturbs one in the free use, possession, or
> enjoyment *of his property* or which renders its *ordinary use* or
> occupation physically uncomfortable �..may become a nuisance and may be
> restrained." * Knowles v. Central Allapattaw Properties*, *Inc*., 145 Fla.
> 123, 130 (1940). (quoted in *Miami** **Shores** Condominium v Moreau,*Case No. 2004-03-2435 (Fla. 2005).
> Since this particular matter influences the courts--- shouldn't this
> influence the local government, too?
> The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") acknowledges that "noise" can be detrimental to one's health and welfare. However, the EPA concluded thatnoise issues were best handled by the local government or State,
> *in order to better protect the health *& welfare of its citizens. See:
> The Florida Supreme Court also stated in *Knowles v. Central Allapattaw
> Properties*, *Inc*., 145 Fla. 123, 130 (1940). (quoted in *Miami** **
> Shores** Condominium v Moreau,* Case No. 2004-03-2435 (Fla. 2005).
> It is a well settled rule that all property is held subject to the right of
> the State to regulate it under the police power *in order to secure
> safety, public welfare, health, peace, public convenience and general** **
> prosperity*. The rule is based upon the concept that all property is held
> on the implied condition or obligation that its use *shall not be
> injurious to the equal rights of others* to the use and benefits of their
> own property. *The public interest is paramount to property rights.* The
> right of the State to regulate a business which may become unlawful is a
> continuing one, and a business lawful today may, in the future, because of
> changed conditions, the growth of population, or other causes, *become a
> menace to the** **safety and public welfare, and the continuance there of
> must yield to the public good.*


IN Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's short story "Silver Blaze," Sherlock Holmes, investigating the theft of a race horse, remarks upon "the curious incident of the dog in the night-time." A Scotland Yard sleuth protests, "The dog did nothing in the night-time," to which Holmes replies, "That was the curious incident."


On the web site - "Setting up a webcam that allows city officials to monitor the behavior of an accused dog by way of a live internet feed is another possibility. In addition, as the technology progresses, it should soon be possible to document the behavior of an accused dog by way of a noise-activated camcorder that kicks-on only when triggered by a barking dog or some other nearby noise."


Dogs have the natural ability to bark! I have the natural ability to scream.  
It would be considered bad behavior if I aggresively ran up to the fence and screamed at my neighbor every time he came out and wanted to use his OWN backyard. Same for the cars driving by, people walking on the sidewalk, etc.  
Habitually barking dogs have behavior problems. The owners allow it to happen. It is absolutely false that they are great security systems. How can a security system be considered good if it is allowed to alarm for hours in a day. Get a reliable security system and take proper care of your dogs (and thus being respectful to the neighbors). Why can't someone use their own backyard, or take a walk?  
The warped logic used to justify the continued neglect and abuse of dogs and people is sickening.


I have two dogs. My dogs I keep very stringent control over. If I hear them bark once, I immediately call them in.
How ignorant is it to say that neighbors should have to let dog owners know that barking is bothering them? HELLO!!! Barking is ANNOYING! How about I sit outside your house and blow my car horn for hours? Then I will tell you that you didn't let me know it was annoying you so how should I have known? See how prepostero
us that is? And if you do complain to me about my horn blowing, then  I stop but do it again every day thereafter on the assumption that it is a new day and if it still bothers you then you can let me know every day.

If you or your animals are making noise, YOU the OWNER should stop it without having to be told. Do you also have to be told to do everything in your lives or are you people just so rude you cannot see that? Sheesh.
I can totally sympathize with Sienko as I have to put up with two incessantly barking dogs whose owners also obviously feel that they are entitled to ruin the peace and sleep of those who live around them. Such arrogance and ignorance, for shame!


Deputy who stole neighbor's dog sentenced
By Angelica Martinez  Union-Tribune Staff Writer
January 29, 2009

SAN DIEGO — A San Diego County corrections deputy who stole a neighbor's dog and abandoned it 20 miles from her Hemet home was sentenced Wednesday to 60 days in jail, Riverside County court records show.

Diane Michelle Brown, 42, pleaded guilty at a court hearing and was given credit for one day already served. Brown will serve her jail time during consecutive weekends beginning Feb. 20.

She was placed on three years of probation and ordered to pay a $454 fine. Sheriff's officials said Brown is still employed with the Sheriff's Department and is on administrative leave. It is not known whether Brown's leave is paid or unpaid.

She was booked into the Riverside County jail in late October after she put her neighbor's Maltese, Spike, in the trunk of her car and left it in front of a building in Beaumont.

Brown claimed Spike's barking was a nuisance, Riverside County Animal Services officials have said. She tried to take Spike's owner to court, but her complaint was thrown out.

Authorities were led to Brown after employees at the Cherry Valley Water District in Beaumont reported seeing a woman take a dog out her trunk and leave it in front of the building. The woman returned about a minute later, apparently to remove the dog's collar.

Two surveillance cameras captured the incident, and one witness wrote down the woman's license plate number.

The witnesses took the unharmed dog to a veterinarian, who scanned the dog's microchip and called its owner.

Staff writer Kristina Davis contributed to this report.

Stratford High School, Goose Creek High School Raid Drug Dogs
Bad dogs?

Many victims of barking dogs seem limited in their efforts to stop the harassment from human sociopaths who own dogs.  There are many things that have been discussed that can be considered and the list can be expanded. Here are some ideas to consider, somewhat hierchical and depending on the circumstances, as everyone faces different situations (consult an attorney about the impact of local laws concerning all of them):

Anonymous letter or copy of laws against barking dogs.

Letters by certified mail by a lawyer, again citing the laws. The lawyer can also write on behalf of a client who remains nameless.

Repeated anonymous calls to animal control with no timidity and no apologies.
Express the desire to remain anonymous.

Repeated anonymous calls to zoning, code enforcement, planning, noise control bureaucrats. These are different from animal control. look it up. Local codes are often online and address noises and nuisances.

Repeated calls to police. Express the desire to remain anonymous.

(If any of the items above cannot be done anonymously, then use them farther below, after friendlier attempts have been exhausted).

Express admiration for the dog and offer to purchase it.

Find a better home for the dog in a distant state or county and offer to take the dog there. Consider offering compensation.

Express admiration for the dog and offer to personally train the dog (including training it to stop barking) and teach the miscreant (the human).

Offer to buy a bark control collar and train the dog (e.g. a shock collar where you control the shock by remote button). The collar could be for the dog(s) and/or the owner(s).

Buy a muzzle for the dog. Modern muzzles are made of cloth and nylon and are more comfortable than the old cage style muzzles (also available). Modern muzzles even expose the end of a dogs mouth, even enabling the dog's tongue to hang out.

Offer to pay for a pen on the opposite side of the sociopath's house, preferably solid wooden or plastic fencing (so the dog does not see out) positioned up against the opposite wall of the house and not extending beyond the edges of the other walls of the house.

Talk nicely (?) to the offender about the problem.

Offering to buy for the sociopath a "barkless" dog, such as the Basenji, which produces an unusual yodel-like sound commonly called a "barroo," due to its unusually shaped larynx.

Discuss with sociopaths anti-bark surgery (and offer to take the dog and pay for it?)

Videotape, record, journal the dog(s) harassment in preparation for court et cetera.

Try anti-barking ultrasonic devices (there are various ways these devices can be used that are not readily apparent. think about it a lot, or ask others). Also see the barking dog compact disc cd at

Nuisance mobile that has mobile videotaping cameras (or the appearance of such) parked near the sociopath. Suggest this to your police or consider doing it yourself. Do a web search to see photos of Peoria Police Nuisance Property Surveillance Vehicle (Armadillo Truck).

Obtain a device that is controlled remotely by button from inside your home that creates a quick ultronsonic sound near the offender enabling you to more precisely try training as a way to stop the barking. Multiple devices can be arranged at different locations (or together) to operate simultaneously. It is also possible to go beyond the commonly advertised products for something that is more effective.

obtain a device that is controlled remotely by button from inside your home that creates a quick audible sound (something similar to a bark-like sound) from speakers (or whatever device makes such a noise, and there are many) near the offender enabling you to more precisely try training as a way to stop the barking.
arrange speakers near the offending noise in an effort to drown out the noise with more pleasant sounds such as talk radio, country music, classical music, rock and roll, et cetera, whatever works best. That can also assist in helping to try training as a way to stop the barking.

The use of audible & inaudible tones has also been pursued with "canine lullabies" and some of them include "heartbeat sounds" (within the music) that are claimed to provide an added calming effect.  Do an internet search for canine lullabies. There are CDs on Amazon etc, and there are even downloads that appear to be free in a search for "canine lullabies torrent"

Other devices or machines (and there are many) near the offending noise in an effort to drown out the harassment/noise. Such devices can be arranged to be operated remotely. That can also assist in helping to try training as a way to stop the barking.

A recording of the sociopath's dog combined with a device to enable play-back when the sociopath is harassing you (and perhaps in loop-play to acheive an extended period of time).

Some anti-barking devices that are designed to be in a fixed position can be set to "automatically" emit an ultrasonic sound together with an audible sound.  They are sometimes not precise in operation and in the long run they might not per se train a dog to stop barking. However, the audible part itself can have a helpful impact.

A fan writes: neighbors might try the following: Fill an empty tin can with rocks and, as soon as the dogs start barking, shake the can. The dogs will think their barking is causing the noise and will stop. You will have to repeat this a few times, but it might work on some dogs.

Research the sociopathic human for history of convictions, jail, prison, drug use, mental health issues, etc. that can be helpful if litigation occurs and when you report the offender to police, animal control, judges et cetera (consider having free copies available to help educate police et cetera).

signs at offender's property explaining the problem. There was once a sign up that said "stop harassing!" and another explained that the offender was a convict on supersivion.

If the offender is on supervision, contact the person who supervises him about his threats and harassment.

Fixed security cameras for your personal security and to help document the sociopath's criminal behavior.

Fake fixed security cameras.

Injunction against repeated threats, harassment.

Lawsuit for nuisance, personal injury, intentional infliction of emotional distress, harassment, deprivation of your property.

Hypnosis therapy (for you) to trick yourself into enduring harassment.

Drugs (e.g. sleep aids and anti-depressants for you)

Fencing, tall thick shrubbery, bamboo, et cetera.

