Don’t mace me, bro

26 Sep

Posted by The One in the In the News department.

Don't mace me, bro I know topherchris already posted about this, but come on… a duck getting maced by a cop is worth at least 16 more posts of funny. Take, for instance, the awesome expert point of view provided to the Times by Ramiro Isaza, a veterinarian specializing in nondomestic species and chief of zoological medicine service at the University of Florida School of Veterinary Medicine.

“In the eyes, it would be expected to be very uncomfortable,” Isaza said, but it probably would not cause permanent damage.

Isaza declined to say whether pepper-spraying a duck constitutes cruelty. That would depend on the circumstances, he said.

“I don’t know what this duck was doing,” Isaza said. “It was probably not used for the benefit of the animal, but without the details, who can say.”

Riiiiight. So your expert opinion is that macing a duck would probably be uncomfortable, you’re not sure whether macing a duck is cruel, and you’re unclear on whether or not macing a fucking duck was done for the duck’s benefit. In other words, you’re a complete moron. Thanks for that. Also, good call on not siding with the cops or the duck without all the facts, it is quite possible the duck was totally resisting arrest and fully deserved a healthy dose of mace.

4 Responses

topherchris

September 26th, 2007 at 11:50 am

Dude, that duck totally had it coming. He asked John Kerry a really important question, and you just don’t do that anymore because it helps the terrorists win. Stupid fucking duck.
drkptt

September 26th, 2007 at 5:55 pm

The paragraph before the ones quoted is:
Ramiro Isaza, a veterinarian specializing in nondomestic species and chief of zoological medicine service at the University of Florida School of Veterinary Medicine, [b]said the effect would probably be the same as using pepper spray on a dog or cat. [/b]

But it’s well known that birds are immune to the effects of capsaicin:
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mchili.html

Some expert.
drkptt

September 26th, 2007 at 9:43 pm

Now this probably didn’t benefit the duck:

http://blogs.govexec.com/fedblog/2007/09/auditor_decapitates_duck.php

Auditor Decapitates Duck
By Tom Shoop | Wednesday, September 26, 2007 | 09:21 AM

Here’s another one for the “You Can’t Make This Stuff Up” files: The Rocky Mountain News reports that Scott D. Clark, an auditor with the Denver office of the Health and Human Services Department’s inspector general office, is facing a felony animal cruelty charge related to an incident at an Embassy Suites hotel in St. Paul, Minn., where he had traveled for work.

According to witnesses, Scott cornered a duck near an atrium pond at the hotel and ripped its head off. Announcing, “I’m hungry. I’m gonna eat it,” Clark got on an elevator with the headless bird and took it up to the fifth floor.

On top of that, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reports, local law enforcement officials said in an official complaint filed against Clark that after police arrived on the scene, Clark said “that he worked for the federal government and when this was over he would have the officers’ jobs.”

When told that he was in trouble for killing the duck, Clark told officers, “Why, because I killed it out of season? Big deal, it’s just a [expletive] duck.”
brightlight

September 26th, 2007 at 10:34 pm

We should ask Dr. Isaza, given the facts at hand, whether he’s prepared to consider the duck blameless in the matter. That duck could have deserved it, you know.