# WARNING-California AB1122 Hearing on Wednesday 5/6/09



## Loudog760 (May 5, 2009)

From USARK:

Quote:


> WARNING-California AB1122 Hearing on Wednesday 5/6/09
> 
> Time to get back to work and flex a little Grass Roots Muscle. The Humane Society of the United States has a bill, AB1122, up for hearing before the CA General Assembly Appropriations Committee this Wednesday. This bill seeks to BAN the sale of animals that are NOT "traditionally" sold through pet shops. This would include many different animals INCLUDING Herps. This is an attempt to end ALL Reptile Shows and "face to face" sales that are the basis for much of how the middle and high end of our market distributes animals. It would eliminate almost ALL sales except from pet shops. Reptile Shows and open air auctions/sales would come to an end in CA.



To help, fill out this form and it will be emailed to all the committee members and call!

http://usark.org/campaign.php?id=6

Phone List:

Kevin de Leon - Chair Dem-45 (916) 319-2045
Jim Nielsen - Vice Chair Rep-2 (916) 319-
Tom Ammiano Dem-13 (916) 319-2013
Charles M. Calderon Dem-58 (916) 319-2058
Mike Davis Dem-48 (916) 319-2048
Michael D. Duvall Rep-72 (916) 319-2072
Felipe Fuentes Dem-39 (916) 319-2039
Isadore Hall III Dem-52 (916) 319-2052
Diane L. Harkey Rep-73 916) 319-2073
Jeff Miller Rep-71 (916) 319-2071
John A. P�rez Dem-46 (916) 319-2046
Curren D. Price Jr. Dem-51 (916) 319-2051
Nancy Skinner Dem-14 (916) 319-2014
Jose Solorio Dem-69 (916) 319-2069
Audra Strickland Rep-37 (916) 319-2037
Tom Torlakson Dem-11 (916) 319-2011



Hurry - they are meeting on 5/6


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 5, 2009)

And this is bad because...?????  Do you know how many reptiles are purchased at reptile shows on impulse just because some kid thought it was "cute" and then later ends up on craigslist?


----------



## ThomasH (May 5, 2009)

Actually most impulse purchases come from petshops, which under this bill would still be completely legal. Impusle buyers usually don't take the time and forethought to look up the local reptile show. Plus herp shows are good for the economy and are nice get togethers for people like each other that normally wouldn't get to meet in person. Nothing is wrong with herp shows and banning them would be completely asinine.

TBH


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 5, 2009)

I also read the bill and this applies to outdoor events.  I don't think its aimed at reptile shows.  Its basically stopping people from selling animals randomly on the side of the road.  A reptile show is a specific event that encompasses pet shops from around the country which would not fall under this bill.


----------



## ThomasH (May 5, 2009)

Noexcuse4you said:


> I also read the bill and this applies to outdoor events.  I don't think its aimed at reptile shows.  Its basically stopping people from selling animals randomly on the side of the road.  A reptile show is a specific event that encompasses pet shops from around the country which would not fall under this bill.


Too slippery of a slope for me. I wouldn't take the risk of it passing. Plus I've bought quality animals from random breeders that weren't reptile expo vendors or pet shop people. This will hurt the economy a little. Besides, how can you trust a state that has banned ferrets, tried people for random consenting pornographic actions, and other stupid crap. 
EDIT: This bill is also aimed at banning any nontraditional pet.
TBH


----------



## pitbulllady (May 5, 2009)

This bill not only prohibits the SALE of animals in places outside of pet shops, but also prohibits the EXIBITION of ALL animals in public, period.  This not only will shut down all reptile and arachnid sales in CA, but also will put an end to all dog shows, such as the  AKC shows and agility trials shown on TV, all horse shows, all cat shows, and the sale of poultry and livestock at farmers markets, county fairs and livestock auctions.  In other words, it would end the sale of all animals outside of pet shops or private homes, and would end the public display of all animals outside of AZA-accredited zoos or aquariums.  There is no way that anyone but the most ardent AR supporter can NOT see how this is a bad thing.

And, as for buying animals from private homes, a mandatory spay-neuter bill is also up for a vote, affecting cats and dogs, while ANOTHER bill would prohibit anyone from selling puppies or dogs that come from commercial breeders.  Basically, it's the intent of the HSUS to leave people wanting a dog or cat no choice but to adopt a spayed/neutered animal from a shelter, effectively monopolizing dogs and cats, while essentially banning everything else.  Pet shops would be limited only to selling "animals traditionally available through pet shops", and can only sell dogs or cats that have already been spayed/neutered, and did not come from commercial breeders, but since hobby breeders cannot afford to pay the fees needed to maintain a breeder's permit in most CA cities or counties, that leaves only shelter animals, or mail order "exotics" from other states...unless HR699 rears its ugly head again.  HSUS definitely is on a roll when it comes to anti-animal owner/breeder/seller bills this year, and since so many people only see their little corner of the world, in terms of not being concerned for those who breed/own/sell OTHER kinds of animals besides theirs, many of these will pass into law, incrementally removing every last right we have to own the animals of our choice.

pitbulllady


----------



## sick4x4 (May 5, 2009)

California AB1122
California's Assembly Bill 1122 (AB1122) makes it a crime to sell, display or offer for sale a live animal in various public places. As introduced this bill adds provisions to the anti-cruelty laws making it a crime to sell, trade, barter, display, or offer for sale, trade, or barter, or give away as part of a commercial transaction a live animal on any street, highway, public right-of-way, commercial parking lot, or at any outdoor special sale, swap meet, flea market, parking lot sale, carnival, or boardwalk. 

expos and shows as defined in the literature are exempt????
????????????????????