Curtains, blankets and other cloth (as decorations on walls that serve as noise suppressors), special windows, white noise machines, fans (for a similar background noise effect), ear plugs, et cetera.

Extremely expensive house boarding, insulation, windows for noise suppression and expensive fencing for same outside (all of which will probably be of limited help).

Regarding the "WHAT WORKS?" question: r u living next to Stalin, Mao or Hitler? Are you living in a concentration camp or gulag surrounded by vicious dogs? Should you move/re-locate? Some of the smartest people in the history of the world were ones who fled their homes under Stlain, Mao, Hitler and the socialist Wholecaust (of which the Holocaust was a part): ~60 million slaughtered (and more persecuted and tortured) under the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, ~50 million under the Peoples Republic of China, ~20 million under the National Socialist German Workers Party. Add to that the smaller examples in Cambodia and elsewhere.  The smart ones fled their homes, countries, often abandoning their wealth, businesses and everything in a rush to escape before it was too late. Others stuck around and hoped the situation improved. The latter people were persecuted, tortored and died by the millions. For the latter, the situations did not improve, they worsened. Other places benefitted from the many well-educated people who fled (e.g. many fled to the United States and prospered there, remaking their lives).  It is interesting to think about. Are you living next to Stalin, Mao or Hitler (or all 3)? Are you living in a gulag or concentration camp (with barking dogs)?

Sociopathic dog owners are reminders of the Michael Vick case and the Diane Whipple case (the lady in San Francisco who was killed by her neighbor's vicious dogs). Neighbors are not only threatened and harassed, their lives are in danger around misanthropes who own dogs.

There are neighborhoods that are being destroyed by a single large, loud barking dog.  There are empty houses on three sides, more across the street, and even farther, where others have fled and no one else will move in. Do you want to stay while the neighborhood continues down the toilet? If you are not already living there, you will not buy one of the great deals (deeply discounted) and available nearby.

Armadillo Police Truck Nuisance Barking Dogs
Armadillo Truck Peoria Police Nuisance Property Surveillance Vehicle

Police intervention

Another thing to consider in court proceedings or litigation (in addition to
the stereotypical nuisance count) should be a count alleging deprivation of
your property (your right to enjoy and use your property). Give that some
thought. The idea was prompted by someone's remark "I'm already worried that
I could lose money on my house due to this issue with the neighbor, and am
wondering if I have grounds to sue them in court for the difference on what
my house would have sold for had that issue not existed. Proving damages in that
situation might be difficult (you could try using appraisers/realtors on the

A fan writes: Who would want to live next door to a dog kennel with seven dogs? (The kennel was not there when I moved in).

I approached a Realtor because I was trying to first prove that my
property taxes were too high and the Realtor wrote a letter on my behalf.

Homes next door or in the vicinity of barking dogs very rarely sell. Real estate agents know the problem will lower the price of the home, but they will inform the seller the house needs a price reduction because of the 'trends.'

Buyers usually say "Get me the hell outta here." NOBODY offers a lower price on a home because of barking dogs. They just wont buy the house.

This page from a contains an interview with Geordie Duckler, an attorney from Oregon, who was talking about the wisdom of possibly hiring an attorney who specializes in property law to handle your barking dog case.


A victim writes: Has there ever been an anti-barking effort that included posting of flyers on a neighborhood's telephone poles, or as signs (perhaps something like "stop barking dogs" and referencing a website or providing an email
address), maybe door-to-door leaflets, or other efforts in that regard?
How about "Stop barking dogs. For the children."
It is even possible that a campaign could appear to announce that there will
be official crack-down soon, and the leaflets would appear to be an official
warning in an area.
Or "Stop barking dogs. Free training at this email."
"Stop barking dogs - Domestic terrorism."
"Stop barking dogs & human torture."

Or a No Parking Zone sign altered to "No Barking Zone."

Agra, Jan 12, 2010. Over 25 street dogs were found poisoned in Agra's Idgah and Mohanpura areas in the past two days, police sources said Tuesday. At first the general impression was that the dogs died because of the cold or some disease. But when more dogs died and some biscuits were found near them, it became clear that they had been poisoned.


The web contains this advertisement: Revenge CD and Ear Plugs: A great way to get back at those noisy neighbors! Give them a taste of their own medicine with any one of these 20 ear-splitting sound effect tracks. Anyone who's ever lived in an apartment will really appreciate this hilarious CD! Earplugs supplied for your listening pleasure. Imported from France. Tracks include: 1) Drill; 2) Party (At Least 200 People); 3) Orgasm (Outstanding); 4) Train; 5) Drum (Played by a Child); 6) Inhuman Screams; 7) Walking (High Heels); 8) Domestic Squabble; 9) Doors Banging; 10) Bowling; 11) Unhappy Dog; 12) Practicing Scales (Violin); 13) Traffic Jam; 14) Garbage Truck; 15) Newborn; 16) Phone Ringing; 17) Ball Game; 18) Pigeons; 19) Spring Cleaning; and 20) Cock-a-Doodle-Doo!

Spoof commercial from Saturday Night Live SNL of Will Ferrell as attorney Wade Blasingame:

It is astounding to see the number of news stories about adults murdering babies when adults cannot make babies stop crying. It is more astounding that the killer is often the baby's own parent.

There are many differences and similarities between crying babies and barking dogs. One difference is that dogs can be quickly and easily taught to stop barking.

The impact of crying babies is a reminder of evidence that barking dogs influenced the murders committed by David Berkowitz (the Son of Sam serial killer of the 1970s, in Brooklyn, New York).

It is a reminder that barking dogs are deliberately used by the government to torture and terrorize humans.  

Injunctions against repeat violence, & criminal assault
by "deliberate threats & harassment from sociopath next door."

Don't fall into the trap of understating the issue as a "dog barking problem." Break the bad linquistic habit. Instead it is "deliberate threats and harassment from the sociopath living next door" (and using a dog for the threats and harassment is just one modus operandi).

It is a trap because you know that if you misstate/understate the sociopath's behavior as a "dog bark problem" the sociopath's response will be to lie and accuse you of harassment (e.g. provoking the dog), when in fact they provoke their dog(s) to threaten and harass you.  They know what they are doing. It is deliberate.

Has anyone ever tried a "repetitive violence injunction" or "injuction against repeat violence/threats"? Many states enable a person to fill out a form/affidavit which usually requires only two descriptions of incidents in which a person has perpetrated threats/harassment. The process is set for a quick hearing in front of a judge who decides whether to issue an actual injunction against the sociopath that can last for months or years. Shouldn't actual threats of violence using a weapon (dog(s)) qualify?

Some states include in the "repetitive violence injunction" definitions both assault and stalking. Look at the statutes to understand what can qualify. Assault is generally defined as "A crime that occurs when one person tries to physically harm another in a way that makes the person under attack feel immediately threatened. Actual physical contact is not necessary; threatening gestures that would alarm any reasonable person can constitute an assault." Stalking laws can be even more inclusive of behavior involving dogs.

Has anyone ever examined whether such a petition for injunction could be followed with a regular civil lawsuit for assault, stalking and the more commonly discussed "nuisance" claim in regard to sociopaths with dogs?

Every time that there are two incidences of violence/threats, it might be the case that a new petition for an injuction can be filed. It is also possible that a different judge will hear new petition(s).  It all depends on the local procedure and law.

If the first Judge is a boob, other judges might understand the crime or have experienced similar threats and harassment and comprehend the gravity of the sociopath's threats/abuse.

For the stereotypical sociopathic dog-owner that could mean never-ending efforts until the sociopath stops her/her abuse.

If the sociopath fools the judge with "I didn't know" for the first petition, then that excuse does not work for the second petition and later petitions.

The victim/petitioner decides when to pursue the injunction and can thus prepare throughly to document the incidences (e.g. with videotape and high quality sound recording) and prepare memorandums/briefs in support with references to the Diane Whipple case, similar cases, expert literature on the impact of barking/noise, on the use of dogs to terrorize, et cetera. Even a CD or DVD with various material included with a memorandum in support of the injuction, or provided as an exhibit in the hearing. It might even be possible to bring in an actual expert. Other witnesses to the two incidences cited could be brought.  It would be a great educational opportunity and could be well executed. If the dogs have a record of biting or other violations, that would seem relevant also. If the sociopaths have a record of violence or other crimes, that could be raised.

Some victims describe sociopathis behavior with dogs that should qualify as an actual misdemeanor criminal violent assault charge (even aggravated due to the use of a weapon - the dog(s)), no different then if the sociopath personally ran out repeatedly with a stick or a poisonous snake and charged at you with it while loudly threatening repeatedly to attack you (and repeating this on an hourly or daily basis). Has anyone ever tried talking to police or the local prosecutor's office about that issue?

Has anyone tried those avenues?


Some vermin are protected, some are not.  by Paul Carpenter

Sensational event on April Fools' Day: District Judge James Narlesky, his courtroom jammed with a standing-room-only herd of wrathful dog lovers, came down hard on James Clewell of Bethlehem.The judge approved criminal charges of animal cruelty and injury to dogs. Clewell stands accused of trying to defend himself against some curs that he said tormented him with incessant barking. A witness, it was reported, said Clewell tossed rat poison into the curs' vicinity. The two mongrels were not harmed, it seems, but Clewell faces years in prison on each charge.The big news story, on the front page of the local section, did not explain why it is acceptable to poison one type of vermin but not another.(I have more respect for rats. They are cleaner than dogs and do not bark. Nevertheless, I confess I have murdered rats and mice with savage spring-loaded devices, with malice aforethought, but I never was busted for it.)

