A Little History Lesson Is In Order Here...
For those readers that are unaware, Pam Rogers was a author of the infamous Louisville, KY, animal control ordinance. The very ordinance that the Louisville Kennel Club (and various other individuals) filed a federal lawsuit against, and were successful in several key areas. For the complete ruling issued by Judge Charles R. Simpson (U.S. District Court), please click here.
One of the unconstitutional findings (relative to the "seizure/forfeiture bond") by the Honorable Judge Simpson was that:
Section 91.101 of the Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government code of Ordinances is declared unconstitutional insofar as it threatens to deprive pet owners of their property rights without a finding of guilt...Metro is hereby enjoined from enforcing 91.101 in the manner just described.Forfeiture/Seizure Bonds Are Unconstitutional
You would think that HSUS got the message from Judge Simpson's ruling, but apparently not. (Too much tofu and not enough meat protein, perhaps?)
This bill is a cleverly worded state version of that portion of the Louisville/Jefferson County ordinance. It is still just as bad, and still seeks to deprive owners of their Constitutional Due Process Rights. That is, no state (or person or anyone) can deprive you of your property without an actual finding of GUILT.
This bill seeks to give "ownership" of animals to third parties PRIOR to a finding of guilt of the accused. It also seeks to force those accused in crimes relating to animal cruelty to post a bond. It does not matter whether or not someone can afford to post this type of bond, the bottom line is that no one has the right to give "ownership" of YOUR PROPERTY to someone else!
What about after the trial, and a person is found innocent? This bill does not make it clear that the animals will be returned to the owner; nor does it spell out--with certainty-- that any monies paid will be returned to the rightful owner. It is part of our American judicial system that society bears the brunt (costs) associated with finding a person guilty or innocent. Cases involving those accused with crimes against animals should be treated no differently.
The very concept of a "forfeiture" or "seizure" bond greatly undermines the idea that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law; depriving someone (or attempting to deprive someone) of their personal property by their ability (or inability) to cough up huge sums of cash flat-out crushes the 14th Amendment.
Our judicial system is not perfect; however, we are afforded certain protections under the U.S. Constitution. More and more, the animal rights industry (namely the Humane Society of the United States) would have us to believe that animal owners are somehow different; that we are not entitled to those same protections against warrantless searches and seizures, the right to due process, the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right to a fair and speedy trial, etc.
Kentucky HB 517 Seeks to Grant Police Powers to HSUS "Agents"
If that statement doesn't scare the crap out of you, then I don't know what will.
Those of us that closely montior the anti-animal owner/breeder legislative climate across the U.S. have seen one too many cases of the HSUS using their phony badges and phony legal "authority" to "raid" breeders/animal owners.
In case any of you missed the memo, HSUS is NOT a governmental authority on anything; they have no police powers. Their "agents" are nothing more than individuals playing dress-up; much like we all did as kids. Except when HSUS agents play cops and robbers, the result is dead animals and individuals deprived of their due process rights!
Recently, a South Dakota dog breeder was "raided" illegally (judge threw the search warrant out) by a local "rescue" group, aided by HSUS agents playing dress-up. In addition to the judge throwing out the warrant, and this fiasco costing untold thousands of dollars to the community---dogs are dead as a result.
And, who could forget the "S.W.A.T Team style" raid (complete with Blackhawk helicopters!) on Louisiana "pit bull" breeder, Floyd Boudreaux? Another case of all dogs dead, due process rights thrown out the window, and THOUSANDS of dollars wasted. The outcome? The judge threw out the case.
But, hey, it's all good to HSUS, right? These highly publicized cases garnered them untold amounts in donations, their phony agents got to dress up like "real-live cops" complete with guns-a-blazin', over-inflated egos got blown up some more. So what that these owners were denied their rights and helpless animals ended up dead, right?
OPPOSE KY HB 517: BAD FOR OWNERS, ANIMALS AND THE STATE OF KY
Call or write to the Chairman of the House Agriculture and Small Business Committee, Representative Tom McKee. Then call 1-800-372-7181 and leave a message for YOUR state Rep. to OPPOSE KY HB 517 in its entirety. It is also a good idea to email them as well!