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 5, 2009)

pitbulllady said:


> This bill not only prohibits the SALE of animals in places outside of pet shops, but also prohibits the EXIBITION of ALL animals in public, period.  This not only will shut down all reptile and arachnid sales in CA, but also will put an end to all dog shows, such as the  AKC shows and agility trials shown on TV, all horse shows, all cat shows, and the sale of poultry and livestock at farmers markets, county fairs and livestock auctions.  In other words, it would end the sale of all animals outside of pet shops or private homes, and would end the public display of all animals outside of AZA-accredited zoos or aquariums.  There is no way that anyone but the most ardent AR supporter can NOT see how this is a bad thing.
> 
> And, as for buying animals from private homes, a mandatory spay-neuter bill is also up for a vote, affecting cats and dogs, while ANOTHER bill would prohibit anyone from selling puppies or dogs that come from commercial breeders.  Basically, it's the intent of the HSUS to leave people wanting a dog or cat no choice but to adopt a spayed/neutered animal from a shelter, effectively monopolizing dogs and cats, while essentially banning everything else.  Pet shops would be limited only to selling "animals traditionally available through pet shops", and can only sell dogs or cats that have already been spayed/neutered, and did not come from commercial breeders, but since hobby breeders cannot afford to pay the fees needed to maintain a breeder's permit in most CA cities or counties, that leaves only shelter animals, or mail order "exotics" from other states...unless HR699 rears its ugly head again.  HSUS definitely is on a roll when it comes to anti-animal owner/breeder/seller bills this year, and since so many people only see their little corner of the world, in terms of not being concerned for those who breed/own/sell OTHER kinds of animals besides theirs, many of these will pass into law, incrementally removing every last right we have to own the animals of our choice.
> 
> pitbulllady


Wrong.  Did you read the bill?  First of all, livestock auctions are EXEMPT.  Second, where do you see where it says dog and cat shows are prohibited?  Do you see dog and cat shows on the side of the road?  in the flea market? in a parking lot?  Where do you see it say "private homes"?  I think you need to review the bill a little further...


----------



## Pacmaster (May 5, 2009)

Why doesnt everybody actually read the thing before they fall into the mass-hysteria?

They want to stop things like carnivals giving away goldfish as prizes, and the low-lifes that bring 200 chickens to a fleamarket in the back of a van . . .

I think this would be a good thing, except it will only give the backers more ammo for next years federal bill . . .

Reptiles and shows will not fall under this bill.
And it specifically states that  exhibitions dedicated to the selling of livestock do not apply.
What are snakes, lizards, T, etc, to a dealer/breeder . . . live stock!

I would put a link up, but I think everyone just needs to go read the whole thing before they start panicking . . .


----------



## Loudog760 (May 5, 2009)

I didn't know that. I just posted what USARK said but still I really don't trust them. IMO this will get worse and they might push for more.


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

Pacmaster said:


> Why doesnt everybody actually read the thing before they fall into the mass-hysteria?
> 
> They want to stop things like carnivals giving away goldfish as prizes, and the low-lifes that bring 200 chickens to a fleamarket in the back of a van . . .
> 
> ...


OH MY GOD DUDE! DO WE REALLY NEED A KINDERGARTEN VOCAB LESSON?
*Livestock - the horses, cattle, sheep, and other useful animals kept or raised on a farm or ranch.*
That does not include any nondomestics at all! Reptile shows are legally classified as swap meets and under this provision they will be banned. 
Our Beloved Expos WILL Be Banned! Why else would USARK make a fuss? Really folks? Interpretive reading is where it's at bud! :clap: 
TBH


----------



## EightLeggedFrea (May 6, 2009)

What's the news on the bill now? Has the hearing ended?


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

News probably won't get by fast enough to know today.
TBH


----------



## sick4x4 (May 6, 2009)

ThomasH said:


> OH MY GOD DUDE! DO WE REALLY NEED A KINDERGARTEN VOCAB LESSON?
> *Livestock - the horses, cattle, sheep, and other useful animals kept or raised on a farm or ranch.*
> That does not include any nondomestics at all! Reptile shows are legally classified as swap meets and under this provision they will be banned.
> Our Beloved Expos WILL Be Banned! Why else would USARK make a fuss? Really folks? Interpretive reading is where it's at bud! :clap:
> TBH


i posted the definition in my above post, where is it stated or expressed or understood that an reptile expo is classified or legally defined as a swap meet????? someone isn't taking their own advise....legally speaking, "a reptile expo" is a sponsored event usally at a private venue not a street corner or swap meet.....

i and I'm sure many others would be hard pressed to encourage buying back ally animals and with this bill, makes the seller more accountable which is IMO, about time...


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> i posted the definition in my above post, where is it stated or expressed or understood that an reptile expo is classified or legally defined as a swap meet????? someone isn't taking their own advise....legally speaking, "a reptile expo" is a sponsored event usally at a private venue not a street corner or swap meet.....
> 
> i and I'm sure many others would be hard pressed to encourage buying back ally animals and with this bill, makes the seller more accountable which is IMO, about time...