More recently, in another case, District Judge Patricia Warmkessel did not face an angry SRO crowd of human lovers in her courtroom as she gently slapped the wrist of Audra Schwoyer of Allentown with a $25 fine and $58 in costs after finding her guilty.There was no big news story, but court documents said police accused Schwoyer of violating a noise ordinance.''The above owner [Schwoyer] did fail to prevent her dog from disturbing the peace by barking or howling to the annoyance of others,'' said a Feb. 23 citation. It noted this was a ''repeat offense.'' ''Repeat offense'' is putting it mildly, according to Schwoyer's next-door neighbors.''They'll go away and the damn dogs will bark for hours.Â…One time they barked for 41/2 hours, almost,'' said John Watson. ''Can you imagine what it's like?'' asked his wife, Joann. ''You can't imagine what it does to us.''She said she and her husband have called police more than a dozen times about the barking, and the officers always are sympathetic but are limited in what they can do.So Schwoyer paid the $83 and went her merry way.For less than $83, by the way, you can buy a ''bark collar'' that uses chemicals, high-pitched sounds or mild shocks to deter prolonged barking.I'd prefer a simple surgical ''debarking'' procedure to alter a dog's vocal cords, but animal rights lunatics, who somehow have political influence, oppose debarking. They claim it is cruel to deprive a mutt of the joy of tormenting humans.The screwballs often display an anthropomorphic attitude about dogs, which raises this question: If you were in a dog's place, or vice versa, which would you find more disagreeable -- having your vocal cords surgically altered, or being castrated?The same people who think spaying and neutering are acceptable will oppose debarking, and I suspect it has nothing to do with what is or is not cruel to the dog. I suspect it has to do with the desire of malevolent twerps to torment other people with impunity.I recognize that dogs can be a joy. Many people in my neighborhood and two of my children own them, so I know that dogs are not problematic if the owners are responsible.The lunatics, however, have organized themselves into a powerful special interest group that has judges in its pocket and can win perverted measures to give dogs more rights than human beings.So it is high time that the victims of vermin start forming their own special interest groups to reverse that trend.A good first step would be to lobby for legislation that says human beings are entitled to defend themselves against vermin -- any form of vermin. A second step might be to get rid of weak, maladroit judges. I do not know whether Clewell actually gave rat poison to dogs that tormented him with incessant barking, but if he did, he should be given a medal for trying to rid his neighborhood of the pests, instead of being prosecuted.When we look at what Clewell faces (years in jail), compared to what happened to Schwoyer ($83), it is clear that the system is demented. 610-820-6176
Copyright © 2008, The Morning Call April 27, 2008

 kill children and adults
Barking Dogs for Terrorism, Nuisance Training, Animal Behaviorist Dr. Rex Curry
BARKING DOGS USED FOR TERRORISM Barking Dogs terrorize humans

Most caliphates within fundamentalist Islam prohibit dogs as pets. Of course, they have their share of social iniquities.

Was the Muhammad besieged by neighborhood dogs in Mecca? Is that why he left and went to live in the cave?


Washington Post article from ~01-14-09 Headline:
Gitmo detainee was tortured, judge says. Charges were dismissed.
"At one point Qahtani was threatened with a dog named Zeus, according to a military report."  
Notice that it does not say Qahtani was bitten or attacked, but threatened. Thousands of Americans are tortured and threatened by dogs (and their sociopathic owners) every day in the USA.

Associated Press article from 01-14-09 Headline:
Study: Stalking haunts 3.4 million in U.S.
"By the tens of thousands, victims of stalking lose their jobs, flee their homes and fear for their safety, according to a new federal survey..."
The number is even higher if they bother to count the thousands of Americans stalked, tortured and threatened by dogs (and their sociopathic owners) every day in the USA.


On drug dogs, lizards and other animals and animal rights -
"The sovereign, after taking individuals one by one in his powerful hands and kneading them to his liking, reaches out to embrace society as a whole. Over it he spreads a fine mesh of uniform, minute, and complex rules, through which not even the most original minds and most vigorous souls can poke their heads above the crowd. He does not break men's wills but softens, bends, and guides them. He seldom forces anyone to act but consistently opposes action. He does not destroy things but prevents them from coming into being. Rather than tyrannize, he inhibits, represses, saps, stifles, and stultifies, and in the end he reduces each nation to nothing but a flock of timid and industrious animals, with the government as its shepherd."  -- Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Vol. 2 [1840]


Apply this logic to barking dogs........barking dogs will be towed.

Car stereo noise measurement
Bass bumpers beware:
Your music could cost you your ride.

Only the really loud cars will be towed, police say
Sarasota ordinance allowing impound takes effect today

By Anthony Cormier Published: September 1, 2008

Today, Sarasota police will begin enforcing a noise ordinance that allows the city to tow vehicles for loud music.

The rule itself is not new. State law prohibits any type of music that can be heard 25 feet from a vehicle.

But the city has added some bite to the existing law.

In addition to the standard citation and fine, officials will begin towing vehicles to impound lots.

First-time offenders face a $74 fine and a $125 towing fee. The prices go up for each additional offense, reaching as much as $500.

Sarasota is one of a handful of Florida cities -- including Bradenton -- that tows vehicles involved in misdemeanor offenses such as prostitution or possession of drugs. But it is the first city in the state to enforce noise ordinances with the threat of tow trucks.

The police, though, promise to be a bit lenient.

Instead of obeying the 25-foot rule, Capt. Lucius Bonner says officers have been instructed to use a 100- to 200-foot radius.

Bonner says: "My general rule is, if you can hear the music before you can see the car, then it's a violation."


Frequency is measured in hertz or "hurts"

An important term related to noise harassment is "frequency."
Frequency is measured in hertz.

In regard to barking dogs, victims make the mistake of thinking that frequency refers to how often the dog(s) barks and that the term used is "hurts." They think that high frequency means it hurts more. Victims say that any situation "mega hurts."

Bass sounds have lower frequency but travel greater distances to be heard.
Higher frequencies tend to bounce more. Thus both types of dogs have their disadvantages. Large dogs have bass sounds that travel greater distances. Small dogs have high pitched frequencies that reflect off objects more.


It seems that when a dog barks or howls, it sets off our car alarm. And the dog owner seems to hear the car alarm where he never heard his dog barking. Poetic justice?

Oh my GOD!!!! What a great idea! Every time the dog barks, hit the panic
button on your key fob and make the car alarm go off! When they go nuts,
tell them it's very sensitive and their dog barking sets it off. Tell them
it's set to go off after 30 seconds as long as the dog stops barking! Then
tell them there is nothing you can do about it.

They will begin to associate the alarm with their barking dog.


A dog can easily bark hundreds or even thousands of times in a few hour period.
Bad as that is, it is not like the horror stories from some people of barking about once a second for hours!


This was heard from a claims administrator for a risk retention group that insures one-thousand-and-three-hundred campgrounds and RV parks nationally.  Her insurance agency is going to be sending out to the managers of all of their facilities a copy of an article from New Animal Control.Org called:

The Relationship Between Dog Attacks and the Tolerance of Belligerent Barking.

They are going to be telling all their managers that as far as the insurance company is concerned, barking is an act of aggression.  Hence a barking dog is a biting dog. Therefore, no barking dogs will be tolerated.


With "Animal Control" bureaucracies the state is revealed, once again, as utterly incompetent at anything but taxing and making war, that is, stealing and murdering.

Barking Dogs Nuisance Training, Animal Behaviorist Dr. Rex Curry
BARKING DOGS USED AS THREATS Barking Dogs terrorize humans

A fan writes: The barking dog CD (which I have not tried) apparently produces non-stop ultrasonic noise.

It looks interesting because it is a different strategy than the usual ultrasonic training devices. The usual devices give a short blast when barking occurs. The usual devices have a limited success because dogs become accostomed to them. (And dogs become more quickly accostomed to the usual devices in part because most people don't know how to use the devices to maximize usefulness).

Anyhoo, this barking dog cd presents the interesting question: what if you simply blast a barking dog with non-stop ultrasonic noise? Will that cause some or all barking dogs to simply give up in the sense that their perception of the experience might compare with a human being blasted non-stop with a nearby air horn or steam whistle?  Is it less likely that the dog will somehow learn to ignore the constant blast that begins when the dog starts to bark? Or will the dog persist in feeling overwelmed?

I haven't seen this discussed before and I think it could be a great benefit to many people.

In theory there is not much that would limit how loud the ultrasonic noise would be other than the equipment that is used (along with multiple output sources, or multiple speakers).

It could even work in an interior setting where speakers were pointed directly at/against the adjoining wall (and pillows or other insulation could be put around the speakers on the victim's side).

If anyone tries it please report the results.

If you disconnect your usual loudspeakers and instead pump your stereogram's energy into power transducers designed to cope with ultrasonic frequencies you will probably find that (a) your stereogram's power amplifiers still work, and (b) your system will emit the ultrasonic frequencies you seek. It is important that the power rating of such transducers be greater than the maximum power output of your system's amplifiers, otherwise there could again be the acrid smell of electronic components cooking.

Ultrasonic products

A fan writes: I decided to try playing music to mask my moving around my yard. this has been extremely successful. At last I feel a little more in control . I really needed that so i now i am much better so much in that during daylight hours its bearable. In addition to the easy listening music i have played a variety of sounds like the sounds the dogs could hear from my property. this also has been extremely successful. . Im a bit a a pc whiz and i can put the sound effects at the same time as the music. i make it that the sound effects are say with 5 minute breaks and then the sound effect could be just seconds to a couple of minutes. Then if i play the sound effects in to the dark hours i no longer play music and instead play natural forest sounds like insects ect. I do vary the sounds and i found I had to mix them up other wise the dogs got too used to them. so from my pc i could change the speed of the sound effects , this really changed the nature of the sounds and always seemed to provide a constant variety. so if the dogs barked at me talking on my mobile then i would play more people talking sounds. I stress this is all done at low levels and at no time is the music designed to annoy others. Im playing what i consider really pleasant music at modest levels. I have found that i dont feel comfortable playing music and sound effects to the dogs all the time . I only put the music and effects when the dogs start to bark alot or im moving around the back yard alot. All the sound effects are freely available at no cost on the net. there's a huge amount thats a free download.

A peace advocate wrote: The easiest way to find out the identity of the dog is to go to Animal Control, fill out the 'Freedom of Information Act' form requesting any and all records they have on the owners and that address. You get: Any other complaints made and by whom and when. Name of owner, Names of dogs, breed, age, sex, color, microchip info, spayed neutered info, license info and vaccination history. No info? Well thats a violation.... the dogs have to be registered IF the animal has been at that address for X amount of days.

The writer and the so-called "Chicago's Anti-Cruelty Society," and its training staff should be rebuked for the information in the Chicago Tribune that spotlights a non-rehabilitated dog.

Now he barks only a third of the time! (and don't believe that either).

