The Bill To Ban Our Hobby Is Here!

[pitbulllady]

Wow PBL, that's insane. I had no clue that they were regulating domestics now. Who knew that after thousands of years domesticating these animals that they would turn right around and regulate them?
TBH

That is EXACTLY what the people backing this bill, the powerful and well-funded animal rights lobby, is counting on-that the proverbial left hand won't know what the proverbial right hand is doing. In other words, that the dog breeders will not be aware of what's going on in the exotic animal community, that the exotic animal people won't care what's going on in the dog or cattle-breeding community, that the little old ladies who feed stray cats won't see the problems with banning "pit bulls", etc. This is how they succeed, by creating divisions within all the people who own, keep, breed, sell, hunt, eat, or in any way interact with animals.

Here's a quote from Wayne Pacelle, CEO of the HSUS, the primary sponsor of the bill in question, that sums up the animal rights view on domesticated animals, lest you still question whether domesticated animals are under the same attack as exotic animals:

“We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding ...One generation and out. We have no problems with the extinction of domestic animals. They are creations of human selective breeding.”
— Animal People News

“My goal is the abolition of all animal agriculture.” — HSUS grassroots coordinator John “J.P.” Goodwin. Mr. Goodwin, who often appears on tv as a HSUS expert on dogfighting, is a convicted felon who did hard time in the Federal pen for masterminding a firebombng of a laboratory when he was a member of the domestic terrorist group, ALF. He claims to no longer be affiliated with the terrorist group, while at the same time, says of former fighting dogs, "leopards cannot change their spots", to defend the HSUS's position that all Pit Bulls confiscated in raids on suspected dogfighting rings should immediately be destroyed, not given a chance. Wonder if terrorists can change THEIR spots, John?

Here are some quotes from Ingrid Newkirk, founder and president of People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals, regarding her organization's view on domesticated animals:


“I don’t use the word 'pet.' I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer 'companion animal.' For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance.”
— The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223


“The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats... If people want toys, they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship, they should seek it with their own kind.”
— Animals


“One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV.”
— The Chicago Daily Herald


“Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation.”
— Harper's

Don't make the mistake of brushing these groups off as a bunch of whacks. They comprise a multi-BILLION dollar industry, funded mostly by donations made by often well-meaning people who honestly believe that they are helping to save innocent animals from abuse. They run a powerful membership drive that targets impressionable, emotionally-vulnerable young people-just like cults do. The HSUS is pushing to become a government office, with law enforcement abilities. They've made it no secret what they are really about, but most people still do not take them seriously, or actually believe that they're doing something good. So you hopefully can see, BoaConstrictor, it's NOT just exotic animals that are under attack. It's not just YOU they're after. It's every one of us. They're making greater headway in restricting domestic animal ownership, actually, because those animals are more obvious. It's fairly easy to hide the fact that you have a snake, or a tarantula, but if you've got a dog, someone's going to know about it.

pitbulllady

 

[ThomasH]

Wow, those people are down right scary. They sound like a terrible imagination sci-fi movie cult gone wrong. If they got what they wanted the economy would go straight to heck, millions would be unemployed, native animals would all be killed by starving domestics and domesticated animals would all die from starvation after being released. I can't even imagine how trashed the U.S would be if all those animals would be set out to roam. I don't even think it would be safe for me to e-mail the people you quoted and tell them my opinion even in a nice-as-possible manner. I didn't even know what HSUS was.
TBH

 

[PsychoSpider]

I always new the u.s.a would end up like this.

 

[357wheelgunner]

And just who-and HOW-do you determine who gets to keep animals and who doesn't, Jdubz? Do we trust the politicians and the HSUS/PETA folks to make that determination? If we do, we can kiss our animals goodbye. How do you determine if the little old lady down the street is "intelligent or educated" enough to own a Toy Poodle? Is a cattle rancher who had to drop out of school in the ninth grade to support his family "educated" enough to continue to raise cattle or have dogs to help control those cattle? If my sister's Great Dane has been bred for size, is that a bad thing? Should someone come take her dog away and kill it because it's large? Should my aunt's Jack Russell Terrier be destroyed because these dogs were-and still ARE-bred to hunt and KILL other animals? Is a mentally-challenged person not "intelligent" enough to have a service dog? What is the minimum IQ to be able to keep an animal, Jdubz? 90? 120? 140? Suppose I were to be the one to decide who is intelligent and educated enough to keep dogs, snakes, tarantulas, or whatever, and I set that minimum at 138 IQ, with a minimum of a Master's Degree...would YOU still get to keep YOUR animals? "Intelligence" and "Education" level have NOTHING to do with RESPONSIBILITY, and never will. Horses kill around 40 people per year in the US alone; that's NOT a very "clean" record, as you put it. Should we prohibit people from owning such animals due to the risk? While snake bite deaths are rare in the US, worldwide that is NOT the case, so does this mean that no one is "intelligent or educated" enough to own a snake?