Where is it classified that it isn't? It only gave exeptions to pet shops and live stock auctions [Which for god sake people, has nothing to do with exotics or even dogs and cats for that matter!] I have commonly heard people term herp shows as reptile swaps. Doesn't matter though. There was only an exemption/inferred white list anyway so herp shows don't have to fit in any of those terms to be banned. Back ally animal buying wouldn't be stopped by a regulation. Therefore this bill will only ban the best.
TBH


----------



## sick4x4 (May 6, 2009)

you stated that "legally" a reptile expo is a swap meet....im asking where is it stated that or where is it understood to mean that???? the bill is pretty specific in what areas it whats to enact law. so your understood terminology isn't warranted. ban the best of what????

 and for the record "dude" with the kindergarten lesson...The term "livestock" is nebulous and may be defined narrowly or broadly. On a broader view, livestock refers to any breed or population of animal kept by humans for a useful and or commercial purpose. This can mean domestic animals, semi-domestic animals, or captive wild animals. Semi-domesticated refers to animals which are only lightly domesticated or of disputed status. These populations may also be in the process of domestication.... so before your foot in mouth disease starts to spread try being alittle nicer, we all make mistakes .......

wayne


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> you stated that "legally" a reptile expo is a swap meet....im asking where is it stated that or where is it understood to mean that???? the bill is pretty specific in what areas it whats to enact law. so your understood terminology isn't warranted. ban the best of what????
> 
> and for the record "dude" with the kindergarten lesson...The term "livestock" is nebulous and may be defined narrowly or broadly. On a broader view, livestock refers to any breed or population of animal kept by humans for a useful and or commercial purpose. This can mean domestic animals, semi-domestic animals, or captive wild animals. Semi-domesticated refers to animals which are only lightly domesticated or of disputed status. These populations may also be in the process of domestication.... so before your foot in mouth disease starts to spread try being alittle nicer, we all make mistakes .......
> 
> wayne


The bill states that basically selling of animals in the state is illegal unless through pet shop, mail order or livestock auction. 
I meant ban the best of sales such as in person but through people who follow and recognize law deeming them to be respectable.
Google it, wiki it, look it up in a dictionary, ask a farmer. All of these references would state a few domesticated farm animals. I've never EVER heard anyone describe live stock as including nondomestics.
TBH


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 6, 2009)

ThomasH said:


> The bill states that basically selling of animals in the state is illegal unless through pet shop, mail order or livestock auction.
> I meant ban the best of sales such as in person but through people who follow and recognize law deeming them to be respectable.
> Google it, wiki it, look it up in a dictionary, ask a farmer. All of these references would state a few domesticated farm animals. I've never EVER heard anyone describe live stock as including nondomestics.
> TBH


http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1101-1150/ab_1122_cfa_20090505_172432_asm_comm.html

4)Does not apply to events held by 4-H Clubs, Junior Farmers  
            Clubs or Future Farmers Clubs, state or county fairs,  
            livestock consignment sales, public animal control agencies or  
            shelters, rescue groups, federally regulated stockyards, or  
*regulated live animal markets*


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

Noexcuse4you said:


> http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1101-1150/ab_1122_cfa_20090505_172432_asm_comm.html
> 
> 4)Does not apply to events held by 4-H Clubs, Junior Farmers
> Clubs or Future Farmers Clubs, state or county fairs,
> ...


What does that even mean?
TBH


----------



## sick4x4 (May 6, 2009)

ThomasH said:


> The bill states that basically selling of animals in the state is illegal unless through pet shop, mail order or livestock auction.
> I meant ban the best of sales such as in person but through people who follow and recognize law deeming them to be respectable.
> Google it, wiki it, look it up in a dictionary, ask a farmer. All of these references would state a few domesticated farm animals. I've never EVER heard anyone describe live stock as including nondomestics.
> TBH


encourage going to a reputable breeder or shop or expo or convention is all i see this bill doing.... how is that a bad thing???? accountability hopefully:clap: ...

ow by the way in the new world, the term "livestock" incuncubises a wide range of animals including non-domestics or animals intended for commercial sale....its a broader term than just cows, pigs and the such....but i guess that might be a big city vs small town kinda thingy huh??? 

wayne


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 6, 2009)

ThomasH said:


> What does that even mean?
> TBH


*Regulate*:  To control or direct according to rule, principle, or law.
*Live*: To be alive
*Animal*: A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.
*Market*: A public gathering held for buying and selling merchandise.


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> encourage going to a reputable breeder or shop or expo or convention is all i see this bill doing.... how is that a bad thing???? accountability hopefully:clap: ...
> 
> ow by the way in the new world, the term "livestock" incuncubises a wide range of animals including non-domestics or animals intended for commercial sale....its a broader term than just cows, pigs and the such....but i guess that might be a big city vs small town kinda thingy huh???
> 
> wayne


Like I have been saying, too slippery of a slope. Am I the only one who notices that parts of the bill actually contradict eachother? The word livestock is almost always used in agriculture, I have found very few references using that term differently.
TBH


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

Noexcuse4you said:


> *Regulate*:  To control or direct according to rule, principle, or law.
> *Live*: To be alive
> *Animal*: A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.
> *Market*: A public gathering held for buying and selling merchandise.


Well yes I know the dictionary definition but how is that used in their context? Why would they say _regulated_ live animal markets? And if that is true then what would the point of this entire bill be? I'll just see how it works out, not my state anyway. But why would usark be so concerned if this bill was just to regulate live prizes at carnivals. But if it didn't apply to fairs couldn't you just win fish there? Rendering this bill useless? Too confusing.
TBH


----------



## ThomasH (May 6, 2009)

"3)Opposition  .  In opposition to the bill, the California Swap  
            Meet Owners Association notes that the swap meet owners have  
            continually argued to be treated as other retail entities  
            would. Therefore, the Legislature should create a set of  
            standards so that they can be given the opportunity to sell  
            these animals in a safe and healthy environment.  They argue  
            that it is unfair to simply impose a blanket prohibition."
This especially leads me to believe that expos are classified as/with swap meets and further proves my "too slippery of a slope" theory.
TBH


----------



## fantasticp (May 6, 2009)

Kyle, good god. Why can't you prescribe to the idea of live and let live and minimal regulation. You are being exactly the person that the hobby hates the most when you let laws go on by by saying...well.um...this one isn't so bad. Slowly but surely we then get regulated into a black and white no fun everyone the same box. Remind me to smack you next time you visit please.