A quick reading of the absurd time and effort (using treats and a clicker) put into the so far futile attempts to stop the dog's barking shows why there are no owner's of barking dogs that will ever duplicate that effort. Any owner of a barking dog who reads the article will roll his eyes at the thought of any attempt (just as we all roll our eyes at the thought of an owner duplicating the attempt). He will be left with the impression that there is no effective method.

Chicago's Anti-Cruelty Society should be called Chicago's pro-cruelty society for what they do in articles such as that linked below. They and the writer refuse to discuss the many other methods that are quick, immediate and effective (e.g. bark collars with remote control buttons and short temporary hands-on training that could take as little as 15 minutes and provide immediate relief followed with continued reinforcement from the remote control collar). They should be ashamed of themselves for the method upon which they focus. The article makes it clear that they are naive people who do not care about results nor the impact on others (humans as well as other dogs and animals that have to endure it and that will be prompted to barking and similar cruel behavior).

And no one in the article (nor the writer) points out that anyone who adopts the dog will have to either hire the behaviorist for continuing work or be taught and then continue training, possibly forever. We all know what will happen. No one will say anything to the new owner (and they certainly won't mention shock collars with remote control buttons), and the dog will regress after he goes home with a new owner, and the new owner will do NOTHING. Or worse, the new owner will throw the dog in the yard in an effort to hide from his barking.

The Chicago Society and the writer are jokes. The entire article is a fraud and a joke. It has nothing to do with reality. They are incapable of intelligently discussing the real issues even in regard to that particular dog.

It shows what we are up against. 

These so-called animal behaviorists are starting to look like a money-grubbing racket of fraud, similar to the shrinks who charge enormous hourly rates to chat with people for freaking years and never solve any problems because for some reason the patient never is declared cured. The patient always needs more counseling.,0,4140149.story

Tickets for barking, not just parking

Have you ever been subjected to almost nonstop barking day and night? I promise, it's not any fun. It is torture.

Those in power should understand that when people complain about a barking dog, it should not be classified as a "neighborhood dispute" or an "animal complaint." It is a complaint about an irresponsible dog owner.

Anyone who believes that frequent barking is classified as having to "sweat the small stuff" or dealing with a "nonemergency" is sadly mistaken.

When the essential character of your existence is transformed and the quality of your life is slashed, as they are when the sound of a barking dog is force-fed into your home, that is not "small stuff." That is a full-blown crisis. It is an emergency that warrants immediate action.

It is a threat to the health and well-being of our families and a violation of our right to the quiet enjoyment of our homes and property.

What we need are antibarking ordinances that can always be immediately enforced. The police should be able to hand out barking tickets while they are on patrol or in our neighborhoods, just like they do with parking tickets.

St. Petersburg has a system for antibarking that usually doesn't work at all and, on those very rare occasions that it does bring about some result, it virtually never does so in a timely fashion.

For more info, see

Barbara Lynne Shelby, St. Petersburg from St. Petersburg Times Newspaper

Another peace advocate wrote: we have some horrible neighbors next to us that just don't seem to care about their dogs or the noise they make. We noticed if we yell at the dogs they would shut up for a while. Rather than going outside and yelling (especially at night when you're trying to sleep) I hacked this bottle opener with voice recording.  
I ouputted the speaker to an RCA jack so I could plug it into a stereo and the trigger to an Insteon Remote Switch ( - I use Insteon remotes for various lights around the house). Now, with the remote ( you can see in the picture, I can hit a button and it blasts my neighbors house from an outdoor speaker I have mounted in a tree that points at their house.

Have an electronics technician build a powerful audio amplifier which accepts the barking din via a microphone, but which introduces a small, adjustable time delay before playing it back through very powerful outdoor loudspeakers.
Adjusted carefully, this system could ..
(a) accept one woof then replay it before the dog utters the next, or
(b) accepts a train of woofs (eg the double bark, the triple bark, the quadruple bark, or more - and then plays the sequence back before the dog has got its breath back for its next outburst.
Of course the dog is going to wonder what the bloody hell is going on, but I reckon even a dog will soon get the point that if it makes no noise itself then that damned barking from your house stops too.
Dog barks - your speakers bark. Doggy quiet - your speakers stay quiet.

ultrasonic pest repeller
ultrasonic pest control
ultrasonic transducer
ultrasonic welding
ultrasonic fogger
ultrasonic flow meter
ultrasonic sensor
ultrasonic cleaners
ultrasonic scalers

ultrasonic plant stimulation

EXCERPT: "Your first (and main) problem will be obtaining an ultrasonic generator of suitable quality. Commercial generators are too expensive for most of us to buy simply to satisfy our curiosity, but you might be able to use one owned by a high school or college. Also, most TV repair shops keep an ultrasound generator on hand, even though they rarely need it. (If you try to strike a deal to borrow or rent a generator from one of these sources, be sure that the unit has an output of at least one-half watt.)

And there's yet another possible source of high-frequency sound. Have you seen advertisements for rodent-repelling machines? Such devices are simply frequency generators that supposedly scare away the varmints by flooding a room with high-intensity ultrasound. These devices could be just the ticket . . . except that they, too, are pretty pricey. Better ones cost up to $100, and the $20 models probably won't work for our purposes. If you already own a good-quality "rat ridder", though, it will serve well for your experiment.

If none of the above possibilities bear fruit, you can build your own ultrasonic generator. It's not a difficult electronics project, and the device can be assembled for under $20 from parts available at a local Radio Shack store. The schematic (Fig. 3) shows the layout; the only other thing you'll need is a 12-volt power supply. Either a battery eliminator or a car battery will work."

raccoon call, coon squaller

I now live next door to a 4 year old Schnoodle...named Harley. He used to be outside just periodically during the day, which was annoying enough, but he is not house trained at all and thus was made a full time yard dog last spring. So since then I've had to contend with a barking...a continuous, frenzied and shrill every time I stepped out of the door, which is the worst of all the noise around here both on the decible level and the length of time it continues on and on...

Is it possible for one be hypnotized to ignore all this noise?

Believe me, even though I despise the thought of my environment controlling me to this extent, I would move if I could because living here is awful. But unfortunately I can't move. Heck, at this point I'm even afraid to move for fear that I'll end up next to another irresponsible dog owner.

I joined this group in desperation after reading on about how noise affects your mental and physical health and realized that the appearance of a myriad of new "issues" (mental & physical) began shortly after Harley became a full time yard dog. But after reading some of the posts I'm not sure if there is really any way to stop the barking and thus regain my sanity, lower my chiropractor bills, possibly increase my life span, and lessen the number of xanax I'm taking...all due to the dog next door that barks at me from the time I step out of the door until 5 minutes after I'm back inside the house...who also starts barking at me when I drive into my driveway, and who also randomly barks at who knows what, day and least until I called them at 10:30 one night, on the verge of a conniption fit. There are no neighbors on the other side of them, just trees, otherwise I'm sure I'd have an ally.

Prior to that I'd suggested dog training a number of times, which of course never happened, and had also called them on several occasions to politely ask them to keep the dog quiet, which they did at the time...but only until the next day.

A few days after my late night call I called the police, who sent out someone from animal control, who had a "talk" with Harley's humans. We used to be good neighbors, but now they are mad at it's MY fault...which also adds to the stress.

In response to the one post I read about blasting the dog with a speaker every time it barks, I've considered parking my car as close as possible to the fence and blasting my car alarm when the dog barks, but I figured someone would call the police on me for disturbing the peace. HA! Not to mention I really don't want to add any more disturbances to the neighborhood, and as frazzled as I am from all this noise the sound of my own car alarm might drive me over the edge.

Heck, just the thought of being barked at is beginning to send me into an anxiety attack complete with heart palpitation and difficulty breathing.

I've contacted dog trainers because I was willing to pay for training (a little late, I know)...until it dawned on me that the humans also have to be trained or it won't take and I'd be wasting hundreds, maybe thousands of my favorite dollars which wouldn't lessen my stress at all. Two trainers suggested a shock collar, but I'm loathe to shock my poor dumb antagonist into submission, especially since I'm the one who would have to change the batteries and make sure the dog didn't suffer from shock abuse. Surely at the rate he barks he might suffer a great deal from being shocked too much.

Isn't it odd how I am suffering so much yet I don't want the dog, the cause of my suffering, to suffer?

Will I ever be able to work in my yard again? Or even just take the trash out? Or just even think about going outside? Will I ever be sane again or am I just doomed for the next 10 years...until Harley meets his natural demise?

Provoked to deadly violence by unwanted noise? SON OF SAM AND BARKING DOGS

Interesting posting, posing the question - can a person be driven to murderous violence by incessant noise? Read the following.

Most people don't realize that there was an interesting connection between David Berkowitz (the Son of Sam serial killer of the 1970s, in Brooklyn, New York) and barking dogs. Berkowitz chose the name "Son of Sam," after Sam Carr, a neighbor who had a barking dog.

It's possible that if Berkowitz's neighbors had kept their dogs from barking, the Son of Sam murders might never have happened.

Another point that is overlooked in the altered dimensions article is that one reason Berkowitz would roam the streets at night (committing arsons, attacks and homicides) is because Berkowitz was AWAKE and could not sleep, due to barking dogs. That is one of the few intelligent points made in the idiotic movie "How to Kill Your Neighbor's Dog" (2000 and Directed by Michael Kalesniko and starring Kenneth Branagh, Robin Wright Penn, and Suzi Hofrichter) where Branagh's character also takes to roaming the streets at night due to a neighbor's barking dog. Branagh's character is also suspected of criminal behavior, including a crime of violence (in Branagh's case, the suspicion is incorrect).

Remember, dogs are deliberately used by the government (and by sociopathic neighbors) as bona fide methods of torture and terror. It has real results. Yet many people believe complaints are silly when it is done by one neighbor to another, literally day in and day out, for years without end.

The following are excerpts from a web site named The complete web address is:


(In 1975) ... David Berkowitz indicated that his feelings at that time were of demons, harassing him through the CONTINUAL BARKING OF HIS NEIGHBORS' DOGS, who ordered him to initiate these dastardly deeds.

Quoted from Berkowitz: "I'd come home to Coligni Avenue like at six-thirty in the morning. It would begin then, the HOWLING. On my days off, I heard it all night, too. It made me scream. I used to scream out begging for the noise to stop. It never did. The demons never stopped. I couldn't sleep. I had no strength to fight. I could barely drive. Coming home from work one night, I almost killed myself in the car. I needed to sleep ... THE DEMONS WOULDN'T GIVE ME ANY PEACE."