MOST of the "threat" with many animals is a PERCEIVED threat that is pushed by the people who want to ban the ownership of ALL animals, period. There might not have been any deaths resulting from tarantula bites, but you'd be arguing against a brick wall with a politician who is terrified of spiders and believes what he/she has seen in the movies, or what he/she is told by the people at the Animal Protection Institute. The media portrays spiders in general as dangerous and threatening and disgusting. The media tells us that "pit bulls" are bred to be aggressive and that they kill people, and they reinforce this by calling every dog that does something remotely bad a "pit bull", no matter what it looks like. It's like calling every snake a "rattlesnake"; it convinces people that ALL snakes are bad and dangerous. When you fall into the trap of believing the media when it comes to animals, you damn every single one of us, yourself included.

pitbulllady

The poster you quoted advocates punishing the owners of pets that do damage, no pets percieved as bad. I'm all for that.

Banning a specific kind of pet is just like segregation and other racism, it generalizes a group because of one or two or ten bad apples. Animals and people should be treated on a one by one basis.

If they execute the next person who's pitbull or other dog attacks and mauls a human, maybe people would take more responsibility for their animals' behavior. I was mauled by a dog when I was young, it's not fun. Owners of violent animals should be punished for their pets behavior. If you can't control a dog or snake or scorpion, and it hurts someone, you should pay for it.

That said, owners who can safely keep centipedes, scorpions, spiders, dogs, cats, elephants, etc. shouldn't be told not to. In America you should be able to own spiders, scorpions, centipedes, pistols, dogs, lions, automatic rifles, fish, firearm suppressors, fast cars, fatty foods, motorcycles...Anything you want, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

Pet hobbyists have the same problem that gun hobbyests do. Some shooters think that revolvers are fine, but high capacity rifles aren't. Some think that suppressors on guns are a good thing, but that full automatic fire somehow is more dangerous. Some pet owners think that they should be able to keep venomous reptiles and inverts, but others shouldn't have dogs.

In order to get anything done, people have to LEAVE EVERYONE ELSE ALONE and not step on their rights unless someone gets hurt.

 

[357wheelgunner]

Animals are my livelyhood. This is serious. If we spend five minutes to e-mail the sponsors we will get our way. If we do nothing there will be a far better chance of it passing because to be against something you have to state your opinion. Nobody is going to read your mind or come up and ask you. Why are you telling people not to fight a ban of the hobby you love anyway? Sometimes fighting is your only chance.

Voicing your opinion to these people won't do you any good.

The people pushing this bill are insane. They're not your average democrats, they're the far left animal rights wackos, here to tell you what to do.

I'm not saying to do nothing, just that there's not much you can do by contacting the bill's sponsors. Contact your state representatives and tell them to fight this retarded bill with everything they have.

The time to fight absurd rules like this is during the 2 year elections. If you don't go out and vote against democrats like these guys, new stupid overbearing laws like this are your fault. Vote in candidates who want less government and more freedom, and you're doing your part.

Somewhere on this board, there is someone who voted for one of these jackasses....I wonder if they'll chime in and voice their opinion of what their representatives are doing? If they don't feel like posting, that's fine too, so long as they understand how personally responsible they are for aiding in the destruction of our hobby.

Boa, great job bringing this up. My rant on the failings of democracy wielded by dullards was definately not aimed at you, your post just got me started. Keep up the good fight!