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 6, 2009)

fantasticp said:


> Kyle, good god. Why can't you prescribe to the idea of live and let live and minimal regulation. You are being exactly the person that the hobby hates the most when you let laws go on by by saying...well.um...this one isn't so bad. Slowly but surely we then get regulated into a black and white no fun everyone the same box. Remind me to smack you next time you visit please.


I think you misread my post.  Except for the first one when I didn't read the bill, my argument is that this bill won't affect the hobby.


----------



## arachnocat (May 7, 2009)

I checked this morning and it says the hearing was cancelled on request of the author. So I guess we will have to wait some more. That gives us more time to send in our letters and emails.


----------



## arachnocat (May 7, 2009)

Message from USARK:

"Yesterday there was a hearing scheduled for AB 1122 in the California Assembly in front of the Appropriations Committee. It was canceled at the last minute by the bill's author. This was likely due to the efforts of USARK, The Reptile Nation and many other groups opposed to the bill. USARK and the Reptile Nation were responsible for 5,127 emails and hundreds of phone calls to the Assembly Members on the Appropriations Committee over a 24 hour period. There were many other animal interests that mobilized against AB 1122 as well... but USARK is not able to track their efforts as we are able to do for our own members. This is not over! This bill will probably be scheduled for a new hearing in the near future. Stay Vigilante!"


----------



## ShellsandScales (May 7, 2009)

I am completely sick of these jerks constantly threatening to shut down the livelyhood of thousands of americans. Will someone please just burn the HSUS to the ground already and put them out of our missery,(j/k sort of). They are going to keep trying and will likely eventually succeed,
Especially with the extremely liberal govenrment that has been shoved down our throat hole the last several decades. I'm only twenty eight and wish I lived in a time many decades ago before politicians opened the door for all of this government control over every aspect of our lives. The government has absoultely no right to regulate many of the things that they take control of. They are going to regulate away all of our freedoms until there are none left. Freedom is quickly dying in this country and I hate to see it keep slipping away.

I protested against the hr669 bill and sent my letters, I just don't have the time and resources to keep up on every single piece of legislation they are trying to slip by. If you blink they will take that opportunity to slip a law through and like I saw in the thread earlier... slippery slope and all...... Once they get a foothold its going to be all over. The best government is able to keep peace and protect their population while trying to MINIMIZE their envolvement in our daily lives and right now everything is exactly the opposite. 


Looks like its time to buy an island and start my own country!;P


----------



## fantasticp (May 8, 2009)

Noexcuse4you said:


> I think you misread my post.  Except for the first one when I didn't read the bill, my argument is that this bill won't affect the hobby.




That isn't the total issue. Why does there need to be a bill for the issue at all? you seem very young on many issues IMO and more so in my BF's O. Why over regulate period? Why complicate things, why make more laws just to make them? Don't support legislators who vote for nonsensical and unnecessary laws...... you seem young in you opinions which only makes me feel more like an old hag. Don't mess with shite that ain't broke.

I. E. IF IT AIN"T BROKE DON"T FIX IT. even if it doesn't affect the hobby today, why pass something completely unnecessayr?????????????????????


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 8, 2009)

fantasticp said:


> That isn't the total issue. Why does there need to be a bill for the issue at all? you seem very young on many issues IMO and more so in my BF's O. Why over regulate period? Why complicate things, why make more laws just to make them? Don't support legislators who vote for nonsensical and unnecessary laws...... you seem young in you opinions which only makes me feel more like an old hag. Don't mess with shite that ain't broke.
> 
> I. E. IF IT AIN"T BROKE DON"T FIX IT. even if it doesn't affect the hobby today, why pass something completely unnecessayr?????????????????????


Why am I not allowed to urinate in public?  Why can't I do my shopping naked?  Why can't I beat my girlfriend every time she pisses me off (not that I would ever think about doing such a thing)?  Because there are intrinsic morals and values inside 99% of us.  Unfortunately, the other 1% doesn't and that's when regulations need to be put in place.


----------



## Dillon (May 8, 2009)

Noexcuse4you said:


> Unfortunately, the other 1% doesn't and that's when regulations need to be put in place.


Wow...Catering to the minority...

Majority rules.

I agree some things need to be regulated but don't start digging your own grave by  passing bills because they dont directly effect you today, at the moment.


----------



## fantasticp (May 8, 2009)

Noexcuse4you said:


> Why am I not allowed to urinate in public?  Why can't I do my shopping naked?  Why can't I beat my girlfriend every time she pisses me off (not that I would ever think about doing such a thing)?  Because there are intrinsic morals and values inside 99% of us.  Unfortunately, the other 1% doesn't and that's when regulations need to be put in place.


The things you mentioned are completely unrelated to the issue at hand. public sanitation and personal protection are a far cry from the sale of animals. While you're at it, why don't we stop the sale of books out of agreement with the majority, or better yet, burn them! That'll put people in their place!


Just to add: That is just the sort of reasoning people use to justify anti-gay crap..."99% of us have morals yada yada yada"....