Three months before the first murder, David moved to 35 Pine Street in Yonkers where he felt the demons followed him and continued their assault through the
incessant barking of the neighbor's dogs.

"When I moved in the Cassaras SEEMED VERY NICE AND QUIET. But they tricked me. They lied. I thought they were members of the human race. They weren't! Suddenly the Cassaras began to show up with the demons. THEY BEGAN TO HOWL and cry out. 'Blood and death!' They called out the names of the masters! The Blood Monster, John Wheaties, General Jack Cosmo."

At last, David Berkowitz broke and his killing rampage began (on July 29, 1976). Exhilarated by the attention he began receiving from the media, David experienced for the first time a sense of self respect. Finally, people were beginning to pay attention to the loner from the Bronx.

Cassara's and the Carrs Our story takes a strange turn on June 10, 1977. Jack Cassara from New Rochelle received an odd note in the mail from 'Carr in Yonkers'. Included with the letter was a picture of a German Shepherd dog. Dear Jack, I'm sorry to hear about that fall you took from the roof of your house. Just want to say 'I'm sorry' but I'm sure it won't be long until you feel much better, healthy, well and strong: Please be careful next time. Since your going to be confined for a long time, let us know if Nann needs anything. Sincerely: Sam and Francis

Jack had no idea who Sam and Francis Carr were so he looked them up and gave them a call. Sam and Francis too were intrigued by the letter and agreed to meet
with Jack and his son Stephen Cassara to discuss the event.

During the discussion and examination of the letter and picture, the CARRS told Jack that they had a SMALL DOG WHO WAS SHOT AND ALSO OF A GERMAN SHEPHERD THAT HAD ALSO BEEN SHOT IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. Stephen Cassara, Jack's 19 year old son, recollected that a strange guy, David Berkowitz, who had rented a room in their house in 1976, had a strange aversion to their dog. "He never came back for his two-hundred dollar

The New Rochelle and Yonkers police were notified. Nann Cassara, Jack's wife, drew the correct conclusion that David Berkowitz was the Son of Sam.

In an even stranger twist, one of the responding Yonkers officers remembered a deputy sheriff, Craig Glassman, was a neighbor of David Berkowitz's. The name's all came together because the officer recollected that Glassman had received an anonymous letter about a 'demon group' consisting of Glassman, the Cassaras, and the Carrs! Yonkers police reacted to this by pulling address and registration information on David Berkowitz. He drove a Ford Galaxy and they noted that his license was suspended ....


Another site contains this:

His neighbor's dog, a Labrador Retriever named Harvey, barked a lot, and it was driving Berkowitz crazy. The neighbor, Sam Carr, received an anonymous letter, asking him to stop the dog's incessant barking. When the barking continued, the killings began. According to Berkowitz, Harvey was a "demon dog", and when that dog barked it had meaning. Harvey, Berkowitz said, was barking out orders, telling him to murder young women. When police announced that several recent killings appeared to be the work of one crazed lunatic, the media went into a frenzy. For months, millions of New Yorkers eyed their neighbors with more suspicion than usual.

Berkowitz sent several cryptic messages to New York Daily News columnist Jimmy Breslin. Breslin published them, and newspaper sales skyrocketed. After killing a young couple who had been making out in a parked car in the wee hours of a spring morning, Berkowitz left a letter at the scene. It was personally addressed to Joseph Borrelli, the police detective investigating his crimes. In that letter, Berkowitz wrote, "I am a monster. I am the 'Son of Sam.'"

Sam Carr, meanwhile, had received a second unsigned letter about the barking dog:

"Now I know what kind of a person you are and what kind of a family you are. You are cruel and inconsiderate. You have no love for any other human beings. Your selfish, Mr. Carr. My life is destroyed now. I have nothing to lose anymore. I can see that there shall be no peace in my life or my families life until I end yours."

Carr tried to get police to investigate, but all they did was listen and shrug. Later, the dog was shot (and survived). Police investigated, but it never occurred to them there might be a connection between the letters to Carr and the letters to Borrelli and Breslin.

Life imprisonment for murder by dog owner etc over complaint re barking dog   Posted December 28, 2009 Satna, Dec 28: A local court here has sentenced 10 people to life imprisonment and fined them Rs 500 each on the charge of killing one person over an argument related to barking by a dog. According to prosecution, Anil Pathak and Kalawati had an argument over barking by her dog. Kalawati, her husband and a few other people attacked Anil over this matter and killed him on July 13, 2003. Additional Sessions Judge Vinay Kumar Pandey delivered the verdict on Saturday.

These are reminders of the Diane Whipple case. A neighbor could be the victim in any case like this. Can you imagine living next to people like this?

2-23-2010 Three pit-bull attacks cause death, mayhem? All three attacks involved dogs known to the victims. ... The first pit-bull attack of the weekend came at 4:28 pm Friday, when a 52-year-old woman was...

Girl, 3, killed in bulldog attack? - -

Dog shot to halt attack  By Kameel Stanley, Times Staff Writer Published Thursday, September 17, 2009

ST. PETERSBURG — Four years ago, Robert Jacks and his wife, Patricia Thiel, rescued a stray dog.

The Labrador-pit bullterrier mix was about 2 years old and had wandered onto the golf course where Jacks works. It was afraid of people. They couple figured it had been abused.

The two dog lovers named it Jake and worked to rehabilitate it. It became part of the family and often would sleep on the couple's bed.

But on Thursday afternoon, something went wrong.

Authorities say Jake fiercely attacked Thiel, a 39-year-old nurse at All Children's Hospital, shortly after 2 p.m., in their fenced-in back yard in Lakewood Estates.

A neighbor coming to Thiel's aid shot and killed the 100-pound dog.

When it was over, Thiel was in critical condition with wounds to her arms, head and neck. Doctors were in surgery late Thursday night working to save her right arm.

Her husband, the golf course superintendent at the St. Petersburg Country Club, spent the night at Tampa General Hospital, trying to fathom why Jake had turned on his wife.

"He was a sweet dog. We don't know what happened," the 43-year-old said. "I'm in shock. It's sad all the way around."

• • •

Joseph Wharton was in his home relaxing after work when he heard the screams.

Seconds later, his daughter burst through the door. A dog was attacking a woman outside, she said.

Then Wharton, a lawn service company owner, heard a neighbor screaming.

"Everybody was panicking. Then a lady yelled 'Doesn't anybody have a gun?' " he said. "That's when I knew it was serious."

The 48-year-old grabbed his 9mm Ruger and ran outside. He crossed the street to 2012 Bonita Way S and looked over the fence.

"He was right on top of the girl," he said. "She said, 'shoot him! Shoot him!' "

Wharton fired into the ground, but the dog just looked up at him and went right back to the attack, he said.

Wharton tried again, telling Thiel to move to the side.

Two shots later, Jake was dead.

Thiel was taken to Bayfront Medical Center and was transferred to Tampa General Hospital for emergency surgery on her right arm, which had the most damage.

"Her arm looked like something out of a zombie movie," said Wharton's 26-year-old son, Josh. "I saw so much blood on her I was afraid to touch her."

Wharton will not face charges, St. Petersburg police spokesman Bill Proffitt said.

• • •

Jacks, who returned home from a doctor's appointment just in time to see his wife being loaded into an ambulance, said he has no idea what could have made Jake snap.

He said his wife may have walked in on Jake fighting with the couple's other dogs and tried to get involved. Or maybe something else set the dog off.

The couple have four other dogs besides Jake. Two of them — both pit bulls — also were in the back yard, but police said they were not involved in the attack.

Pinellas County Animal Services impounded three dogs and Jake's body on Thursday. A fifth dog, which Jacks said was a small hound he'd recently rescued, ran off in the commotion and had not been found by late Thursday night.

Animal Services will keep the dogs for now as it investigates, officials said Thursday.

Jacks said he hopes authorities will have compassion and eventually return the couple's other dogs.

"It was a freak thing. Jake was the one who attacked, and Jake paid the price," he said. "I'm just hoping for the best for Patty."

There are two definitions of the phrase "drug dogs":

1) Dogs used by police to sniff drugs and arrest people for recreational non-violent activity between consenting adults and;

2) Vicious, loud, obnoxious, threatening, barking dogs used by drug dealers to threaten violence against non-consenting adults (those victims are often people who live near the drug dealer).

There have been many examples of drug dealers using dogs to protect themselves.  Many are convicted felons who have had their 2nd amendment rights removed due to their supposed potential for violence. They use dogs as substitutes for guns (on a similar topic see the Diane Whipple case).

(*amend/edit letter as appropriate)

Your Name and Address:

Current Date:

Copies to: (Relevant people, e.g. neighbour’s landlord)
Neighbour’s Name & Address
(or source of problem)

Dear ………..

I (we) are writing to you over the concerns we have for the noise/disturbances (*amend as appropriate)  that is coming from your property, ………. (their address). We have spoken/haven’t spoken (*amend as appropriate) on a number of different occasions, for example (list dates) / yet as we have not had the opportunity (*amend as appropriate) and would like to give you some examples of your noise/disturbance/behaviour that is specifically disturbing us/me and preventing us/me from enjoying my own home.

These include:

•    Specific ‘bullet-list’ of example(s) of noise, disturbance, activity, etc – be sure to give as much detail as you feel is necessary with the times and how long it went on for. Be sure to say how it affected you (this is very important – e.g. you may have been unable to sleep, watch TV, it may have made you feel ill, drained or exhausted, etc).

* Optional:
Your ongoing noise is preventing us from enjoying our house and it also prevents us from welcoming visitors to our home – as your noise is very embarrassing and disturbing to them as well as to us.

We do not wish to prevent you from enjoying your house/property, as we hope you don’t wish to prevent us from enjoying our property. We both/I feel we have been (a) patient, very tolerant, polite and well-mannered neighbour(s) to you (both) since we have been neighbours. (*amend and edit as appropriate)

Unfortunately, we/I have both reached the point where we cannot tolerate any more noise-levels/disturbance as we have outlined above, for the detrimental reasons to us both/me that we/I have mentioned in this letter and the effects this is having on our/my health and well-being.  (*amend as appropriate) 

We are/I am asking that you return the favour by addressing the noise problems we/I have outlined to you here. We/I both hope we can come to an amicable and friendly agreement and arrangement with you/you both/your family, to stop these noise problems and prevent them from re-occurring in the future.