 

[J_dUbz88]

And just who-and HOW-do you determine who gets to keep animals and who doesn't, Jdubz? Do we trust the politicians and the HSUS/PETA folks to make that determination? If we do, we can kiss our animals goodbye. How do you determine if the little old lady down the street is "intelligent or educated" enough to own a Toy Poodle? Is a cattle rancher who had to drop out of school in the ninth grade to support his family "educated" enough to continue to raise cattle or have dogs to help control those cattle? If my sister's Great Dane has been bred for size, is that a bad thing? Should someone come take her dog away and kill it because it's large? Should my aunt's Jack Russell Terrier be destroyed because these dogs were-and still ARE-bred to hunt and KILL other animals? Is a mentally-challenged person not "intelligent" enough to have a service dog? What is the minimum IQ to be able to keep an animal, Jdubz? 90? 120? 140? Suppose I were to be the one to decide who is intelligent and educated enough to keep dogs, snakes, tarantulas, or whatever, and I set that minimum at 138 IQ, with a minimum of a Master's Degree...would YOU still get to keep YOUR animals? "Intelligence" and "Education" level have NOTHING to do with RESPONSIBILITY, and never will. Horses kill around 40 people per year in the US alone; that's NOT a very "clean" record, as you put it. Should we prohibit people from owning such animals due to the risk? While snake bite deaths are rare in the US, worldwide that is NOT the case, so does this mean that no one is "intelligent or educated" enough to own a snake?

MOST of the "threat" with many animals is a PERCEIVED threat that is pushed by the people who want to ban the ownership of ALL animals, period. There might not have been any deaths resulting from tarantula bites, but you'd be arguing against a brick wall with a politician who is terrified of spiders and believes what he/she has seen in the movies, or what he/she is told by the people at the Animal Protection Institute. The media portrays spiders in general as dangerous and threatening and disgusting. The media tells us that "pit bulls" are bred to be aggressive and that they kill people, and they reinforce this by calling every dog that does something remotely bad a "pit bull", no matter what it looks like. It's like calling every snake a "rattlesnake"; it convinces people that ALL snakes are bad and dangerous. When you fall into the trap of believing the media when it comes to animals, you damn every single one of us, yourself included.

pitbulllady

Actually i do not fall into the trap of media, i watch news and other things to get a perspective on the world and current events. And intelligence and education do have something to do with responsibility how could you say it does not? Service dogs are very calm, and well trained dogs that have not been bred to attack other things and thus do not have the basic instinct to attack, the have the basic instinct to hunt all dogs but that is very different from attacking. Jack russels are to small and not very powerful to propose much of a threat to anyone other than a baby or small child. once again this boils down to the fact that pitbull were bred for fighting and jack russels for hunting, two very different things. Great danes have been bred for size this is true but they have also been bred for being docile animals, once again not bred to fight. With intelligence comes responsibility and with education comes the ability to care for that animal properly. the farmer who dropped out of ninth grade to farm may not have a general education but knows a whole lot about farming and those animals on his farm. So to decipher if someone can care for there animals there should be different classes grouping these animals so the poor little old ladies can still have their poodles and we can still have our exotics.

 

[ThomasH]

Voicing your opinion to these people won't do you any good.

The people pushing this bill are insane. They're not your average democrats, they're the far left animal rights wackos, here to tell you what to do.

I'm not saying to do nothing, just that there's not much you can do by contacting the bill's sponsors. Contact your state representatives and tell them to fight this retarded bill with everything they have.

Yeah we can beat this. Just not with the sponsors. None of them have emailed me back. I guess they just thought they were ditching a real wacko. This probably won't become a law but we also just can't sit, take that chance and watch so start contacting people.
Thanks,
TBH

 

[pitbulllady]

Actually i do not fall into the trap of media, i watch news and other things to get a perspective on the world and current events. And intelligence and education do have something to do with responsibility how could you say it does not? Service dogs are very calm, and well trained dogs that have not been bred to attack other things and thus do not have the basic instinct to attack, the have the basic instinct to hunt all dogs but that is very different from attacking. Jack russels are to small and not very powerful to propose much of a threat to anyone other than a baby or small child. once again this boils down to the fact that pitbull were bred for fighting and jack russels for hunting, two very different things. Great danes have been bred for size this is true but they have also been bred for being docile animals, once again not bred to fight. With intelligence comes responsibility and with education comes the ability to care for that animal properly. the farmer who dropped out of ninth grade to farm may not have a general education but knows a whole lot about farming and those animals on his farm. So to decipher if someone can care for there animals there should be different classes grouping these animals so the poor little old ladies can still have their poodles and we can still have our exotics.