----------



## sick4x4 (May 8, 2009)

fantasticp said:


> The things you mentioned are completely unrelated to the issue at hand. public sanitation and personal protection are a far cry from the sale of animals. While you're at it, why don't we stop the sale of books out of agreement with the majority, or better yet, burn them! That'll put people in their place!
> 
> 
> Just to add: That is just the sort of reasoning people use to justify anti-gay crap..."99% of us have morals yada yada yada"....


what about the taking of creationism out books and god out of the pledge of allegiance crap???? and dont even mention gun laws ummmmmmm, its always funny to see what soap boxes one chooses to stand on when its something they are in favor of...

imported animals can have catastrophic consequences if not regulated..FL is a prime example of non native species producing viable populations where they should not be. ....example, someone let out 8-9 pouched rats(these weigh like 3-5 lbs) and now they are becoming an epidemic and if they start to spread, look what could happen to agriculture..these types of bills make it harder for these things to happen with casual hobbyists...

ca due to its climate can have the same results..which is why they ban alot of non native animals and i dont blame them.... besides most of the people not in favor of the bill dont even live in CA, soo chiming in is kinda a mute point dont you think...im in favor of a registry personally...we have them guns why not animals???they both can have catastrophic results if left unregulated.....


----------



## Noexcuse4you (May 8, 2009)

fantasticp said:


> The things you mentioned are completely unrelated to the issue at hand. public sanitation and personal protection are a far cry from the sale of animals. While you're at it, why don't we stop the sale of books out of agreement with the majority, or better yet, burn them! That'll put people in their place!
> 
> 
> Just to add: That is just the sort of reasoning people use to justify anti-gay crap..."99% of us have morals yada yada yada"....


The things I mentioned was in response to your statement of "Don't support legislators who vote for nonsensical and unnecessary laws".  

These laws wouldn't be necessary if everyone knew the difference between right and wrong and always followed right.  If everyone who sold their animals on the side of the road, outside of walmart, at the fair, etc.  treated their animals humanely, then these laws wouldn't have to be put in place.  The problem is, they don't and that's when regulations are put into place.

For the record, I am for gay rights.  Being gay has nothing to do with morals.  Its purely biological.

I am finished with this argument.  Arguing on the internet is pointless.


----------



## fantasticp (May 8, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> what about the taking of creationism out books and god out of the pledge of allegiance crap???? and dont even mention gun laws ummmmmmm, its always funny to see what soap boxes one chooses to stand on when its something they are in favor of...
> 
> imported animals can have catastrophic consequences if not regulated..FL is a prime example of non native species producing viable populations where they should not be. ....example, someone let out 8-9 pouched rats(these weigh like 3-5 lbs) and now they are becoming an epidemic and if they start to spread, look what could happen to agriculture..these types of bills make it harder for these things to happen with casual hobbyists...
> 
> ca due to its climate can have the same results..which is why they ban alot of non native animals and i dont blame them.... besides most of the people not in favor of the bill dont even live in CA, soo chiming in is kinda a mute point dont you think...im in favor of a registry personally...we have them guns why not animals???they both can have catastrophic results if left unregulated.....



Ok first. We both know where I live. (in CA) So are you directing that response at me beneath my quote??? No we should not have registered animals or registered guns (some states still don't) or mandatory GPS systems installed in our cars so the government knows where and when I travel (And no, I don't carry a cell phone everywhere and prefer to spend cash. What kind of freedom does one have if they are led around on a leash? We can even install snitch devices so speeding tickets print right out of your dashboard too. 

Punish stupid people who are irresponsible with animals, and not only are you promoting free society and choices, but eliminating the need to create another money pit of an agency to regulate all these new laws.


...Speaking of soapboxes, we all know you are a complete socialist under the delusion UN ideals entitle every man woman and child free shelter and free healthcare and that the US would ever adopt that mentality. So I guess you were just introducing yourself there. 


And kyle, arguing/discussing on the internet is what you do. If you have to take your ball and go home, just say so.


----------



## sick4x4 (May 8, 2009)

free society??? there's no such thing, regulatory measures are in place because without such regulations civilization is incapable of governing itself.. an experimentation already tried and tested and completely failed....which is why democracy hasn't been practiced in the US for some time now dugh... 

if you play by the rules you have nothing to fear, you dont;P  well than off to hell you go....do i like that its mandatory to wear a seat belt no, do i think im drunk and cant drive if im over .08 no..but these legislation's where put into practice to protect us from the foreseeable consequence of not implementing them. does it hurt people who abide by them no but break them and watch out. same with this bill...

 so as far as being a socialist???? you have got to be mixing me up with someone else...anyone who knows me, knows im a true capitalist...but this chicken little philosophy you and Thomas are spewing out... as though big brother is somehow going to outlaw expos and dealers of exotic animals somewhere down the road by making sure puppy-mills, mass produced animals and the illegal distribution of live animals is controlled  is, forgive me here but its a little comedic don't you think...whats with this pandemic view of legislation to curtail the exploitation of animals.....dont you think one Florida is bad enough???? 

wayne


----------



## cacoseraph (May 9, 2009)

heh

dictionary definitions absolutely do not matter in a legal context


i looked at what someone posted as the bill, but it was only a couple few pages long... so i doubt it is the full thing


basically, the bill should define animal and should define all terms specific to the bill *somewhere*.  if they don't, the bill would be all but unenforceable in the CA and USA legal system.  as an instance of why this matters.... the CA Fish and Game or whatever specifically do NOT include terrestrial invertebrates in their definition of animal, thus NONE of their regulations for "animals" apply to 99% of the inverts anyone on this board keeps












and as for why laws like this are created?  well, in the USA you can not be convicted of a crime ex post facto.... that is, unless there are specific laws ON THE BOOKS specifically making and event illegal when or before an event takes place you can not be convicted of any wrong doing.  so, if scumbags selling half dead animals out of the back of their SUV are not breaking any current laws (which is entirely possible, due to having to so carefully define everything) then THIS law would allow them to be prosecuted.  of course, most laws also have hidden agendas to them, and something like this certainly seems ripe for it



ultimately, from what i read of the bill no clear legal conclusions could be drawn for implications to our hobby and our expos and what not. it looked like maybe i just read an abstract or something though




edit:

ah, this bill is an addendum or whatnot to Section 597 and compliments 5971.  if someone cares, they should look for better definitions in there.  do quote what you get in here so we can make sure you are reading it right, though


