RESCUE HELPERS UNITE

[staffylover]

to being miffed at being threatened and having my account closed?

My son fostered a dog through the above, they are a collection of volunteers who help rehome, mainly dogs, but cats and small furries as well. Without informing RHU he rehomed the dog, which is a big no-no...I bollocked him and the rescue got the dog back. People connected to the rescue, NOT RHU, threatened to castrate my son and send animal rights "friends" to see him. My son is an animal lover and at no time abused, harmed or in any way neglected this lovely dog and in the few days he had the dog he bought the dog a new crate new toys and turned her around from being a manic dog to one that was good with other dogs, walked good on the lead/off the lead and knew her basic commands. I loved doing things for the animals for no return. When this rescue got the dog back they told the woman that she had bitten a child, untrue, but on its website it says it is good with children? Any advice?

tallyb good advice and I wish I had the guts to go but Im afraid it will inflame the situation if they go and interview these people. I can give names and RHU have these names........BUT THE THREAT OF ANIMAL RIGHTS PEOPLE VISITING MY SON SCARES THE WOTSIT OUT OF ME. Anyone who abuses animals in anyway should rot in hell but the dog wasnt harmed, abused or neglected in anyway. As far as I know the dog is with the rescue and up for adoption

"...the dog wasn`t harmed, abused or neglected in anyway"

What? So offering a dog as free to the first taker on Gumtree and without a homecheck when the whole purpose of rescue back-up and RHU is to prevent such potentially dangerous and cruel practices isn't neglect?

Because it damn well is where I come from.

That the dog wasn't harmed or abused by the person your son gave her to is only a matter of bloody good luck. I can understand entirely why those who allegedly threatened your son are so angry. This is not least because, as I learned this morning, your son initially wasn't willing to be forthcoming about the dog's whereabouts.

IMO that you cannot see that your son's behaviour was neglectful is reason enough to ban you from the RHU forum. To be brutally honest and speaking as a rescuer and a member of RHU I wouldn't knowingly work with people who hold your attitude and wouldn't want to be associated with a rescue forum which knowingly has members who do either.

vallhala please remember things I`ve posted before. This was the second person he had seen and we were TOLD he could do the homecheck.

Yes he was initially reluctant, would you surrender someone elses details to some one who has threatened violence? and it certainly isnt allegedly

I dont know how many times I have to state this but what he did was bad and I have admitted this oh so many times. Im confused with your statement about my attitude??? Your still a member? and you knowingly work with people who threaten violence AND condone violence because as far as I`m aware these angry people are still able to use RHU

As I have posted before I tried to post on RHU about this but as my account was subject to my posts being scrutinised before being allowed on the forum, it wasnt put on?</strong> It did not name the rescues/individuals as RHU know these details.

Tell us what sort of a home and to what sort of family your son gave this dog?

valhalla You obviously have the details. Single lady in a block of flats. On the rescues website it does state they will rehome to people living in flats....and it was not a bedsit Are they/you going to address the threats. Would you surrender someones details to that sort of person Please answer as I am.

People connected to the rescue, NOT RHU, threatened to castrate my son and send animal rights "friends" to see him

can you and your angry friends justify that?

This is super bizarre.

One minute you won't name the rescue the next I'm supposed to have the details.

I was asking YOU for the details as I thought they might possibly be pertinent. It seems I was right.

So your son went against RHU and rescue policy and agreement and advertised a dog he'd had in his care for a couple of days on Gumtree (which no decent rescue would do), free to a good home (ditto), without a homecheck (ditto) to a woman who lived in a block of flats?

I said nothing about a bedsit

Some rescues will rehome to some flat-dwellers, on a case by case basis and after a homecheck. I would very, very much imagine that the rescue concerned acts similarly. That doesn't mean that they rehome to flat-dwellers as a matter of course so your comment is a bit misleading to those who aern't acquainted with rescue policy and practice.

Regardless, that does NOT provide any justification for your son to take it upon himself to place an unassessed dog belonging, at the end of the day, to a rescue, into an unchecked home of any sort.

Re your question - I would do whatever it takes to safeguard the dog. I told you that in (I think) my very first post. No kill, no excuses, no limits, no fear.

Would I have given the address of the person who had received the goods I'd stolen? I wouldn't have done as your son did in the first place and, as I have already said, neither would my own kids who are 14 and 15. But yes, had I had a complete personality change and become the type of utter prick who risked the owner and the dog's welfare I would have immediately given the rescue the address.

Your son is lucky that the rescue didn't go to the police.

Let's get this in context. The very vast majority of us in rescue are female. What was the sex of the person who allegedly thhreatened your 20 year old son?

And what did they actually say? Because that they will "castrate" someone doesn't seem to me to be the type of phrase that would generally roll off the tongue.

Finally, think about it... unchecked home. Unassessed dog. Female owner... no kids in her home? No visiting kids, no nieces, nephews, friends with kids, no chance of her getting pregnant, no-one at potential risk except her? You can promise me that can you?

And let's not forget the risk to the poor bloody dog of course.

In what way?

@ staffylover

On topic which is "Rescue Helpers Unite" forum? They have done nothing wrong, any forum has the right to accept, withhold or deny membership to whomsoever the admin chooses.