If being "EDUCATED" is any indicator of whether or not a person should be allowed to keep animals, based on your so-called "knowledge" of dog breeds and what they were bred for, I hope you do NOT keep any animals! Your first statement-"I watch news and other things to get a perspective on the world"-says it all. My first assessment was correct-you are indeed gullible enough to believe what the news media tells you. If the news media shows you a mixed hound dog that bit someone and tells you it's a "pit bull", you believe it. If they tell you that little dogs cannot hurt anyone, you believe it. You know NOTHING about dogs other than what the popular media has force-fed you. I bet the folks at PetLaw Group would get a big kick out of your claims that a Jack Russell Terrier can't hurt anyone, or that Great Danes were bred to be docile and weren't bred for fighting, lol! How about being bred to kill WILD BOARS? Of course, Jack Russells don't kill people-because if they do, the news media would call them PIT BULLS, just like they did when that Jack Russell and a Plott Hound killed a two-year-old in Richmond, VA, a couple of years ago.
I don't rely on the news to tell me about dogs. I own dogs. I breed dogs. I hunt with dogs. I have worked with people who have bred and worked dogs since before your parents were born. I know dogs, and how they act, and what the different breeds were created for. If we were to go by your derailed train of thought, 90% of dog breeds would be illegal, since they were bred to kill something at some point, and many still are. But, that is actually irrelevant. I've been around American Pit Bull Terriers since I was born, and I'm probably old enough to be your grandmother. EXPERIENCE, your own and that of the people YOU learn from, is far more valuable than "education" and "intelligence" when it comes to keeping animals, or doing anything, for that matter. I've seen and owned more REAL American Pit Bull Terriers than you have seen in your lifetime, and I know the breed better than the news media, or PETA, or you. Yes, they were bred to fight-OTHER DOGS. Great Danes were bred to fight and kill wild boars. Jack Russell Terriers were bred to fight and kill foxes, badgers and other wild animals. I've personally seen one single-handedly take out a big boar raccoon, an animal that can whip a whole pack of hounds and send bobcats packing. Seen that, too. Not watched it on the news on tv, personally experienced it. Animal aggression is NOT the same as people aggression; if it was, no hunting breed would be safe to own, since all will kill any animal they catch! Did you know-wait, that's a dumb question; I guarantee you don't-that for countless generations, APBT breeders shot any dog that showed any aggression towards humans, for any reason? Old-school dog-fighters hired KIDS to handle their dogs in the fighting pit; those kids had to be able to pick up the dogs and take them to their corners and treat their injuries without risk of being bitten. The dogs were also used as barter, traded for things the owner needed, like food or clothing, so the dogs were bred to accept any random stranger as their owner right away. But then, the news doesn't tell you that. All the news-with the full backing of PETA-can tell you is that any dog that bites is a "pit bull", no matter what it actually looks like. My grandfather used to have a very descriptive phrase to apply to people who had gotten all their "knowledge" from the news, or from a book, trying to argue with someone who had actual EXPERIENCE with the subject at hand; he'd say that they were "trying to argue with Noah about the Flood", a very apt description for someone trying to sound knowledgeable about something they really no absolutely NOTHING about, making themselves seem like a fool to anyone with actual, real-life, first-hand experience in the matter.

pitbulllady

 

[snakemaster1]

I read over that bill and from what i read the bill suggests that they will ban all SPECIES OF ANIMALS NOT NATIVE TO AMERICAN SOIL so if the animal is not naturally ocurring in the USA all 50 states it will be banned and if you read the bill it states also this includes animals that are captive bred. so that would basically mean anything sold in a pet store would become illegal to own. from fish ,birds,reptiles,rodents the whole works.

 

[pitbulllady]

I read over that bill and from what i read the bill suggests that they will ban all SPECIES OF ANIMALS NOT NATIVE TO AMERICAN SOIL so if the animal is not naturally ocurring in the USA all 50 states it will be banned and if you read the bill it states also this includes animals that are captive bred. so that would basically mean anything sold in a pet store would become illegal to own. from fish ,birds,reptiles,rodents the whole works.