Join our page on Facebook, "Stop KY HB517: Bad for Animal Owners, Animals, And The State!"
Once you join our page, please "share" the link with your Facebook friends by posting the link on your own profile page.
It will take all of us working together to keep KY HSUS-free!
Posts
I am truly troubled by this narrow minded attitude. Maybe if you could step away from the idea of "ownership" and step into one of "guardianship" you would understand why it is necessary to remove a living breathing mammal from abuse and neglect "before" it dies at the end of a chain. It makes little sense to go to trial if the victim is already dead. This is why children are removed and placed in "foster care" before the guardian kills them. I truly do not understand why anyone would want to breed more animals when we are putting down 10K mostly healthy adoptable pets in this nation everyday. Why is that alright with people like you? Why can you not see that while you fight to protect your rights, these creatures that live with us and serve us and love us have none? Perhaps you would prefer to have lived in the time of slavery because your attitude lives there. I think it is telling when one screams of their "rights" when all the while, what about another's rights. Animals need to be thought of in different terms than just something one owns to treat as they wish. I love this business about "looking between my dogs legs" attitude. It is a telling phraseology of the narrow mindedness that permeates this attitude. Your hatred and contempt is seething and last but not least: if not spay/neuter mandates, then what? What is the answer to the pet overpopulation if not to curb the breeding? What is the solution, do you think? How do you plan to stop all this killing? Please by all means before we get between the legs of your dog........tell me, what is your plan?
ReplyDeleteI live in the same area as you, and it's people like YOU who scare me. I won't even let my dogs go outside without watching them every minute for fear some AR person will try to swoop in and spay/neuter them or trump up some phony charges that they are being abused or neglected.
ReplyDeleteYes, I OWN my dogs. I'm not a guardian or a pet parent, and for exactly the reason that is discussed in this blog. I don't want to do anything to make it easier for government to take my animals away from me or to give up my rights to care for my dogs and make decisions for them. That includes the decision to keep them intact, for many good reasons.
When are ARs going to admit that 75 percent of the dogs in this country and 87 percent of the owned cats are already spayed and neutered? That information is even posted on the HSUS web site. There was an overpopulation problem for animals in this country in the 1950s-70s, with 20-30 million cats and dogs being put to sleep each year but that is NOT the case today. VOLUNTARY spay/neutering has brought those figures down to 4 million annually. That's been done through education. And there are always going to be some cats and dogs euthanized each year — the old, the sick, animals with temperament problems. So, no, we do not need MSN.
As for animals having "rights," not on this planet. I love my dogs as much as anyone does but I have the brains and sense to see that they are not people and they don't have the same ability to make moral decisions that people do. Do they have souls? Sure, why not. Should they receive good care? Of course. Are they intelligent? You bet. But my dogs cannot make ethical decisions and they are not entitled to the same rights as humans.
It doesn't matter if you can't understand why people would want to breed more animals or not. What matters is that we have a Constitution, animals are property and people have the right to do as they want with their property. There is no cruelty involved in breeding animals. It's one of the oldest and most cherished human endeavors. And, most of the domestic animals we have today exist thanks to human intervention and intentional breeding.
The intentional breeding of dogs and other domestic animals certainly does not need to stop. There should be more enforcement of existing leash and containment laws to stop random mixed breed dog breeding. There should be continuing efforts to educate people to spay and neuter pets who aren't going to be used for breeding. And you can check Nathan Winograd's web site for information about the No Kill movement: http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/
To: Spay/Neuter-the kindest cut
ReplyDeleteThe sad part of the "rescue the animals before they die" is that in the cases cited above, the dogs were healthy before being taken and now are all DEAD at the hands of groups like the HSUS and overzealous misguided local animal controls. Why do they keep spreading the HYPE that they are the authorities on animal care and know what is best for animals when they can't even keep those seized animals alive and put them in way worse living conditions than where they came from that their health deteriorates? The problem is that these groups just want the power and the money and really don't care about the animal's welfare.