----------



## Drachenjager (May 9, 2009)

ThomasH said:


> Like I have been saying, too slippery of a slope. Am I the only one who notices that parts of the bill actually contradict eachother? The word livestock is almost always used in agriculture, I have found very few references using that term differently.
> TBH


I have seen signage in many pet stores that say "No Guarantee on Livestock". In fact i have a few tanks purchased from pet stores that still have labels on them stating just that. I really do not think they are selling Wilbur the pig outta there.


----------



## Drachenjager (May 9, 2009)

ShellsandScales said:


> I am completely sick of these jerks constantly threatening to shut down the livelyhood of thousands of americans. Will someone please just burn the HSUS to the ground already and put them out of our missery,(j/k sort of). They are going to keep trying and will likely eventually succeed,
> Especially with the extremely liberal govenrment that has been shoved down our throat hole the last several decades. I'm only twenty eight and wish I lived in a time many decades ago before politicians opened the door for all of this government control over every aspect of our lives. The government has absoultely no right to regulate many of the things that they take control of. They are going to regulate away all of our freedoms until there are none left. Freedom is quickly dying in this country and I hate to see it keep slipping away.
> 
> I protested against the hr669 bill and sent my letters, I just don't have the time and resources to keep up on every single piece of legislation they are trying to slip by. If you blink they will take that opportunity to slip a law through and like I saw in the thread earlier... slippery slope and all...... Once they get a foothold its going to be all over. The best government is able to keep peace and protect their population while trying to MINIMIZE their envolvement in our daily lives and right now everything is exactly the opposite.
> ...


its typical of a socialist government to attempt to CONTROL every aspect of your life, from telling what kind of car to drive to telling you what you can sell and where . DOWN WITH SOCIALISM vote for the Constitution party!!! Seriously tho. It is a sign of the times that all this socialist agenda is getting shoved down our throats. And it surprises me that the democrats are wondering why many in Texas talk of secession ...mind boggling. We have way too many bloody laws now. Most of which are actually Illegal. If the constitution does not give that power to the government then The government can not claim that power. . Period. Next thing people will be saying that the 2nd amendment applies to the military and police only. and forget what infringed means. Good grief what a bunch of idiots we have become .


----------



## fantasticp (May 9, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> so as far as being a socialist???? you have got to be mixing me up with someone else...anyone who knows me, knows im a true capitalist...wayne


http://scabies.myfreeforum.org/about862.html&highlight=

Would suggest otherwise....


"its called human rights ::..i think?....as an American i have the right not to starve(even if its of my own doing) i have the right to have a roof over my head, i have the right to the basic necessities of a human existence...unfortunately people know how to tweak the system...with all of the freedoms we as a people strive for here in America and with our irrational view of having to save the unfortunate continually guiding how we vote for new laws, are you surprised that you would have to pay for it???? someone has got to and its not the government's job to???"

The government's job to keep you alive and a roof over your head capitalism is not my friend.

Throughout the thread you mention all sorts of "free items" as your definition of living in a free country as opposed to freedom to do things being the definition of a free country.

Here's another good socialist quote from the same thread:
 "...my honest opinion, get rid of the middle class....but thats another debate altogether.....i got to go to dinner.."


----------



## Drachenjager (May 9, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> ..example, someone let out 8-9 pouched rats(these weigh like 3-5 lbs) and now they are becoming an epidemic and if they start to spread, look what could happen to agriculture..


just tell the Cajuns that they have a limit of 3 per year and that they taste good in gumbo and problem is solved.

really it is amazing what a Cajun can make good meals out of.
and they are very good at killing the limit several times a year


----------



## Drachenjager (May 9, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> free society??? there's no such thing, regulatory measures are in place because without such regulations civilization is incapable of governing itself.. an experimentation already tried and tested and completely failed....which is why democracy hasn't been practiced in the US for some time now dugh...
> 
> if you play by the rules you have nothing to fear, you dont;P  well than off to hell you go....do i like that its mandatory to wear a seat belt no, do i think im drunk and cant drive if im over .08 no..but these legislation's where put into practice to protect us from the foreseeable consequence of not implementing them. does it hurt people who abide by them no but break them and watch out. same with this bill...
> 
> ...


ACTUALLY The USA is not a democracy and never has been. It was founded as a Constitutional republic. In which only men and land owners at that voted. the reasoning behind that was that women voted with their heart and not their mind. And that non land owners were loafers that would be a drain on the country.  Land
 owners were seen as responsible and providers. Basically it was no deposit no return. Somehow someone got the idea that we were supposed to be a democracy and that's when the socialism hit the fan. a little at a time. IF YOU DON'T WORK YOU DON'T EAT AND SHOULD NOT HAVE A VOTE PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!! I am sick of people voting for their interests and ignoring the rights of the rest and the health of the country. DOWN with welfare , down with grants to countries that hate us and collect on the debt the USA is owed from WWII with interest. Pay of china and stop wasting my darn money !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## cacoseraph (May 9, 2009)

awesome OP adherence =P



and i sort of take back what i said, poorly defined legislation isn't necessarily unenforceable... what generally happens is the first couple few cases brought to trial establish the er, precedence of the legislated law.  what that means is in the first few cases judges decide what all the poorly defined terms mean.  in the US there are essentially two kinds of law: legislative, which is the laws actually like, voted one way or another into existance.... and precendencial laws... how the cases based on certain laws are decided.  it is... probably not the most optimal way to do things





```
i might be misremembering that jurisprudence word.  can't think of what the real word would be, though


edit:
it is not jurisprudence... it is precedence... my bad. i am going to edit the post now
```


