The same corrupt animal shelter that doubles as animal control, & that illegally took (stole) my and other peoples pets has offended its own community people. If you read my page “Our Missing Pets” (our story) you’ll notice that I tell how he targets women, women he doesn’t believe will stand up to his threats of false charges because he doesn’t believe they can afford a lawyer to fight. The current fiasco just backs that up even more. The shelter is having a $15.00 adoption day, but here’s the catch, you have to own your own home to be able to adopt. Now in a crumbling, turning into a ghost town city (only still not ghost town yet because of bsu campus, & those to poor to leave) most people don’t own their own homes.

His excuse (which I’m sure is his latested not well thought out defense to stealing my pets) is that only home owners can guarantee to be a pets forever home & be loved & taken care of. That just because you live in a pet friendly home or apt now doesn’t mean your next place will be. Now I want to point something out that he doesn’t realize he just said about himself. To believe that an animal is optional when looking for a place shows that he views pets as optional when it comes to finding new homes. With REAL fur-parents, we will turn homes down if they don’t allow pets, and local scam artist landlords will allow them until after you sign their lease & move in then say no. The fact is using the age old landlord excuse is just that, an excuse to dump pets because they don’t want to mess with them. Not to mention with illegally taking pets he has to come up with excuses for why so many pets go through there. The reality is, is that it’s usually poorer people who make sure their pets are fed, ect even if they do without themselves. There are food banks here, & cheaper vets 50 miles away, places the current director at the Muncie animal shelter purposely doesn’t inform owners of. This is a city government ran kill shelter/animal control that is CONSTANTLY begging for donations of everything they can sucker people out of, food, litter, leashes, collars, vet bill payments. The exact things he claims is neglect when it comes to owners. Let me point out that the same food bank also donates food to shelters & rescues that can show they have a real financial need for it yet he begs the community for it, why, because the shelter can’t prove a financial need. When they have (in their own words) 3800 pets go through the shelter a year that are sold for $65.00-$75.00 each that’s $247.000.00 for 3800 pets at $65.00 & $285.000.00 for 3800 pets at $75.00. So $247.000.00-$285.000.00 profit a year, just from selling pets, now that doesn’t include government funding it receives, yet he begs for food, supplies, the animals live in filth & on hard concrete floors. Where does all that money go?

I’m going to burst his false claim real quick. Being a home owner doesn’t show a person is more responsible to adopt or own a pet, nor does it guarantee a forever home. 1) Home owners take pets back as well. 2) And the biggest is people lose those homes everyday, they could burn down the day after they adopt, a tornado could hit it, a flood, people could buy their home out from underneath them the same day, ect. You know where that puts them? Yep that’s right, having to stay in a hotel, w/friends/family who may not allow pets, looking for a pet friendly new home. In other words, it’s puts them in the EXACT SAME POSITION AS RENTERS are when moving. So now how is owning your own home a guarantee an animal will have a forever home? That’s right it isn’t!!!! Oh and let me point out that homeowners insurance plays the same role when it comes to renting v’s owning. To show another example of how owning a home isn’t always set in stone, if someone wants to buy a house out from under someone, all they have to do is offer to pay 3x’s the current taxes on their home and it becomes yours. Some cities may try to not allow you to do this which then leaves them open to a lawsuit for not following the rules and allowing it. Is it ethical, no. Is it legal, yes. Some people have won a very large amount from cities not wanting to follow the rules, and it’s an underhanded thing to do. However, it’s just one of many examples of how just because you own a home one day, doesn’t mean you will still have it the next which is what renters face. So there’s no REAL difference in owning v’s renting when it comes to providing for pets!!

The truth is, those who don’t have a lot of money usually make the best pet parents. They bond more, & faster because both usually need each other. They benefit the most from having a pet. Peckinpaugh however just likes to place himself above others and is simply starting his newest discrimination tactic within the community. I’ve posted his past tactics, such as, lots of pets all somehow getting loose on the same days bringing the shelter in fee’s, somehow magically & mysteriously  knowing what pets around town don’t have rabies shots once again bringing in income, & the biggest being illegally taking responsible owners pets for false reasons, threatening them into silence with false charges, all so he can take those pets and sell them for profit, in other words “Pet Flipping” of stolen pets. Pet Flippers use to only be regular people, however place an abusive, corrupt, person into a position of authority (one they are not qualified to hold but instead was giving the job by a family friend, the mayor, here they call it the good ol boy system) and they will abuse their position to their own personal gain.

Now for some, don’t just think because he claims to be for the best interest of animals that it means he is. If you do your research you will find that even a serial killer once worked in animal control and abused his position. Many shelter & animal control employees are being charged & fired from their positions for abuse, neglect, ect.

To pretend that owning a home guarantee’s a pet will be taken care of, loved, & not given right back up is simply Ludacris & clearly discriminative to the poorer community. As a real, honest, animal lover you would think he instead would work towards bring in cheaper or free vet care into the community so everyone could add the love of a pet to their family. However, Peckinpaugh is only thinking with a $ in front of his eyes, he doesn’t actually care about pets, or the community how he pretends. If he did, one he would stop stealing peoples fur-babies, & two, he would work towards bringing things into the community to help pet owners. However, if you open your  eyes and look, he’s always asking for everything from the community, what he see’s as not able to care for ect, is the exact same things he is guilty of!! How can someone who obviously cant care for animals properly (in his own claims on others) dictate that others can’t either simply because they are not rich?

It’s simply Ludacris, & discrimination period!!!!!