The ACLU filed their amicus brief earlier this year, along with other groups, including AR groups and politically inclined others, to try and tell the Court why the AETA (Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act is not legal http://www.aclum.org/sites/all/files/legal/blum_v_holder/aclum_amicus.pdf All of these briefs in one way or the other, argue that ARs either can’t protest or are allegedly “afraid” to protest, or feel their actions would be squelched if they try to protest.
Then they claim that because it’s aimed at animal rights groups, it should be illegal. To us, the government is not required to take aim at any specific people or group, nor are they required to use any law if they do not wish to do so. Many AR laws are never used at all, and are aimed at animal owners but can be used against people who are NOT the owners themselves. None of those things make the law itself illegal; AR laws can be specifically aimed at only one breed of animal and punish only owners of that breed which to us is discriminatory, but ARs and ACLU want to expand the scope because targeting terrorists in animal issues apparently is “unfair” because the government isn’t choosing to use the law on non animal groups?
That’s because the non animal groups aren’t bombing and burning down other people’s property! That is apparently the domain of religious extremists, most of them from the Middle East.
As we all know, ARs protest all the time in any given locale, they are exceptionally vocal, loud, and certainly not afraid to engage in shutting down businesses, torching farms, burning down millions of $$ of property, releasing animals into the city streets or other areas, physically resorting to even violence against scientists, the families of scientists, which include beating the spouse of a scientist, torching their property and burning the front porch area; obtaining personal addresses and phone numbers and standing outside in front of the person’s home, harassing the family, spilling fake blood on the sidewalk, pummeling Los Angeles shelter workers, using firebombs or other incendiary type devices on the ranch, homes, or other structures of people they do not “like”, destroying the property of others such that notes are then sent out to the media for those taking “credit” for such deeds?
This damage to people and society was not done by one AR or two ARs. This type of conduct is done by the ARs that believe their CONDUCT can and should rise to such levels so that they can make everyone bow down to their demands for stopping the use of any type of medical research, clinical studies, etc, which involve animals; protesting the dog shows nationally, and in general, ignoring the rights of others and pushing THEIR OWN LIFESTYLE BELIEFS upon society. 
Using what society considers to be “legal” methods of protest, ARs have shut down many pet related businesses, such as pet stores which sell pets or animals (fish, rodents, etc) by maintaining a physical presence outside such stores, and driving away all the business.
HSUS has tried to shut down Petland stores by filing lawsuits in Arizona, which failed miserably when HSUS was unable to demonstrate any proof that such animals were linked to any pattern and practice of purposely selling “sick” animals by using the Hunte corporation, which HSUS sued as a named defendant.
The lawsuit against Hunte was booted out quickly. It completely failed, as expected.
What people forget about ARs (animal rights) is this: ARs only push their own lifestyle beliefs upon everyone, to (1) take out the animal and pet trade completely; (2) to change the LEGAL STATUS OF EVERY ANIMAL from that of property — to something HIGHER than property under the law.
This is done for one reason only: IF in fact animals were no longer property, then we could not own them. NOT owning property means you have a limited right to them, and basically you would likely not be able to sell, buy, trade or have a genuine stake in such animal because you do not actually OWN the property. When someone rents property, they don’t own it. When someone is just engaging in custodial care, they don’t own the property, but they might be responsible for it.
They don’t have 100% dominion over the item because they don’t own it. When you pay on a loan for a car, it can be repossessed. When you own it outright, they can’t take it from you unless their is some lien against it for taxes, or you get arrested and a forfeiture is levied. ARs want to change the legal status of animals and make animals into something that would end up giving them rights, such as constitutional rights, as demonstrated by the PETA lawsuit (which failed of course) which tried to say that whales at Seaworld should have constitutional rights.
ARs are NOT about animal welfare laws— but they would have us believe they are. An example is that HSUS attempted in California, to expand the law for “violent videos” claiming they were dangerous for kids. The CA legislature foolishly passed the law, then an injunction was brought against implementing the law. HSUS took this case to the SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES and tried to argue that violent videos were so harmful to kids that the courts needed to carve out a new exception to freedom of speech by making the “harm” to kids rise to the level of child porn, which has no exception in free speech constitutional law. [This is just a simplistic version of the argument, but you get the general idea]
Now, the United States Supreme Court struck down this law very fast, as expected. HSUS focused only on videos and not any movies, tv shows, or books. Surely everyone knows at 8pm on general television we can see tons of dead bodies, bodies torn to shreds, dismembered people, monsters killing people, vampires killing people, etc. Yet HSUS purposely only focused on “violent” videos and tried to support the violent video law they had. Why do you think HSUS did this? We’ll tell you why. HSUS incrementally will take ANY law— as long as they can link it to kids, parents, family, or any person or family type unit (fostering kids, adopting kids, babysitting kids, etc) and then TRANSLATE THE SAME LAWS INTO THAT FOR ANIMALS.
