ARs Estatic over SB917, Can’t Wait to Call Cops

This is an AR example found online, specifically referring to SB917

Submitted by Kelly at:July 27, 2011 05:25 PM

YES! Now, everytime I see someone selling animals on the side of the road or in a parking lot, I can tell them it is illegal, and if they don’t leave in 5 min., I am calling the cops! Whooo Hooo! This is super important because we need to change public belief that money can be made off of animals.

We need to make people understand that with our current pet over-population situation, we should not be breeding more animals. If you are looking to add a pet to your family, contact a rescue organization or go to your local shelter. NOTICE that AR did not say if a rescue or shelter was outside in same exact location, IT WOULD BE LEGAL???

Now this is just one person, talking about a scenario outside. We know damn well that there are plenty of other ARs that will actually set up people to MEET them outside in order to snitch them off. We know there are people that will start calling AC on ex friends, neighbors, and whoever they don’t like. There are ARs that will find animals for sale and take pictures of the people, the animals, and probably their car licenses.

Just by looking at rehoming efforts on Craiglist, it will be obvious that if the public figures out what’s going on, they won’t even try to rehome any animals out of fear of going to jail, or being fined.  ARs that filed a challenge to the AETA claim they are fearful of doing legal protests because the animal enterprise might try to claim they are terrorists. The difference we see  is that animal rights extremists are categorized as a form of terrorists by the government due to the many acts the FBI has tried to solve, often without success, including arson, millions/millions of $$ of destruction, and purposeful interference with businesses, including using teriary targeting.  Of course the level the ARs are charged with depend upon the harm they caused, how much violence, if any, was used, whether computers were used for the purpose of knowingly interfering with normal business, if stalking or oppression,etc was used.

In SB917, it is very very obvious that ARs knowingly drafted the law to EXEMPT themselves from ABUSE, for which they are already NOT exempt, under PC597.  Animal shelters cannot make up exemptions for knowing illegal criminal behavior [according to their own law], but then exempt themselves from the same exact thing. Sure, animal control is authorized to kill animals, but not abuse them.   We don’t believe ARs can exempt themselves from abuse, we are not talking about governmental immunity in a 42 U.S.C. 1983 claim where “immunity” can be implied as to legislators for example. State actor liability is a complicated area of law, and when seizures are done by those connected to government (such as private contracted or public animal control) issues usually become quite thorny.  What the public animal control does vs the private “animal rescue” or private SPCA can make a difference.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s