Saturday, January 03, 2009

What Color Is Animal Rights Extremism?

What Color Is Animal Rights Extremism? Fresh bruise P U R P L E Not just liberal folly anymore: Pacelle's HSUS won't be fenced in by party politics

What goes around always comes around. Dog owners living in little houses on the prairie, off the grid, and otherwise at home on the range are getting a bitter taste of what their blue state brethren already know only too well: hometown animal whackjobs working from the HSUS playbook.

Purple haze of extremist proposals drifts over blood red communities

In late 2008 Torrance County, New Mexico -- a county carried handily by John McCain -- began consideration of an animal control ordinance allowing animal control officers to enter homes without a search warrant.

Limit laws, tethering restrictions, a licensing differential making it 3 times more costly to comply if you own an intact dog. . .22 pages of restrictions and requirements for animal owners. The document cites the Humane Society of the United States, and requires that strayed dogs be neutered prior to return to their owners.

Cottonwood, Arizona -- located in Yavapai County -- began consideration of a mandatory spay-neuter proposal for dogs and cats not long ago.

This just in: a councilman, and ex-cop, in Grand Island, Nebraska, is calling for mandatory microchipping. Someone sold him on the need to modernize. . .but forgot to mention the privacy issues.

Looks like the entire freaking State of Montana may need to mull over a statewide ban of "pit bulls" in 2009. Texas, too.

Bad times in the badlands

Tea, South Dakota -- in Lincoln County -- is looking at anti-tethering and breed specific mandatory spay-neuter proposals as possible "improvements" over the pit bull ban it enacted twelve years ago. In other words, a more humane approach to negative profiling and a kinder path to extinction could be available shortly for certain dog owners in Tea. That should make everyone feel so much better.

All, in all, I'd say things aren't looking so good out there in the land of the free and the home of the brave. Not for dog and animal owners, they aren't. And, trust me, I'm not gloating.

But I know who is.

Monomaniacs don't do that red state/blue state shit

Wayne's got his eyes on the prize.

HSUS just blows on by the annoying details. HSUS can claim to support private property rights in Virginia, and seek to dismantle those same rights in Torrance County, New Mexico.

Anybody have a problem with that? Cause HSUS doesn't.

Animal extremism is not conservative, its not liberal. Its not right-wing, its not new-age, its not feminist, its not gangsta. Wayne doesn't give a crap about anything but furthering HSUS's messed up agenda.

Everything else is just background noise.

No more Obama drama

We're dealing with a one-horned flying purple people eater from hell.

Animal extremism is an assault on civil rights and civil liberties. It makes a mockery of the U. S. Constitution. Animal extremists aren't troubled by the rule of law. They consider themselves above it.

No Democrat, no Republican, no liberal, no conservative -- no one who treasures liberty and the pursuit of happiness -- could stomach the HSUS agenda, or its tactics.

So have at it, folks. 2009 is open for business. Should be a hum-dinger.


Azor & Me said...

Thanks for the alert about doings in Montana. I'll keep an eye on it. Peggy

Anne Good said...

Interesting topic. I hadn't really given much thought to the microchip issue.

OKbirdlady said...

Excellent, on point article. The fringe "true believers" are certain that the end justifies the means, and the Constitution is "just a piece of paper", as someone in our government averred a few years ago. Let's hope the Obama, as a Constitutional scholar, is aware of the fringe ambitions to end animal use and their lack of respect for citizens' civil rights.

Caveat said...

Thanks for this. Too many people associate these laws with Democrats when, if you look at a map, the traditional red states are as bad or worse.

As always, education, not legislation, is what works to create a culture of responsibility.

The more people know, the less they fear.

YesBiscuit! said...

Ignorance knows no bounds.

Freedom Pup said...

Bluedog, another great post. The HSUS is using every bit of effort they have and cent they reel in to further erase civil liberties in America.

We, at, are working on helping spread the word beyond the electronic feeds, to the radio and newspapers- maybe even tv if we can swing it.

You should check out our most recent blog concerning our friends at the HSUS.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the truth, as usual. WP thinks all is well. What a surprise he is in for....we have just begun. If there was outrage at CA AB1634, there should justifiably be worse outrage at HSUS "helping" with any ordinance in the USA--when it comes to "saving" pets, "helping pets, or SEIZING pets. Thanks, petdefense (at Stay tuned for the Advocacy Store. PS Azor&amp...your dog looks like mine. :)

The Philosophical Pit Bulls said...

The climate out there for all aspects of pet ownership is pretty bad. Average pit bull are almost as bad as the humaniacs! God forbid someone decides to have a litter that was not planned and are honest about possible genetics issues that are a nuisance but not a death sentence for the dog while they are trying to rationalize their dog from the breeder with the fancy website and brag rags having epilepsy!

When did things on OUR end get so skewed? When honesty is attacked more so than hiding pertinent things it ought not to start flame wars to play into the humaniac hands. By denigrating breeders as subhuman we are doing their work for them!

Anonymous said...

Sadly 2008 was a banner year for HSUS with over 100 laws restricting or eliminating the rights of animal owners passed across America. The lack of a red / blue differential seems to me to indicate that the AR's money is equally attractive to scumbags on both sides of the aisle.

It *is* really scary to me that states where residents traditionally take a very conservative approach to civil rights are now having those rights stripped away from them by a coalition of self-serving politicians and ignorant do-gooders who don't understand the difference between animal RIGHTs and animal WELFARE.

Anonymous said...

I found your blog around a year ago when the KY law was being considered. And now look at the results. Thanks for your blog. I enjoy reading it although I wish it wasn't needed at all, but in the meantime its not fluffy and cute, its blunt to the point and somewhat comical in a shouldn't be kind of way. I refer people to your blog when asked about AR and BSL and it truly has changed many minds, thank you again from myself, my farming family and my happily intact cats who if asked if they wanted the snip would shout He.. NO!! We won't go -:)

marsha chambers said...

If you think some of thoes laws are strange, try Texas. In the Texas Court of Appeals the JP Forfeiture Case started out as an Administrative Hearing in which Constitutional Rights did not matter in 2004.
Then when a Petition for Judicial Review of the Administrative Hearing was filed the District Court CHANGED the JP Court Hearing/Trial INTO a Civil Forfeiture Suit Filed by the State of Texas and Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction.
When this Judgment was Appealed to the State Court of Appeals that Court CHANGED it INTO a Civil 'In Rem' Forfeiture in which JP Court have special and limited jurisdiction.
When an Action was filed against the State of Texas for the Return of the Proper and Declaratory Judgment of the Constituttionality of the State 821 Statutes the District Court again ruled that it Lacked Jurisdiction because the State had Immunity from a suit to correct the previous forfeiture.
This judgment was appealed and the Appellate Court then CHANGED the 2004 Civil JP Court Case INTO a CRIMINAL FINDING OF GUILT Case. This was done without ANY ARREST AND WITHOUT ANY CRIMINAL CASE EARD IN ANY COURT.
There is a LOT MORE Information and copies of these cases and the State Attorney's Brief and Responses and also the Brief's and Responses that have been FILED BY THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE.
There is also Federal Cases and a copy of the Writ of Certiorari thaqt is NOW before the US SUPREME Court.
site www.RightToOwnAssets.Com