It’s not a secret that family laws and welfare laws are what HSUS uses to make up ANIMAL LAWS. You can plainly see this by the “fostering” “adoption” and “guardian” terms used in animal welfare–and these are all coined by ARs. These stepping stone increments have risen greatly since 2007–in California it is now illegal to give away or sell an animal outside, UNLESS you are a non profit, in which case, then you are exempt from selling or giving away. That is plainly insanity, since a non profit is NOT a guarantee of anything. Just look at HSUS, ASPCA and other AR groups being charged with RICO charges (racketeering and fraud) in the Ringling Bros case which took 11 years and is still going. HSUS also filed against the meat packers in CA when the packers filed an injunction against the HSUS downer cow law, claiming that the federal law preempted the HSUS law as applied to pigs.
Sure enough, HSUS proceeded to the United States Supreme Court again, and as expected, LOST the case on preemption. HSUS also had the “crush film” law passed more than a decade ago, which had a limiting instruction for its application. Sure enough, HSUS then tried to use the “crush” film law against a dog book/video author, [of course they picked out Mr. Stevens because he did a video/book on history of dog fighting] and actually got the prosecutors to arrest Mr. Stevens and they even found him guilty at the trial level. Stevens then appealed and got his case reversed. Of course, in predictable fashion, HSUS marched into the United States Supreme Court, this time to fight on how their crush film law applied to Mr. Stevens’ video.
As expected, the Supremes struck down the HSUS law, but in an even greater way…..the Supremes indicated that the HSUS crush film law was purposely set up only for crush films—which is a very very small niche of sexual-animal fetish behavior. The Supremes indicated that the crush film law was unconstitutional because it would seemingly make every movie, book, video, manuscript, depiction, advertisement, etc–in violation of the “law” as written, because it contained “a depiction of cruelty against an animal” !!
HSUS law said that a “depiction of animal cruelty” made it illegal, but obviously it was NOT limited to a crush film………. It said nothing about whether the depiction was actual, real, knowing, unknowing, fake, etc. So in other words, a fake or staged dismemberment of an animal WOULD be illegal under the law, whereas a real video of a non fake enactment would be illegal as well, even if it was taken from a news story.
Many children’s cartoons and movies such as Bambi would be deemed illegal under HSUS law as applied, and possibly even on the face of the law. Clearly the way HSUS wrote this law was done on purpose. But of course, no one cared when HSUS got the law passed.
HSUS tried to argue that showing dogs fighting was illegal, but if such fighting was filmed where it was legal (as it was/is legal in some countries) then would it be illegal to watch such a film because of HSUS law? Would selling the historical video/book be illegal in every state, and even if sold to a state or country where dogs fighting is not illegal? [We are aware that dog fighting is not legal in the USA at this time, because HSUS made sure that it became illegal in the US] According to the Supreme Court, the sale of the video/book was not illegal based on first amendment issue of speech. The Supremes found the HSUS law COMPLETELY unconstitutional…..and struck it down.
So, any law passed by HSUS is often done with 5-10 years in mind down the road. When they draft these laws on seizure, forfeiture, abuse, etc, they already have NEW laws they plan to ADD on to those which pass.
Particularly in the liberal states that cater to AR laws (very Democrat, left leaning) HSUS will already have legislators they wine and dine to get these laws passed. In CA, HSUS is courting mostly Hispanics from the legislature. Although many extreme AR groups do not like HSUS because they know Pacelle is simply a money-monger, HSUS Pacelle has openly admitted he is no fan of pets realistically. That is because he subscribes to the PETA mentality of better dead than fed. 
What is amazing is despite ALL of the move star whoring used by HSUS and ASPCA, there is really no change in Los Angeles shelters.
And the main reason for this is despite the Hispanic legislative connection of HSUS, HSUS does not try to implement change in the barrio areas or lower economic areas in Los Angeles, which is where most of the abandoned dogs (mixed breeds, medium-to large size,often male juvenile age) actually come from— this is a known, well documented issue. Such dogs make up the bulk of those which are killed in shelters.
This is not a questionable issue, it is a known fact. But ARs don’t try and address the issue, instead they do just the opposite and target the breeding/selling of show dogs, expensive dogs, and dogs in pet stores. When ARs then try and force pet stores to ONLY sell “shelter” animals, it usually results in abject failure because most people buy the breed they want, and are willing to pay for it. Instead of FOCUSING on those areas/issues, Los Angeles instead passed mandatory spay and neuter, knowing that none of the areas which have the abandoned dogs, will comply.
Therefore, no changes are shown because they purposely ignored the facts. This indicates that such laws are NOT done to remedy the ISSUE, but instead, are targeted toward breeders of the very animals that customers WANT to buy. That is because ARs don’t want animals sold or bought for $$$ and don’t want any owner to “profit” from a sale. This is proven by exempting non profits from selling outside, but then charging anyone else as a criminal (for animal abuse) if they do the same thing. So just remember, ARs want animals to NOT be property.