The rest of your argument is immaterial to the subject matter in the title.

"In what way?"

The son did a homecheck valhalla that was approved by the rescue as the rehome to those in flats. Thats is what the OP said.

They were obviously trusting him enough to homecheck as he had before. Often rescues will only kick up a stink about a person when they are upset. He can't have been that bad for them to trust him before. I'm not saying he did right, he was wrong but its a tad bit of an overreaction in my book. Thats is what the OP said

To answer just the question of cancelling your account again. I wish you could see. That RHU had no choice to cancel yours after having to ban him and then your parnter leaving. You stated your parnter left because he could not work with people who would threaten violence or condone violence. So why would want to stay. The forum made the right choice I feel.

Go to the police. How would you feel if they carry out their threats of violence and you did nothing. If it was me, no matter how scared I was I would go.

Apologies for the spelling

Apologies Ceretrea and OP - I'm dealing with another matter by chance where there was no homecheck carried out and there should have been, with resulting problems and the owner now wants the dog out. I confused that situation with this.

Doesn't make it any more right or any more of a sensible action though.

The OP is alleging that their son has been threatened by people connected to the (still unnamed) rescue.

This is a quote from RHU. It is about an animal abuser and was written by the OP:

"Aren`t their any RHU people who could accidently kick his door in, and him as well?"

I'm going to leave this thread because the OP's position and much-proclaimed objection to the alleged threats upon their son is as untenable as the son's behaviour was unacceptable.

OP - YABU.

@ vallhala staffylover ceretrea

1 The subject matter of this thread is RESCUE HELPERS UNITE not an unnamed rescue organisation.

2 Any forum admin has the right to refuse, deny or remove membership of the forum to whomsoever they choose. They are not required to give any reason for doing so.

3 By entitling this thread RESCUE HELPERS UNITE the OP implies that RESCUE HELPERS UNITE are at fault, they are not.

@ staffylover YABU

That should be an end of the matter.

valhalla

This is not least because, as I learned this morning, your son initially wasn't willing to be forthcoming about the dog's whereabouts

Who did you learn this off? I thought the fosterers themselves helped with the assessing..on the rescues website they actually quote my son? Hindsight is a wonderful thing and he should not have done it but he did and he has regretted his actions. The rescue is lucky he hasnt gone to the police, threats of violence aren`t taken lightly. But as I have stressed you need proof. All I can say is it rolled off her tongue very lightly!

The person who issued the threat, on behalf of her "animal rights friends" was a "lady"

To get things people will promise you anything...can any one on RHU/rescues say they haven`t got it wrong...a case was highlighted to me by the rescues representative when she called asking for my sons/womans details.

damacles You haven`t read the OP correctly. Im saying RHU have cancelled my account through no fault of mine. Your inference of implication is wrong.

ceretrea

To answer just the question of cancelling your account again. I wish you could see. That RHU had no choice to cancel yours after having to ban him and then your partner leaving. You stated your partner left because he could not work with people who would threaten violence or condone violence. So why would want to stay. The forum made the right choice I feel.
To be able to put my side of the argument, and without censorship, to other RHU users. And to see if the rescues themselves had been banned.

valhallaThis is a quote from RHU. It is about an animal abuser and was written by the OP:

"Aren`t their any RHU people who could accidently kick his door in, and him as well?"

This was in response to a sickening piece of evil violence against several dogs. An elderly woman lived underneath this person and could sometimes hear the torture inflicted on these dogs. On this occasion I advocated violence as did others, but I did not ring and threaten him through his mother. The word contempt springs to mind.

valhalla

My son made the wrong decision.

This man is an evil disgusting human being who has tortured and killed several dogs in full hearing of an elderly scared woman. She has heard him torturing these poor dogs by strangling them and throwing them up against walls. Read the whole thread and if I could access my private posts I would show you the emails I got from her friend who was frantic and did not know what to do...the police and RSPCA were more than useless. I myself rang the local RSPCA to inform on this man...how many RHU members did the same.You are truly beneath contempt.

@ staffylover
I read the opening post, understood it perfectly and saw no fault on the part of RESCUE HELPERS UNITE forum who you named in the title.

At the risk of repeating myself for the third time, they are entitled to remove any member they see fit and do not have to supply a reason. Have you not read, understood and accepted the terms and conditions of forum membership?

Any other information provided by you in the opening post is hearsay or irrelevant to your forum membership. Because it does not concern RESCUE HELPERS UNITE, but concerns another adult person (ie your son)and a rescue, not you.

YABU

"valhalla....You are truly beneath contempt."

I'm "beneath contempt"? Don't make me laugh! What for? For being a rescuer and animal rights supporter who has made it clear throughout that to rehome as your son has done is deplorable?

Or for being a self-confessed animal rights supporter who has pointed out that you've made allegations about people you won't name and which you can't prove and that you claim to be wildly concerned about violent talk but you aren't adverse to uttering the same yourself?

Are you seriously trying to discredit me by inferring that I would have any sympathy whatsoever for the abuser in that RHU thread? Nice try!

I've no problem with anyone advocating kicking the fucker's head in, but unlike you I don't claim to be adverse to such comments.

Now, other people may be justified in calling me deplorable for that view but you are in no position to judge me.