Sorry, but once the money is raised, the girl has a responsibility to the donors to make sure the monies go to where they were supposed to go. She most likely didn’t raise the money by saying, “Give me some cash, I’m thinking about donating it to the police force.”
Hmm … js_africanus has been a little quiet lately. Has he abandoned this thread to fly off to Sudan with sacks of cash or something?
We deserve a progress report, no?
Had to come back to explain more about K-9 units, building on what meathead and CrazyCatLady tried to address.
K-9 units can be especially effective at finding drugs, bombs, money, suspects, and missing persons. As someone else noted, a trained dog can sometimes subdue a person more easily than a police officer can (incidentally, that’s why Mounted units are so effective–people will get the FUCK OUT OF THE WAY of a huge horse, so they are fabulous for crowd control). And with a better outcome (no use of force, less risk to suspect and officer).
Specifically, one of the Hall County K-9 dogs helped find an elderly man who suffered from dementia and wandered out of his care facility. The dog found him collapsed in a corn field. Have you ever tried to find anything in a corn field?!?!
As for funding, a number of states are facing a very tight budget and are cutting public services to the bone. As useful and important as K-9 units can be, I am certain that they would be cut before people, and replacing a dog or outfitting one with a vest would be a strain. You might think that there is money to buy everything a community needs to stay safe, but that’s not true. Some Fire Departments have “equipment funds,” for example, where they save donations to go towards stuff that would help them do their jobs but is not in the budget.
A dog might cost $5000 but it takes another $10000 for the handling, outfitting of special vehicles, food, care, continued training, etc. It sounds like Hall County already has an investment in many of those items, and they’d go to waste without a K-9 unit.
Vests are important for bullet, stab wound, and blunt trauma protection.
Incidentally, there is a national organization that buys vests for K-9s. And it all got started because of the efforts of a 10-yr old CA girl. Go figure.
Yes, this (and Kalhoun’s) is an excellent point, but my hypotheticals weren’t trying to mirror the situation exactly. I’m trying to point out that there are situations where the parents should be exercising a little editorial control over where the girl donates her own money, hoping to make the point that there could be situations where the parents should be exercising a little control over where she puts a lot of effort raising money.
Obviously, if people are giving specifically for the dog, she’s got to donate the money for the dog. The question is not what she should do with the money once she’s raised it, but is it a good idea for her to be trying to raise it in the first place.
This particular case certainly has some merit. The devil’s advocate position I’m playing is: where should the parents draw the line? Should they allow her to raise money for a bullet proof vest for Officer Polly Parrot, the police department’s anti-drug mascot, if she wishes?
What the fuck? Has anybody else taken notice of the fact that: Police Dog == $1000; Bullet Proof Vest $5000?
YOU CAN BUY FIVE DOGS FOR THE COST OF ONE VEST! Why protect that one dog when you can buy four others to replace him for a lesser cost?
Why not buy a vest for a HUMAN, little girl?
Her priorities are definitely messed up.
As has been said, if people donated to this little girl believing that their money is going to a particular cause, and then the girl’s parents stepped in and stopped her from making the donation, she – or, because of her age, more likely they – would be doing something presumably illegal as well as immoral. (And if I’d donated to her – and I just might give to a cause like this, having seen how incredibly helpful service dogs can be in many lines of work – and found out her parents had ix-nayed the final donation, I’d have 'em in small claims court or the Court of Public Opinion so fast it would make their heads spin!)
I believe a child starting fundraising efforts in her own community, in an effort to provide additional protection for what is a big investment for a local police force, is a great way for her to learn. What’s the old saying? “Charity begins at home.” Maybe from this, she’ll branch out to other, larger charity efforts. Maybe in 30 years she’ll be heading the International Red Cross. Kids who are charity-minded at age 10 are rare enough they should be encouraged, not told they’re doing the right thing but doing it all the wrong way!
If people come along and second-guess and criticize what she’s doing, what’s her incentive going to be to continue and expand her charitable efforts?
Blalron, go back and reread the article. $5,000 for the dog and $1,000 for the vest. Also, according tothis link, when you factor in training and other equipment, the cost of the dog is more like $10k. I think that a $1k investment to protect an asset with a $10k replacement cost is warranted, at least when the asset is one that routinely goes into dangerous situations.
Oh, s/he has been posting alright, just not here.
Um, no, we haven’t because
(bolding mine)
You got the numbers backward.
See above, obviously you can’t. You can buy a vest for the dog for 1/5 the price of the dog itself.
An excellent point. Also related, is what is the incentive to donate to this girl or any other charity if there is someone out there to criticize your humanitarian effort? Donors are reluctant enough this year to be bad-mouthed and haranged for their consideration.
As for the incredibly wealthy who leave small islands for their cats, I agree. But deterring fund raisers from seeking that particular career path can only increase the number of those occurances. The more qualified and educated fundraising professionals in society, the more informed and involved donors we’re going to have, and thus, fewer bogus planned gifts of large estates to people’s pets.
Plus you can still use the vest on the next dog.
The numbers game is really besides the point. Who the fuck is the OP, or any of us really, to say what is or is not an acceptable charity to support with time or money? This OP is the most arrogant and wrong headed I have seen in quite some time.
Haj
What an ass. Police dogs protect and serve the HUMANS in the community. The little girl is NOT contributing to a “PETA” cause. This isn’t about animals vs people. This is about a little girl wanting to help the PEOPLE in her community by soliciting to buy an asset used by the police to help prevent crime, track criminals, find missing persons, sniff out bombs, etc. Why would anyone consider any of those concerns less “worthy” than hunger or disease? Why would you even think of comparing them?! And on a sliding scale, no less. Sheesh!
ava, my email inquiry as to where to send a donation is on its way.
Ass.
And an email is headed back to you:).
For those who asked me about it yesterday - I made a tiny boo-boo, but it shouldn’t be a big deal. If you haven’t sent it out already, it’s Grand Island, not Grand Allen. The rest of the address and the zip code are correct, so it shouldn’t have a problem making it to its destination. My apologies- I have crappy hearing and I misunderstood the woman on the phone and neglected to confirm the address (which I typically do with everything else).
Ava
Thank you avabeth. I already had the address from you and today I was doing my bill paying, check writing, etc. I put the correct name in before sending.
I had my cites all set up to go to prove that a 1k expense of a police vest for the dog was not only a sound investment, but a reasonable justifiable expense, but CrankyAsAnOldMan beat me to it. 
Next, ragging on the lemonade stand girl? 
Freedom means other people being able to donate to their favorite charities also.
I note with interest that js_ has not responded to my question as to what js_ is doing to help those slaves. Or for that matter, any charity.