You got it, snakemaster1! That is the intent-to ban the trade in ALL animals, period. The HSUS is pouring hundred of thousands of dollars into getting this one passed, all money donated by people who think they're helping abused/abandoned cats and dogs or pets displaced by natural disasters, or stopping dog-fighting and chicken-fighting. Many of those people own and breed and sell many of the animals that would be impacted by this if it passes. The bill leaves it open to easily add species to the "Invasive Animal" section of the Lacey Act, so anything that is perceived as a POTENTIAL threat to humans, native wildlife, or the environment.

pitbulllady

 

[crpy]

Does Pitbulllady rock or what, damn I not worthy, but i want to be on your team.

 

[snakemaster1]

The same thing is happening here in the cold frozen far north AKA Canada i have been trying to get everyone on board here in BC. where they are trying to ban all alien species. no one can seem to see the big picture here either they want to ban it all, they don't care how they do it . No matter what you keep we have to band together to fight these laws.

 

[Galapoheros]

If this thing passes it will surprise the hell out of me! I was surprised enough just to read such a thing so, who knows. The people that decide how this ends up MUST be more sane than the people pushing it. We try to elect sane people that represent the majority and the majority surely must think this bill is crazy. I just don't think it will fly, even gov employees like their pets. Pres Bush loves his dog. Maybe an amended form of it will go through someday, but as it is ...that would be crazy! I guess the "crazy" thing could happen. I think the "left" is destroying the idea they believe they fight for ..freedom. They want to control and protect everything like an over protective parent that doesn't let their children go and live their life. There needs to be a rational balance and the majority seems to be denied more and more the right to represent that rational balance. I too see that the media is very manipulating. I remember hearing on the news that somebody had somebody else's dog that got lost in hurricane Rita. The media was trying to turn that into a big story, and they almost did it. Now use your own brain and take a look at it. Somebody had somebody else's dog! ......that's it! That's all! We all live in small worlds. We hear on the news that somebody was murdered and they make us think how bad it is out there. I don't want to sound insensitive but 1000's of people die every day. They pick a bad scene and paint a picture of life for you to see and we let that become our perspective. They decide what to tell us in the news and decide how they want us to think about what they say and then present it that way. It's how people can start riots, cults, wars, etc. They found a large fossil of an arthropod not too long ago and said it was the biggest arthropod that ever lived. Most people would say, "Wow!, that's interesting..." Use your own head again. "They" don't know that, nobody does. Nobody knows what the largest arthropod that ever lived on earth was, it's impossible to know that. If they said, "....known to date..." that would change everything. But it's more exciting to say ..ever existed.. My mind isn't out for rent as much as it used to be. I question and think a lot more about what people tell me than I use to and I try to listen to both sides. Well anyway, enough of that rampage. If this thing passes as it is, ..speechless man! I just don't know WHAT I would think.

 

[EightLeggedFrea]

I hope to God this incredibly stupid thing doesn't pass. It sounds like another one of those things to distract us from the REAL problems going on right now.

Any idea WHEN they are going to vote on it anyway?

 

[pitbulllady]

If this thing passes it will surprise the hell out of me! I was surprised enough just to read such a thing so, who knows. The people that decide how this ends up MUST be more sane than the people pushing it. We try to elect sane people that represent the majority and the majority surely must think this bill is crazy. I just don't think it will fly, even gov employees like their pets. Pres Bush loves his dog. Maybe an amended form of it will go through someday, but as it is ...that would be crazy! I guess the "crazy" thing could happen. I think the "left" is destroying the idea they believe they fight for ..freedom. They want to control and protect everything like an over protective parent that doesn't let their children go and live their life. There needs to be a rational balance and the majority seems to be denied more and more the right to represent that rational balance. I too see that the media is very manipulating. I remember hearing on the news that somebody had somebody else's dog that got lost in hurricane Rita. The media was trying to turn that into a big story, and they almost did it. Now use your own brain and take a look at it. Somebody had somebody else's dog! ......that's it! That's all! We all live in small worlds. We hear on the news that somebody was murdered and they make us think how bad it is out there. I don't want to sound insensitive but 1000's of people die every day. They pick a bad scene and paint a picture of life for you to see and we let that become our perspective. They decide what to tell us in the news and decide how they want us to think about what they say and then present it that way. It's how people can start riots, cults, wars, etc. They found a large fossil of an arthropod not too long ago and said it was the biggest arthropod that ever lived. Most people would say, "Wow!, that's interesting..." Use your own head again. "They" don't know that, nobody does. Nobody knows what the largest arthropod that ever lived on earth was, it's impossible to know that. If they said, "....known to date..." that would change everything. But it's more exciting to say ..ever existed.. My mind isn't out for rent as much as it used to be. I question and think a lot more about what people tell me than I use to and I try to listen to both sides. Well anyway, enough of that rampage. If this thing passes as it is, ..speechless man! I just don't know WHAT I would think.