That is so they can end any and all business associated with buying, selling of animals. This would mean no ranching, farming or pets bred and sold for business. HSUS wants to enter the REGULATION OF ANIMALS laws on a state/national level and by passing federal/state laws, HSUS is already there. To further profit from such laws, the regulations imposed by HSUS are then allowed to be enforced by HSUS giving themselves a hand in such enforcement. For example, the chicken regulation in CA coming up in less than 2 years, will show that HSUS will try to give themselves enforcement powers over the chicken farm industry. We guarantee it.
HSUS is now working with APHIS to try and revamp the entire regulation involving the sale and enforcement of internet law/what constitutes a hobby breeder, involving sales of animals, esp dogs. By the HSUS pushing APHIS, HSUS is trying to do what HSUS has failed to obtain in normal legislation. Instead, HSUS is circumventing legislation and trying to go straight to the regulatory administrative process and change the regs directly (Federal)…….. this would have huge far reaching effects on hobbyists. Of course, the AKC and other groups have heavily opposed such regs, and rightly so.
HSUS has no business in telling APHIS how to design laws since HSUS is not an expert animal husbandry nor breeder entity, nor animal expert group at all. Nope. HSUS is a lobbying group that tells shelters how to kill faster, kill more, and still market what they have, if they haven’t already killed them. Now if HSUS didn’t kill the exact dogs here, we know HSUS worked with many shelter groups nationwide to have dogs KILLED en masse, by claiming they had nowhere to put them, by claiming they were “dog fighter” dogs, by claiming they were “sold” for fighting (without proof since defendants were exonerated, but all dogs dead)………you decide……..your property rights are violated if HSUS does their SWAT team raid, kills your dogs, ransacks your house,etc. Not a joke. 
Instead, HSUS simply uses “welfare” laws as the stepping stone to further expand animal rights and HSUS’ ability to enforce the regulation to further make $$ for HSUS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTrhQd9GHlE see this video on parody [making fun of] HSUS ads using funeral music used with movie star whoring to pimp off the AR propaganda bullshit of “abuse” which is just a fund raising ploy by HSUS. This video makes fun of AR HSUS because the ARs use the ANIMALS as propaganda to GAIN $$$. Note: if you don’t understand HSUS’ propaganda videos where they use movie stars/funeral music to fleece the public — understand that HSUS relies ON EMOTIONAL PROPAGANDA such as “abused” animals to gain $$FUNDING$$ and to pay for more advertising and lobbying, giving the public the idea that they represent shelters nationwide. HSUS does not do that, instead HSUS makes people THINK they represent shelters. The fact that HSUS even promotes the book on HOWTO KILL ANY ANIMAL is a huge clue. Dead is better than fed.
(HSUS makes everyone think that animal abuse is rampant when in fact, there is very little animal abuse)…. and HSUS and ASPCA encourage shelters to offer $ REWARDS $ to people to “snitch” off those people that someone suspects might be committing “abuse…” If such abuse was as rampant as HSUS claims, there would certainly be no need for REWARDS.
See example: 
The Humane Society of the United States is now offering a $5,000 reward for tips resulting in arrest and conviction of dog breeders… They have a 1-800 number on their website for you to call in your tip http://www.examiner.com/article/hsus-puts-a-bounty-on-breeders
-
animal news HSUS Related TheHSUS adds to reward for killing of endangered Mexican gray wolf in .related…issue…The HSUS offer adds to an existing $5,000 reward offered by the Blue Ribbon Arson Committee. equine chronicle $2500 reward for info
-
Jul 21, 2012 – Reward Offered For Information About Second .… The
-
HSUS Offers standing reward in equine……………$10,000
Jun 19, 2012 – HSUS Offers Standing Reward of $10000 For Tips on Horse Soring Offenders – Just … through the offering of a reward to crack down on abuse of these animals. … For Advertising Call Gordon Downey at 919.835.4771 or …
-
Aug 28, 2012 – Earlier this year, The HSUS paid a $10,000 reward for information that led to the … the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.
-
http://www.examiner.com/article/hsus-puts-a-bounty-on-breeders
Jul 12, 2012 – Now do not mistake this to say that animal abuse and cruelty should not be reported it … For more about the HSUS “reward” click here ….. tactics using your well intentioned donations solicited by heart rending ads which btw …Humane Society offering reward in dog deaths in Georgetown – WCSC humane-society-offering-reward-in-georgeto…Jul 6, 2012 – The Humane Society of the United States is offering a reward of up to
See 20/20 videos on animal seizure: (Not new, but good if you have not seen)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyjfHjxGxm0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWP_wXfkO78
HSUS published a book on how to kill just about any animal– we know because we bought it just to see how they designed it. Did HSUS file an amicus brief on the AETA lawsuit? We didn’t look, but we doubt it. That might make HSUS lose some funding because for the most part, no one really believes that arson, violence, and harassment should be used against innocent people.
Yet HSUS laws do far more damage that we can ever realize, especially over time. The numbers of ruined families, killed animals, shut down businesses, lost homes, forfeited animals/property by HSUS law is not small. We hear only of the most egregious but HSUS takes great risks because they have a lot of $$$$.
The saddest part is that 80% of the USA population doesn’t even know what HSUS REALLY does. ———–>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PASS IT FORWARD!!!
Pet Defense 