----------



## ThomasH (May 9, 2009)

It definitely applies to expos. Read post 33. http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=152721&page=3
TBH


----------



## cacoseraph (May 9, 2009)

that is a taxation body.  barely barely relevant here.  if the existing section references that body then you are on to something, otherwise, i am pretty sure not. i suspect the BoE is somewhat limited in power, cuz as we known, the power to tax is the power to destroy 


you can't just pull definitions from some random place. there has to be like, a chain of reference from the original document.... OR precedential law can like, reference other definitions


----------



## sick4x4 (May 9, 2009)

in the context of what we talking about, human rights i think....http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ and what our taxes where paying for....nothing to do with the OP or society as a whole????

never said the US was a democracy, i believe i said it hasn't been practiced in the US for some time....the idealism of it is what leads people to think the US practices it....which i think was mentioned in one of the above posts and i rebutted it..

and as far as the rats go. (i think that method is in use with another rodent population, where the florida swat team gos out every night shooting some kind of rodent???)..its a demonstration to the destructive impact a non-native species has an a local ecosystem...i used Florida because they have wild populations of non native tarantulas(and other inverts), fish, pythons and other reptiles all causing problems because they are producing viable breeding colonies or groups and disrupting the nature of things in Florida...


wasting money is what government does..remember the golden rule..he who has the gold makes the rules


----------



## ShellsandScales (May 9, 2009)

Less law is better. Why not enforce the laws we have instead of always making a new ones. The other thing I never understand is why is it such a taboo for a non native animal to establish itself in a new environment and compete with the local animals?? This has been going on for millions of years.......... long before man ever even came into the picture. Animals getting introduced to new environments. Sure now we give them a little help but are we not a valid species on the earth anymore to make our impact?? Usually it is geography that keeps wild populations seperate (i.e a river). Geography changes and then the animals can move to a new environment and either be out competed by the existing species, or they will outcompete the native population. Ecosystems change and so do the species that exist in these ecosystems. Many many many many many many many many many many........ more species have died out then are alive today, and no matter how it may seem there are always new species evolving. A non native being introduced into a new ecosystem is just another catalyst for evolution to take place. Who cares if there are burmese pythons in the everglades!!!!!! WHO CARES!!! They exist elsewhere in the world and haven't managed to kill off every living thing in their native land, I'm sure many animals will adapt to this "new" predator.Get over it people we are not as in control of the planet as we think we are. What good does it do to cripple an entire industry?? NONE. And its not just the breeders and shops that will suffer. What about vets?? Especially those specializing in exotics??? Just to give one example of how this would affect more then just the pet trade.


----------



## fantasticp (May 10, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> in the context of what we talking about, human rights i think....http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ and what our taxes where paying for....nothing to do with the OP or society as a whole????


What it has to do is your "labeling" of yourself as a "true capitalist" in post #37 which you are clearly not if you want to abolish the middle class and give free food, shelter, and healthcare to everyone. Maybe you need a dictionary or something.

Edit: Here, I'll help you out.

Capitalist:
noun 1. a person who has capital, esp. extensive capital, invested in business enterprises. 
2. *an advocate of capitalism. *
3. a very wealthy person. 

Capitalism:–noun an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. *as contrasted *to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth *<-----IE SOCIALISM*

Which one did you sound like in the referenced thread:?



sick4x4 said:


> wasting money is what government does...


Always a good attitude. Ever plan on making any money?


----------



## fantasticp (May 10, 2009)

ShellsandScales said:


> . What about vets?? Especially those specializing in exotics??? Just to give one example of how this would affect more then just the pet trade.


I was just thinking about that yesterday. My best friend from high school spent 10 years in vet school. That's a hefty chunk of student loans to pay off with no marketable job skill if there aren't any pets.


----------



## cacoseraph (May 10, 2009)

ShellsandScales said:


> Less law is better. Why not enforce the laws we have instead of always making a new ones. The other thing I never understand is why is it such a taboo for a non native animal to establish itself in a new environment and compete with the local animals?? This has been going on for millions of years.......... long before man ever even came into the picture. Animals getting introduced to new environments. Sure now we give them a little help but are we not a valid species on the earth anymore to make our impact?? Usually it is geography that keeps wild populations seperate (i.e a river). Geography changes and then the animals can move to a new environment and either be out competed by the existing species, or they will outcompete the native population. Ecosystems change and so do the species that exist in these ecosystems. Many many many many many many many many many many........ more species have died out then are alive today, and no matter how it may seem there are always new species evolving. A non native being introduced into a new ecosystem is just another catalyst for evolution to take place. Who cares if there are burmese pythons in the everglades!!!!!! WHO CARES!!! They exist elsewhere in the world and haven't managed to kill off every living thing in their native land, I'm sure many animals will adapt to this "new" predator.Get over it people we are not as in control of the planet as we think we are. What good does it do to cripple an entire industry?? NONE. And its not just the breeders and shops that will suffer. What about vets?? Especially those specializing in exotics??? Just to give one example of how this would affect more then just the pet trade.


