Prosecute "pit bull" breeder Floyd Boudreaux all over again?
Dream on, babycakes.
Civil rights don't matter to animal rights extremists
Following the speedy acquittal of Floyd and Guy Boudreaux on dogfighting charges two weeks ago, and as BDS reader The Philosophical Pit Bull points out, the internet is crawling with copies of petitions and form letters addressed to assorted Louisiana officials.
It seems some people have a problem with acquittals based on insufficient evidence. HSUS promised them a conviction, and they want one. One way or another, the extremists want to see blood.
Better interpretations of evidence
For example, Easy Vegan says:
This case needs to be reopened, with a better interpretation of the evidence, so that Floyd and Guy Boudreaux are prosecuted to the fullest extent under Louisiana animal fighting and cruelty laws. Anything less is a grave miscarriage of justice.
Easy Vegan would have preferred a lynching. There is no such thing as "better" interpretations of evidence, and its double jeopardy that's a grave miscarriage of justice. Its a constitutional thingie.
HSUS and its underlings took their best shot at the Boudreaux family, and guess what? The judge promptly threw the case out.
No do-overs allowed, and Easy Vegan doesn't get to re-write the Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution protects us all from repeated prosecutions on the same charges, based on the same (non) evidence. Even Easy Vegan nutcases enjoy the protections of the Fifth Amendment.
Coincidentally, the Fifth Amendment is also what guarantees us due process of the law.
Due process is what was denied Floyd Boudreaux when his dogs were seized, and immediately slaughtered, by the Louisiana SPCA. The dogs were destroyed long, long before Floyd Boudreaux had his day in court.
Is Easy Vegan above the law?
Because animal extremists sure seem to believe the law doesn't pertain to them.
Take Animal Charity in Youngstown, Ohio. Smartdogs' Weblog has an excellent discussion of the actions of a couple of "humane law" agents and their boss, who apparently believed that illegal search and seizures are justifiable because "its all about the dogs".
The law says otherwise.
Tammy Grimes thought she was above the law when she authorized herself to steal a dog, and refused to surrender it when she got caught.
The dog died in Tammy's care.
After she was convicted of theft and receiving stolen property, Tammy's groupies started a letter-writing campaign, asking for her to be pardoned. They thought Tammy was above the law, too.
But Grimes was sentenced accordingly.
One nation. Liberty and justice for all.
We are all innocent until proven guilty in this country. We have the right to a fair trial. We are protected from illegal searches and seizures of our property.
Whackjob vigilantes cannot appoint themselves judge, jury and executioner, and expect to be pardoned.
Animal rights extremists have little use for the Bill of Rights. Civil rights are mostly inconvenient details that gum up the machinery and slow down the
killing salvation of animals.
"Its all about the animals" is a phrase that allows zealots to brush past atrocities like the way Floyd Boudreaux's dogs were seized and killed. I don't know how they sleep at night.
Stuff like this could give Humane Society of the United States a bad name. Couldn't it?