The Anti's won't try to use this bill to get rid of dogs, even though technically, with the way it's written, they CAN. Instead, they're using other bills, mostly at the local/municipal levels, to gradually eliminate dogs and cats. Mandatory spay/neuter laws, BSL, limit laws, ridiculous pet housing laws, so-called "vicious" dog laws that encompass most normal dog behaviors as "viciousness" are being put into effect all over the country. Now, there are what I call "snitch" laws, where the HSUS actually pays people large cash rewards to tell on neighbors that might have an intact dog, or doesn't walk their dog enough, or if the neighbor has what might be a "pit bull" and therefore MUST be involved in dog-fighting or dealing drugs. In California, a bill currently on the Senate Floor(it already passed the House), if it hasn't passed already, forces owners to spay/neuter cats and dogs IF there have been three complaints made about that animal. Thing is, the complaints do not have to be substantiated or verified, just filed! They can range from pooping on a neighbor's lawn to barking or looking menacing behind a fence. The burden of proof is 100% on the animal's owner to prove that the animal did NOT do anything, while at the same time, the HSUS is offering people up to $5,000.00 to "snitch" on cat and dog owners, with full confidentiality! In other words, If I know one of you lives in CA, and I can find out your address, and I know you've got an intact cat or dog, I can contact the nearest animal control office where you live and tell them your dog tried to bite me, or your cat peed on my car...and if I make three complaints, they can force you to spay or neuter your animals, and fine you...while I can collect a hefty prize of blood-money from the Humane Society of the United States! Chicago is trying to pass MSN of ALL animals, regardless, and is also trying to prohibit anyone who has been convicted of a felony from owning any kind of animal as if animals were the same as firearms. Now, when most of us think of "felons", we tend to think of violent criminals, BUT there are many non-violent or "white collar" crimes that carry felony penalties upon conviction. Think "Martha Stewart". Under this law, SHE would be prohibited from owning even a goldfish, let alone her beloved Chows! The main purpose of this law, according to its backers, is to get rid of GANGS! The theory is, if the gang-bangers can't have dogs, or can't breed dogs, or buy dogs(most of 'em around here steal dogs), they'll drop out of the gangs and stop all the other activity associated with gangs, like armed robbery, drug dealing, vandalism and randomly shooting five-year-old kids in playgrounds. Talk about "fuzzy logic"!

pitbulllady

 

[ThomasH]

Keep the e-mails flowing. Fight the good fight.

 

[arachnocat]

Sounds like the rest of the country is becoming like California. The laws here about keeping pets are really ridiculous. Pretty much all exotic animals are illegal. Luckily snakes, lizards and tarantulas haven't made it to their list yet but they add more every year. California is also the only state where you can't have transgenic animals. So no Glo-Fish. Even though the glo fish are just the same species of zebra fish you can get in any pet store.
I hope this law doesn't pass but people are always going to keep fighting for stupid laws like this.
I hope it doesn't ruin our hobby.

 

[ThomasH]

Just a little bump to the top.

 

[357wheelgunner]

Sounds like the rest of the country is becoming like California

The problem is that most of the country votes for whoever they think will give them the most free stuff, which usually means retards like these guys who think that the country's money grows on trees, and that they can control anyone they want by passing overbearing new laws.

America is definately not like california

 

[crpy]

The problem is that most of the country votes for whoever they think will give them the most free stuff, which usually means retards like these guys who think that the country's money grows on trees, and that they can control anyone they want by passing overbearing new laws.

America is definately not like california

A-cat said it "sounds" like, not "is" lol, but im with ya