Yours Sincerely,
Your Name

Bad Dogs terrorize humans. Nuisance Training, Animal Behaviorist Dr. Rex Curry

Barking mad at neighbor's Chihuahuas
N.Y. woman sues for $500,000, but she should have asked for more,0,181877.column
Kevin Cowherd     March 8, 2009

A New York City woman files a $500,000 lawsuit that claims her neighbor's yappy dogs are driving her nuts, and your first thought is: Wow, way to overreact.

Then you find out the yappy dogs are Chihuahuas.

Your next thought is: Oh, she should sue for way more than that.

She should sue for 2 or 3 mil, easy. Maybe even more if she can prove lasting damage to her emotional well-being.

That should be a piece of cake when you live above two Chihuahuas.

Maybe you read about the plight of lawyer Paulette Taylor, 62, who lives in an apartment on the Upper West Side. Her recent lawsuit against neighbor Thomas Henderson claims his two Chihuahuas "bark in a manner that is offensive, constant, continuous and incessant."

This, of course, is simply everyday activity for a Chihuahua.

Dogs are bred for various qualities. Beagles were bred to pursue hare by the Norman French. Boxers were bred for bull-baiting and boar-hunting. Shih Tzus were bred as amiable companions for Chinese emperors.

Chihuahuas were bred to be annoying, and the breed has held true to that legacy for centuries.

Some historians have speculated that Chihuahuas were held sacred by the ancient Incas and Aztecs. But the idea that they would worship a jittery little dog with rodent features and bug eyes seems preposterous, given what we know about those once-great cultures.

Taylor claims in the lawsuit that Henderson's Chihuahuas have her so stressed she can't sleep, and that the lack of sleep is making her chronic back pain even worse.

She adds that her neighbor "may even be guilty of inciting his dogs to bark."

This, of course, is the only frivolous passage in the lawsuit. I say this because you don't have to incite a Chihuahua to bark. Are you kidding? A Chihuahua's default position is to yap, yap, yap day and night.

Oh, I'm told they sometimes shut up to take food and drink and slam themselves against screen doors. And there is evidence that all that yapping sometimes drives them to the point of exhaustion, after which they will collapse into sleep.

But they sleep only in brief, fitful intervals, probably to rest their vocal chords so they can gear up for another continuous 17 or 18 hours of yapping the next day.

In any event, Taylor has had it with all the yapping, stating in the suit that it's causing her "emotional and physical distress."

She's suing Henderson, the building's management company and the building's owners.

Of course, it looks like a slam-dunk for her with Chihuahuas being involved, since judges and juries everywhere are familiar with how irritating the breed can be.

"We're asking for a restraining order against the dogs, or some sort of soundproofing" of Henderson's apartment, Taylor's lawyer told the New York Post.

All I can say is good luck with the sound-proofing idea.

The fact is a Chihuahua's yapping is so loud and shrill that conventional sound-proofing measures are doomed to fail. In order not to hear the yapping, you would have to put the dog in a padded underground dungeon, such as the one used by the serial killer in Silence of the Lambs, or a high-tech acoustical chamber like they have at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va.

I spent a summer working at the beach years ago and lived four doors down from a woman with a Chihuahua. This thing would start yapping at the crack of dawn. The woman would then close all her windows and turn on the air conditioning, and you could still hear the mutt from two blocks away.

Remember, this was only one Chihuahua. If it had been two Chihuahuas yapping in stereo, as is being alleged by Taylor, an angry mob would have descended on the woman's house and forced her out. I would have been holding one of the torches, too.

So good luck with your lawsuit, Ms. Taylor.

Actually, you won't need luck.

Play a tape of that yapping in court, and you're an absolute lock to win.

Copyright © 2009, The Baltimore Sun

Virginia law and City of Richmond ordinances, do not require that any more than one person need to complain before chronic dog noise can be officially determined to be a Public Nuisiance, other than that one person be living outside of the property where the dog resides.

The following 2003 appellate court ruling makes this clear, in a case where the appellate court upheld the trial court's ruling against the person harboring the dogs. The appellant hired a 'sharp lawyer' who tried to use other court cases to prove that at least 4 different people needed to officially complain before it could become a Public Nuisance, but the court ruled that one complaint was sufficient, that Public Nuisance means that the nuisance is occurring outside of the property in question, not that it needs to impact the 'public' in the sense of it being 'widespread'.

The trial court judge imposed a 2 year jail sentence, and was kind enough to suspend the sentence if the defendant would abate the problem.


'Murphy, 239 Va. at 355, 389 S.E.2d at 463. In drawing a distinction between the two types of nuisance, the Supreme Court described a private nuisance as "one which implicates or interferes with a right or interest that is unique to an individual, such as an interest in land." Id. Conversely, the Supreme Court noted, "'[i]f the annoyance is one that is common to the public generally, then it is a public nuisance. The test is not the number of persons annoyed, but the possibility of annoyance to the public by the invasion of its rights. A public nuisance is one that injures the citizens generally who may be so circumstanced as to come within its influence.'"'
'On appeal, Patterson contends the evidence presented at trial was insufficient, as a matter of law, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the barking of her dogs constituted a public, rather than private, nuisance, in violation of Richmond City Code  4-63, because the City presented testimony of only two households that were adversely affected by the alleged nuisance. Relying on White v. Town of Culpeper, 172 Va. 630, 1 S.E.2d 269 (1939), Patterson argues that "the City must prove that Patterson maintained a public nuisance through the testimony of more than four persons." Thus, Patterson concludes, the trial court erred in finding the City's evidence sufficient to sustain her conviction. We disagree.'
'Patterson was convicted of violating Richmond City Code  4-63. That code section provides, in pertinent part, that "[n]o owner shall fail to exercise proper care and control of a dog or cat to prevent it from becoming a public nuisance." Richmond City Code  4-63(a). Richmond City Code  4-1 provides, in pertinent part, that "[p]ublic nuisance means, for purposes of [Chapter 4 of the Richmond City Code, entitled "Animal Control"], any dog or cat that . . . barks, whines,
howls, or makes other annoying noises in an excessive, continuous, or untimely fashion." Richmond City Code  4-38 provides that "[i]t shall be unlawful for any person to violate or fail, refuse or neglect to comply with any provision of this chapter, and except as otherwise provided in any section of this chapter, upon conviction thereof, such person shall be punished for a Class 4 misdemeanor." None of these code sections require that a certain number of people be affected by the barking, whining, howling, or other "annoying" noise of a dog or cat for there to be a violation.'
'Applying this reasoning to the present case, we conclude the City was not required to prove that a particular number of people were actually affected by the barking of Patterson's dogs for that barking to constitute a public nuisance under Richmond City Code  4-63. Like the subject ordinance in Murphy, the instant ordinance, as applied here, is a noise ordinance. It requires, among other things, that dog owners properly control their dogs to prevent them from barking "in an excessive, continuous, or untimely fashion." Richmond City Code  4-1; Richmond City Code  4-63. Plainly, the "right not to be subjected to" such barking is common to the public generally and not unique to "individuals in the enjoyment of their property."
Murphy, 239 Va. at 356, 389 S.E.2d at 464. Hence, the barking of dogs "in an excessive, continuous, or untimely fashion" is a public nuisance.'


http://library7. municode. com/default- test/home. htm?infobase= 19947&doc_ action=whatsnew

http://www.1stcoa. courts.state. HTMLOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 78656

http://www.3rdcoa. courts.state. pdfOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 15014

http://www.7thcoa. courts.state. HTMLOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 11162

http://www.9thcoa. courts.state. HTMLOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 9119

http://www.10thcoa. courts.state. HTMLOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 9576

http://www.11thcoa. courts.state. HTMLOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 9114

http://www.12thcoa. courts.state. HTMLOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 6695

http://www.14thcoa. courts.state. HTMLOpinion. asp?OpinionID= 85369

Rex barking dog alarm

Rex Plus! The Barking Dog Alarm


Police say a barking dog is an excellent way to deter burglars and this one never needs food, water, or to be taken for a walk. Rex is the ideal watchdog because he does what even the best living and breathing watchdog can't do (without some of the annoying problems that go with owning a dog). With his electronic radar eyes, Rex can "see" through thick doors, walls, and glass. And once his cord is plugged into any standard 110 VAC electrical outlet, he'll stay on duty around the clock, indefinitely. Rex can protect homes, apartments, mobile homes, RVs, jewelry stores, hotels, factories, warehouses, public and private buildings of virtually every kind. 

Choose any location indoors where you want to detect movement such as hidden behind the front door. Turn Rex on and he begins detecting. When movement is detected, Rex Plus will alert you with the sounds you have chosen. 

Rex Plus is the electronic watchdog that never sleeps! He will bark angrily as an intruder approaches or play soothing sounds of the rainforest to alert you to a visitor! Choose from four settings: continual tranquil sounds of the rainforest, alert sound of an angry and protective watchdog, soothing sounds to alert you of a guest's arrival, and alert sounds of both the angry watchdog and a warning siren.

Switch from watchdog mode to tranquil sounds of nature with a simple adjustment button. 
Sense movement through walls, doors, and glass to alert you of a visitor's arrival. 
Very Realistic - barking gets louder and more frequent as intruder gets closer. 
Variable distance sensitivity (up to 30') as well as volume control. 
Protection with none of the problems of owning a real dog. 
Perfect for all public and private buildings. 
Plugs into any standard electrical outlet. 
Reliable 24 hour protection. 
No installation required. 
Maintenance free. 
sniffer dogs, police dogs, drugs dogs, behaviorist, narco dogs, drug detection dogs, bomb dogs, explosives dogs, narcotics dogs, Consent or we will kill this dog.

Drug dogs are natural libertarians with no interest in the "War on Drugs" and they have to be constantly taught to detect drug odors and approach peaceful humans and search them, so that humans can be arrested, handcuffed and imprisoned for decades under modern prohibition. That is not an easy trick to teach a dog. It's easier to teach humans. See the article from the Montana News Association

EXPERTS ON DRUG DOGS attorneys nationwide contact this site to use them in other cases.