lol, this post indicates a STRONG need to learn more about animal world


i was going to respond but that post is just too insane to reply rationally to


----------



## sick4x4 (May 10, 2009)

fantasticp said:


> What it has to do is your "labeling" of yourself as a "true capitalist" in post #37 which you are clearly not if you want to abolish the middle class and give free food, shelter, and healthcare to everyone. Maybe you need a dictionary or something.
> 
> Edit: Here, I'll help you out.
> 
> ...


i guess #3 makes me a capitalist or my family anyways, so guilty by association you can say.... any hoot, its a pointless argument as you don’t have to be republican to have republican views and like I mentioned later in the thread, I was a capitalist with socialistic tendencies... kind of a paradox I know but not as nearly narrow minded as you seem to be...

the argument you keep referring to entails several points I was trying make on the responsibilities of a free nation... not that they were my personal views on the matter...we were talking about where our tax dollars ended up going(I.E. welfare, bailouts it seems recently, and a huge amount of humanitarian aid) which was pointed out, is what a free government does...it helps the needy, hungry and homeless.....yes abolish the middle class(its existence is theoretical at best) but understand there are certain obligations as a free nation, whether you like it or not to help those who cant help themselves for whatever reason..IE the American way   now go away....


----------



## fantasticp (May 10, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> i guess #3 makes me a capitalist or my family anyways, so guilty by association you can say.... any hoot, its a pointless argument as you don’t have to be republican to have republican views and like I mentioned later in the thread, I was a capitalist with socialistic tendencies... kind of a paradox I know but not as nearly narrow minded as you seem to be...
> 
> the argument you keep referring to entails several points I was trying make on the responsibilities of a free nation... not that they were my personal views on the matter...we were talking about where our tax dollars ended up going(I.E. welfare, bailouts it seems recently, and a huge amount of humanitarian aid) which was pointed out, is what a free government does...it helps the needy, hungry and homeless.....yes abolish the middle class(its existence is theoretical at best) but understand there are certain obligations as a free nation, whether you like it or not to help those who cant help themselves for whatever reason..IE the American way   now go away....


I suppose I have to since you have to tag this thread with the disclaimer "Well, I just say things I don't mean anyway except when I mean them, except when I'm just saying them." 

And as I have said before and actually said before and not changed my mind as I feel like it and misquote myself, I'm not a republican I'm a Libertarian. There is more than blue and red, and not being a Socialist does not make me a Republican anymore than not liking vanilla means I like strawberry. A view is a view and not necessarily a Republican view unless you don't know the other options out there.


----------



## fantasticp (May 10, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> I was a capitalist with socialistic tendencies... kind of a paradox I know but not as nearly narrow minded as you seem to be..


Just can't leave it alone. You are not a paradox you just can't keep your story straight. Good thing the internet has better memory than you do so others can read and see that.


----------



## sick4x4 (May 10, 2009)

fantasticp said:


> Just can't leave it alone. You are not a paradox you just can't keep your story straight. Good thing the internet has better memory than you do so others can read and see that.


are you still here???? i think if you read the the scabies thread you will see i already stated that...."ok that was the end of my cultural anthropology lesson ::.....lets if we want to discuss this more start a new thread in the retreat.....as you can see i am a capitalist with very socialistic tendencies"..hum good memory is right.....now you should adhere to the thread protocols and take it to the WH or just go away again......


----------



## fantasticp (May 10, 2009)

sick4x4 said:


> are you still here???? i think if you read the the scabies thread you will see i already stated that...."ok that was the end of my cultural anthropology lesson ::.....lets if we want to discuss this more start a new thread in the retreat.....as you can see i am a capitalist with very socialistic tendencies"..hum good memory is right.....now you should adhere to the thread protocols and take it to the WH or just go away again......


Well you can claim you are a "capitalist with socialistic tendencies" but until I see one capitalistic thought or idea come out of your keyboard I will beg to differ. Quoting yourself saying it does not prove anything. 


I leave the thread with only the definition of anthropology:
-noun 1. the science that deals with the origins, physical and cultural development, biological characteristics, and social customs and beliefs of humankind. 
2. the study of human beings' similarity to and divergence from other animals. 
3. the science of humans and their works. 
4. Also called philosophical anthropology. the study of the nature and essence of humankind.

None of what you said in the scabies thread had an ounce of study or barely a fact that aside. Mostly:



			
				sick4x4 said:
			
		

> its called human rights ::..i think?....





			
				sick4x4 said:
			
		

> we are a nation that rewards lazy but due to the pursuit of free rights as a people, the cost of such freedom is such?


Where was the lesson?

You then go on to say


			
				sick4x4 said:
			
		

> when you tug on that humanity string in the hearts of Americans, its usally only the middle class that feels anything for it and they act accordingly.....


Then, 


			
				sick4x4 said:
			
		

> its my honest opinion, get rid of the middle class....but thats another debate altogether....


And today:


			
				sick4x4 said:
			
		

> ..middle class(its existence is theoretical at best....


First they are compassionate, then need to be destroyed, then, I've heard of them, but are they real?
Clearly proving that you only type to hear yourself speak. Bye!


----------



## sick4x4 (May 10, 2009)

i think socio-cultural anthropology is the word your looking for.....WH please....


----------



## arachnocat (May 15, 2009)

This bill was amended yesterday to EXCLUDE flea markets and swap meets!  
Here's the new version:
http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/Bills/ab_1122

I guess the animal show promoters were loud enough to be heard by the author. Thanks to everyone who sent letters and complained about this bill.
We're safe again... for now!


----------



## Loudog760 (May 15, 2009)

That's good because expos were included.

http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=152721&page=2&highlight=AB1122+Hearing


----------