Most of us are responsible pet owners, rescuers and breeders and abhor true cruelty to animals but a lot of those raids show conditions that aren't even from that particular raid and they talk so many untruths about the recued animals condition in the news that their words are not believable anymore. These organizations are all about power and money and should be ashamed of themselves.
Mandatory spay neuter does not work and increases the number of animals entering pounds and animal controls and increases the euthanization rate in those jurisdictions. Let's make the animal shelters do their job in finding homes for stray animals and reuniting lost animals with their owners.
Education about spay/neuter, more free or low cost spay/neuter services, feral trap neuter return programs along with the other programs recommended by the No Kill Advocacy are what really works to reduce the number of healthy animals dramatically. Please see the truth by looking up Nathan Winograd and the No Kill Revolution!
Huh? What does the above described laws have to do with keeping dogs out of shelters? Seems to me that when a faux-gov't organization takes a persons dogs illegally, they create MORE dogs that have to be placed, and potentially euthanized.
ReplyDeleteWhen discussing the constitutionality of a proposed law, there is no room for emotion. This is a conversation about organizations that seem to think they are above the law, or even part of the law. They are not. I don't even think they should be allowed to keep the dogs during a trial. If the state confiscates the dogs, the state can maintain them, just like they do all evidence in any criminal proceeding.
I think it is more than reasonable to maintain the same standards for all crimes. Warrants, police, burden of proof on the state, burden of cost on the state, etc. for all crimes, including those that involve animals.
If you want to actually lower the shelter intake/euthanasia "problem", how about supporting tax credits for landlords who allow dogs, or helping people find low-cost behavioral and basic training classes. Finding ways to keep dogs *in homes* is the key.
Seems to me that this boy running the hsus along with that peta girl may very well be psychopathic animal killers and get paid to do it.will it only end when the people who know what there doing walk away from the animals. Then we get to watch a young man and woman chase their dog around with a squeaky toy driving a little red car here comes your future.
ReplyDeleteHSUS helped make Louisiana law re "alleged" fightin' dogs...it states if the dogs are "alleged" to be fighting dogs, then that gives the dogs the label "contraband" and they can be destroyed ASAP. That is not constitutional and that's how Louisiana kills such dogs. SAD.,
ReplyDeleteRumor has it a similar law is being drafted for Wisconsin.
ReplyDeleteto say to Anonymous that said most of us are "responsible pet owners", I say then you are not looking very hard. And to the other anonymous that said 4million is better than 10-20million. Why is 4 million acceptable. The animals killed in the Animal Control in 2009 were 1200 adoptable healthy animals. These are turned in, roaming or plain dumped. Take at look at the flea markets in the spring when they are selling puppies for beer and cigarette money to anyone that has a $10-$20 and tell me that dog is headed for a guality life. I am glad you all take care of your animals as I do mine, but you are in the minority not the majority. Take a ride around some of these trailer parks and look at what is going on with the cats and the dogs and tell me that's OK. If you love your own dogs so much what about the rest of them? And why not rights for a warm blooded being with feelings? Does your dog have feelings? Is s/he able to communicate in some way to you? Does it feel pain and suffering? What more do you want before someone says, we have to look out for them. Who said anything about parenting or human feelings, this is where the insanity begins. Talk that makes no sense to anyone instead of a reasonable exchange. And then you call us AR the radicals? Who's the radical? Have you been to a puppy mill? Have you walked through and looked at them? I venture to say no, because if you love an animal and you have been in a PM, you would not be ranting on this site about your rights. Instead, you would be screaming for theirs. You find all these raids are just pumped up for the sake of HSUS? What a ridiculous attitude to have. I happen to have a puppy mill breeder dog, recused from such a place 3 years ago. It took almost 2 years before he could trust anyone other than me. Most people would have thrown him away, but he is by far the most loyal dog I have ever lived with and I have the priviledge of being his guardian and he mine! No, not parent, not mother, just friends for life. I would fight to the end for any dog' right to live a comfortable life and not live on the end of a chain 24/7, how can you not?
ReplyDelete