Help liberate dogs from modern prohibition and fund
the behaviorist Dr. Rex Curry and his research about "drug dogs" and their indoctrination / brainwashing.              

Nazi Police State
Police State USA Nazism

Learn more about the USA's growing police state


The government tried to overturn a victory against sniffer dogs.
The U.S. Supreme Court denied the government's petition on Oct. 31, 2005.
Docket information is at
Afterward, the government unsuccessfully appealed to Florida's Supreme Court to overturn the victory.

Florida's Attorney General fought against Florida v. Matheson and its requirement that narcotic K-9s must be continually trained and tested under higher standards or they cannot be used to search people and cars.
The Florida court decisions are at (3-3-05) and the very libertarian decision (the appellate case below) at argued the original motion to suppress for Matheson.

Narco dogs are used as ruses against humans, to violate constitutional rights against searches and seizures.  Here's how -

* Some cops ask to search cars for no reason at all during routine traffic stops. They ask to search because they know that most victims do not know that drivers can "just say no" (most drivers are know-nothings about constitutional rights). Drivers who do know are often too meek to "just say no." It is unknown how often cops ask for consent to search and how often consent is given under duress or ignorance. Drivers who do not complain roadside will not complain, learn or litigate later.

* If drivers say "no," then some cops tell drivers that an ordeal is inevitable because the cop radioed for a canine and it is coming to the scene. That warning is often a lie to induce consent. There is no police dog on the way.

* If a dog is or is not "on the way," some cops add additional lies to make drivers think that there will be a long wait and that the driver must stay until a dog arrives. Cops rely on driver ignorance of the fact that evidence will be suppressed if drivers are detained longer than it takes to complete the traffic stop (e.g. write the ticket). Drivers are induced to consent to search to avoid a long wait based on lies.

 * If a dog is en route, some cops let drivers think that they are obliged to stay even when the cop has no reason to detain drivers any longer. Cop's rationalize that drivers inexplicably loiter roadside with cops, or that drivers enjoy waiting for dog sniffs. Cops take advantage of drivers who are too stupid (or too meek) to ask if they are free to go, so that drivers "consent" to unwarranted detention by not leaving.

* Cops lie about how long it takes to write tickets or to obtain a radio response on tag inquiry. If a dog is actually en route, then some cops write tickets very slowly, until the dog arrives.

* When cops need consent, and drivers say "no," then there is no basis to search. Without consent, cops need "probable cause" to search. Cops can create cause by claiming that canines alerted, even if there are no alerts, or canines can be cued. A search is forced against the driver's will. In January 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Illinois vs. Caballes that a dog sniff during a traffic stop was not a "search." Caballes and similar cases turn canines into props for lies. When dogs are used as props for lies, it doesn't matter whether dogs are well-trained.

* If a dog alerts and nothing is found, then cops will never record that as an error. If cross-examined later, they will testify that the dog detected lingering odors of contraband that were recently present. Cops will testify that dogs never make mistakes, never have and never will, and that apparent errors are skillful detections of lingering (residual) odors of contraband. No one can question a dog about whether the cop is lying or mistaken, and it is usually a waste of time to ask a cop the same types of questions.

* Many errors by drug dogs cause lawyers to wonder if police carry drugs to plant scents so that drug dogs will alert. Some news items support such speculation in cases where drugs have been planted by police.   Drug laws are wrong in the first place, and in the second place drug laws cause more wrongdoing by government during enforcement.

Government's attitude toward your liberty is like a dog at a fire hydrant.
Police-state tactics were witnessed worldwide via videotape from Goose Creek High School in South Carolina, where children were forced to the floor in handcuffs and terrorized by dogs and cops with guns drawn.
Drugs Goose Creek rexcurrydotnet
Nothing was found.

Stratford High School, Goose Creek High School Raid Drug Dogs
Don't Howl Hitler: Stop the USA's growing Police State

Stratford High School, Goose Creek High School Raid Drug Dogs
Bad dogs?

In other schools, classes have been interrupted and the children were marched out and lined up to be harassed by a dog.

The Caballes case foreshadows more police-state possibilities: Uniformed law enforcement marching through neighborhoods with German shepherds on leashes sniffing anything and everything -every car parked on or near the street, the air emanating from homes, neighbors walking outside. Imagine the same thing at any place of business or employment, and police marching German shepherds through parking lots, car to car, for no reason other than fishing expeditions. Imagine the same nightmare in any shopping area or a downtown street area, a festival, a bar's parking lot, with uniformed agents with German shepherds sniffing pedestrians and their bags and cars and anything, and stopping anyone on an alleged alert and going through their purses, persons, cars, etc, right there on the street.

Drug dogs are like humans in that they must be taught to approach peaceful people and search them, so that humans can be arrested, handcuffed and imprisoned for decades under modern prohibition. That is not an easy trick to teach a dog. It is easier to teach humans.

It is a wonder why the kids weren't instructed to robotically chant the Pledge of Allegiance during the ordeals (and with the Pledge's original straight-arm salute).  A breed that is used often as drug dogs is the German Sheppard. The police state resembles the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazis).

As an attorney, I am often consulted by people victimized in searches by dogs trained to smell drugs. A drug dog's skills are often overestimated because people anthropomorphize dogs. A humanlike quality that dogs have is that they are natural libertarians with no interest in the war on drugs.

I am the attorney who argued the original motion to suppress in Florida v. Gary Alan Matheson, that curbed drug dogs in Florida.

Matheson's case included oral argument before Florida's Supreme Court and the public has a rare opportunity to view a video of the justices' questions and the arguments linked at

The Matheson case points out the lack of credibility of drug dogs and their employers.

No one can question a dog about whether the cop is lying or mistaken, and it is usually a waste of time to ask a cop the same types of questions.

Drug dogs are like humans in that they must be taught to approach peaceful people and search them, so that humans can be arrested, handcuffed and imprisoned for decades under modern prohibition. That is not an easy trick to teach a dog. It's easier to teach humans.

All drug dogs are "playing a game," as are some humans who support modern prohibition. The dogs are taught using dog toys. The toys are hidden with drugs to trick the dog into a game of searching for its toy by associating it with drug odors. Many errors can happen. There is always the danger that the dog will alert on anything that resembles or smells like its toy (towels, tennis balls, car carpet, etc.).

Cabelles holds that cops can take dogs fishing.  Caballes involved a "legitimate" traffic stop for speeding (that turned into 12 years for pot).  Dog-fishing in parking lots or on sidewalks should still be opposed.  Random drug checkpoints have already been found unconstitutional by the Court.

Here are the totalitarian police-state possibilities that the U.S. Supreme Court opened up: Imagine uniformed law enforcement marching through your neighborhood with German Shepards on leashes sniffing anything and everything -your car and every car parked on the street, the air emanating from your home, you walking outside.  Imagine the same thing at your place of business or where you work, police marching German Shepards through the parking lot, car to car, for no reason other than a fishing expedition and entering any vehicle where there is an alleged alert.  Imagine the same thing in any shopping area or a downtown street area, a festival, a bar's parking lot, uniformed agents with German Shepards sniffing pedestrians and their bags and cars and anything and stopping anyone on an alleged alert and going through their purses, persons, cars, etc, right there.

Dogs are used for human lies. Police cannot search a car without probable cause or consent, and an easy way to claim probable cause is to claim that a dog alerted.  It doesn't matter whether a dog is accurate.  The dog is just present as cover-up to testalie in court. Dogs are perfect pets for perjury.  If contraband is found then the arrest will probably stand.   If nothing is found, the driver leaves shaken, but I know of no case where the driver even complained or sued.

Drug dogs turn simple traffic stops into fishing expeditions for drug busts. Driver's are asked for consent to search without any suspicion at all.  When drivers refuse consent, an officer threatens to bring a dog in order to intimidate drivers into consenting to avoid a wait.  Persistent refusal prompts cops to radio for a dog, and then claim that the dog alerted.

Any case that lacks a videotape of a dog's actions on the scene should result in  rejection of testimony that the dog alerted, or did so without cueing.

Drugs dogs often bark up the wrong tree. Motions to suppress should argue that the dog's training and history show false positives and problems that make the dog unreliable for searches. In Cabelles, Justices Souter and Ginsburg dissented, pointing to studies showing that drug dogs frequently return false positives (12.5-60% of the time, according to one study).  

Moreso than in humans, the libertarianism of drug-dogs always resurfaces, and must be suppressed constantly by law enforcement retraining. Without constant retraining the dogs lose interest and stop performing accurately. Record-keeping is a must to know whether dogs are guessing, or seeing cues. Only with record keeping and independent testing can any judge draw any conclusion from the dogs game playing out on the street.

Dogs approximate humans in that they go along with the system to avoid disapproval from peers (teachers, school students, friends, etc., in the case of humans). Drug dogs do not want disapproval from their police handlers. Dogs play the game, and will try to guess and read cues, because they are searching for approval, not for drugs.

Dogs match humans in that if you influence them enough they will do anything -- like passing the 18th amendment. In the dogged pursuit of modern prohibition, some dogs are slow learners as are some humans.  The government's war on drugs is a dog chasing its own tail.

Let's liberate drug dogs. Return them to protecting people from violence and theft, which is also the only proper purpose of law enforcement. Dogs should be man's best friend, not man's persecutor. Drug dogs are natural libertarians.

Rex Curry Attorney at Law in Tampa, FL. He can be reached via email at:
lawyer (at)

The oldest living medical marijuana patient (OLMMP) said: "Rex, thanks for your work against drug dogs.  I was in the airport recently and a dog sniffed my bag and walked away. I called to the handler and asked if the dog was trained for bombs or drugs, and the handler said 'for drugs.'  So I told him to bring the dog back because I had marijuana in my bag." phoned OLMMP, but only reached his voicemail.  OLMMP called back and said "I am sorry that I missed your call. I had stepped outside to take my medicine."

PLAYBOY MAGAZINE: Professor Curry made Playboy without taking his clothes off

The Drug Sense Weekly interview
The History News Network

and see many cases here

Are drug dogs used to plant drugs and to frame people? Some evidence suggests that is the case.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that sniffer dogs at traffic stops do not violate the 4th amendment, per se.  There is still room for attacking the credibility of the dogs and their handlers.

Florida's 4th District Court of Appeal (DCA) and the 5th DCA have certified conflict to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the Matheson issue.

Drug dog alert cannot be used to get warrant for a home?  More leashes for drug dogs. The police may not use a drug dog alert outside the defendant's home to obtain probable cause for a warrant to search the home, the Fourth DCA ruled February 15, 2006. State v. Rabb, ___ So. 2d ___, 31 F.L.W. D510 (4th DCA 2/15/2006). The case can be viewed at or under the "opinions" section at and then looking under the 2/15/06 opinion date, or try an internet search for the case name.  The earlier Raab case was at  State v. Rabb 4th DCA 09/14/05  
As of 4-25-06 the Rabb case SC06-417 was still active at Florida's Supreme Court at

State v. Laveroni  4th DCA 30 Fla. L. Weekly D2173 new dog case

State v. Coleman 5th DCA 09/30/05 aligns w 4th DCA

Missing dog records drop charges?
U.S. District Court suppresses evidence in a dog gone case


If you don't consent to search, we'll kill this dog

The Sheriff said "I'll kill myself if you don't waive your rights"
I'll kill myself if you don't waive your rights sheriff
The Sheriff said "I'll kill myself if you don't waive your rights"

Free the Drug Dogs!

by Keith Halderman

An old friend of mine attorney Rex Curry, who was one of the first libertarians I ever met and who helped transform much of my thinking, developed a case that may be headed to the Supreme Court. Florida v. Matheson, which he won, involves a challenge to the veracity of drug dogs searches. The state of Florida is appealing and the issue is on the high court's docket. 

The September 16th issue of the online journal DrugSense Weekly has an interview with Mr. Curry in which they ask him, "Given the problems with drug dogs explored at your website (see link above), why do you think they are so popular with police departments and municipal government?”

He replies “Oh that is easy. You have to remember that there is a strong incentive for law enforcement not to CARE whether the dogs are accurate. The dogs can simply be props for lies, in that the dogs are there to overcome refusals to consent to search, and the dog provides law enforcement officers (LEOs) with the ability to say that an alert occurred even if there was no alert. And here is another angle: some LEOs do not want a "drug dog," they want a "car dog," in that they want a dog that when shown a car will alert, as if to say "yes that is a car." For some LEOs the goal is to search whenever the LEO desires, period. The dog is simply a ruse to do so. That is why the dogs are so popular. Do not be confused with the idea that there are "problems with drug dogs." For some LEOs those are not problems at all. And again, that is why some LEOs have no interest in maintaining records about their dogs."


You made Playboy without taking your clothes off. The Matheson case is one of your best. I am still getting calls about your case.
- Doc C, Texas.

police dogs drug dogs, sniffer dogs, narco dogs, bomb dogs, explosives dogs, drug detection dogs I dare you to search my car !!!

This page (and below) is a collection of resources for lawyers dealing with drug dogs.  Please send in any motions, appeal decisions, tips, etc., to
lawyer  AT and an effort will be made to post them here.

Rex. I have just visited your website and would like to congratulate you on what is very clear your shear hard work. I myself am a dedicated Security and Drug detection dog handler investing thousands of pounds in training. In addition I am company director of Watchdogs Ltd and am concerned about the level of  training handlers have not completed. In addition within the UK we are about to come under Licensing which many of us have been waiting for for a long time. There is no requirement for a drug dog handler to have a licence so the handlers working security dogs who know they won't be able to get a licence are now trans-shipping to drug dog handling. Having said that I do feel a stop will be put to this soon. Keep in touch. Phil H., Director Watchdogs Ltd, Member of NASDU NTIPDU BPSCA BIPDT JSIC.

A fan of writes (dated March 24, 2005): In Florida, the Pinellas County Sheriff's department is currently expanding its sniffer dogs from 30 to 90. A new building is being built just south of Pinellas Park to house them. All german shepherds but not all drug dogs, and note also that our population is expanding rapidly here, with lots of tourists and people moving in and out.

Another fan writes: I actually discovered a vacant lot where some dog-cops were meeting and I saw them signal training the dogs to "GO OFF" on cue with very slight hand motions. Then I saw them walk dogs around a COP car they used (this shows it will work in any situation) and when the cop made this little twitch with one finger extended, the dog would bight at the door handle and tires and stand on its back legs and bark at the windows etc...

MOTION TO SUPPRESS DRUG DOG SEARCH - this is the initial motion that started the path to victory.

MOTION TO SUPPRESS 2 THE SEQUEL - more details & humor. How government fornicates the canine.

THE EXPERTS USED RE: DRUG DOGS - attorneys nationwide contact me to use them in other cases.

APPEAL CURBS DRUG SNIFFING DOGS - this is the appellate decision curbing drug dogs.  It is presently awaiting decision after having oral argument before the Florida Supreme Court on January 12, 2005.

MORE ON DRUG DOGS - this is how drug dogs can be used in ruses to violate the constitutional rights of humans.

DRUG DOGS ARE LIBERTARIANS - they require constant indoctrination to change them.

NEWSPAPER EDITORIAL - Click here for a favorable newspaper editorial.

NEWSPAPER ARTICLE - Click here for a news story on the opinion.

EDITORIAL CARTOON - Click here for an editorial cartoon.

INNOCENT MAN FREED - after 22 years in prison, by discrediting drug dog.

Pigs use dogs to fish for humans.

narcotics dogs, sniffer dogs, drug dogs, police dogs, narco dogs, drug detection dogs, bomb dogs, explosives dogs, Rex the Wonder Dog !!!

The USA needs
Rex the Wonder Dog !!!

Rx means Rex.
Rx means Rex. The prescription is liberty, and freedom is the pill. Liberty lets everyone live like a king.  Repeal modern prohibition. GET HIGH ON FREEDOM.  

Drug dogs are often used as ruses to violate the constitutional rights of humans. In the war on drugs, the government lies like a dog.  

A dog is man's best friend.  He should not be man's worst enemy.

Many drug dogs are so inaccurate that they could be replaced with the "drug coin." Flip it and heads means that there is an alert and probable cause to search.  Tails means there is no alert, and no probable cause, but a search occurs anyway.

From Reuters: A San Diego arena was evacuated for about two hours, delaying a first-round game in the hugely popular national college basketball championship, after a hot dog cart attracted the attention of a bomb-sniffing dog. Thousands of fans arriving for a game between Marquette University and the University of Alabama were kept outside. Authorities cordoned off part of the building. It was meat and not explosive heat attracting the dog's attention.

A dog expert writes: "Thanks Rex. As a professional dog trainer you did our profession a great favor. Maybe we can get rid of the B.S. trainers and the monkey see monkey do method to training, and apply the science behind it." 

Learn more about search issues and how to say "NO!" to searches.

Dear Mr Curry,  I wonder if I could please ask for some help?
    We are a children’s civil rights organisation based in the UK. As you are probably aware, there has been a rise in the use of drugs sniffer dogs here. In some schools, dogs are taken in to perform routine searches, and it is now commonplace in London to have dogs posted at the exits to London underground trains.
    While we have been concerned about the use of dogs, and had objected on various civil liberties grounds, we had naively assumed that dogs were pretty accurate! We’ve found out the hard way that this isn’t true: two of our (non-drug-using) teenaged members have now been stopped by dogs at stations, and then searched. They were both pretty upset by the experience.
    We want to find all the research possible about the accuracy of sniffer dogs, and intend to bring out a report to publicise what is going on. – quite honestly, we are more likely to stop the practice of going into schools with dogs in this way, rather than by arguing civil liberties (not a major concern of the British public!)
    Are you able to point me in the direction of research into the accuracy of sniffer-dog detection + the rate of false positives? I’d be very grateful if you could.
Best Wishes,  Terri Dowty, Director, Action on Rights for Children

REPLY: Please do not be fooled by the accuracy of sniffer-dogs because the dogs are used as props for lies, regardless of any actual accuracy.   Law enforcement claims that the dogs alert when the dogs do not alert, and law enforcement will knowingly use dogs that will alert on anything, nothing, or on cue.
    The description of the police-state in the U.K. (from your comments) is similar to the U.S.'s police state.  Please distribute the video link below to see police-state tactics in the U.S. that were witnessed worldwide via videotape from Goose Creek High School in South Carolina, where children were forced to the floor in handcuffs and terrorized by dogs and cops with guns drawn.
    Other images of domestic terrorism in the U.S. are found in a google image search for the following words: Goose Creek raid
    As a leading authority on "sniffer-dogs" in the U.S., I fear that similar behavior is in store for the U.K. if it has not already happened near you.  Please let me know.
    For more on the U.S.'s police state see
    As to any accuracy of drug dogs you can research Mr. Myers, who is referenced at this link
    and you can consult other experts linked at
Please keep me posted on your work.
Thank you   Rex Curry  Attorney At Law

A now-retired appellate judge once said that school students would come up to him from time to time and say that they planned to go to law school so that they could defend the Constitution. "Don't go to law school," he said he told them. "If you want to defend the Constitution, the best thing you can do is to go to D.C., become a cop, and roust supreme court judges for no particular reason."  Of course, anyone anywhere could defend the Constitution by becoming a police officer and harassing state or federal judges all over the USA.

Another lawyer said: A judge in my local county was stopped for speeding and was treated like dirt by the cop.  That's one judge who woke up.
Pledge of Allegiance in FRIGHTENING photos
and more photos and articles at
For fascinating information about symbolism see 
Fan Mail


Dog training is similar to Human training. Police State USA Pledge of Allegiance


Edward Bellamy and Francis Bellamy promoted their dogma that they called "Military Socialism." They admired the "efficiency" of the military method and wanted it imposed upon all of society for all food, clothing, shelter, goods, services, everything. They advocated the government takeover of all schools in order to force everyone to be the same and to create their "Industrial Army." That is why the federal flag flies over government schools (socialist schools). They inspired trite propaganda in which every "problem" spirals into a war: the War on Drugs, the War on Poverty, the War on Crime, the War on Illiteracy, the War on Terrorism, et cetera. They inspired the non-trite and very real use of government force and violence for any and all purposes. Today, the USA's military-socialist complex and its aggressive military socialism is the Bellamy dogma.

POLICE STATE USA Swastika, Industrial Army

Rex Curry blog spot

Pledge of Allegiance blog spot

Pledge Allegiance blog spot
Click Here to Pay Learn More