Anyone for a BIG cup of "Unintended consequences" ?

[CAJUNLAWYER]

Text - H.R.724 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Now I am as much against this kind of sick sadistic behavior as anyone else, but..................
How about a hunting video of a hunter taking an elk with bow and arrow and the elk runs 50 yards and dies. Some rabid USA from ,say San Francisco, decides to charge the hunter, some poor schmuck from, say Louisiana with a federal violation.
I really DON'T like it when the feds get involved in ANYTHING.

 

[rubiranch]

I've been thinking the same thing.

 

[histreenut]

More or less like this then unfortunately...

Sent from my VS835 using Tapatalk

 

[DeathGrip]

1. Crushing.

What? I can't crush animals anymore?

 

[Faulkner]

Text - H.R.724 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Now I am as much against this kind of sick sadistic behavior as anyone else, but..................
How about a hunting video of a hunter taking an elk with bow and arrow and the elk runs 50 yards and dies. Some rabid USA from ,say San Francisco, decides to charge the hunter, some poor schmuck from, say Louisiana with a federal violation.
I really DON'T like it when the feds get involved in ANYTHING.

This law, much like Red Flag laws, leave way too much for cultural interpretations.

 

[M29since14]

...I really DON'T like it when the feds get involved in ANYTHING.

+1,000,000 - and then some.

I will wait to see what hilarious, twisted interpretation of the Constitution they will create to justify assuming they have this authority. Hilarious it would be, I guess, if it wasn’t so sickening.

 

[jdlii]

Based on the current wording, the proposed act seems very "open ended" and seemingly would lead to court interpretation on a case by case basis.
This would, IMO, then lead to varied decisions depending on each state and judge where a case may be heard and would likely end up at the circuit level or even the USSC.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

More or less like this then unfortunately...

Sent from my VS835 using Tapatalk

Why can't I "like" this more than once?

 

[BAM-BAM]

Put a stop to "hunting" and we will be overrun by game animals...........

around my Burb of the Burgh we already have way way too many deer and turkey.... working on Coyotes and the occasional bear.

Folks in several rich suburbs are calling for "birth control" programs!!!!!

The rut is going full tilt in my backyard as I type!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Kurusu]

1. Crushing.

What? I can't crush animals anymore?

Nope.

And cockroaches will finally rule the World.

 

[bigwheelzip]

Woman arrested for church knife attack 'over faux fur boots' - BBC News

There is at least one enthusiastic supporter in Ohio, that stabbed a woman who babysat for a church, because of the faux fur lined boots she wore.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Rule3]

(1) the term ‘animal crushing’ means actual conduct in which one or more living non-human mammals, birds, reptiles, or amphibians is purposely crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, impaled, or otherwise subjected to serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 and including conduct that, if committed against a person and in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, would violate section 2241 or 2242);


So all you snake killers beware!

 

[DeathGrip]

Nope.

And cockroaches will finally rule the World.

Oh No No No It doesn't say anything about squishing. That's what you do with bugs. There's a huge difference between "Crushing" and "Squishing". Maybe they should do a study.

 

[Fishslayer]

Animal rights activists want to ban ALL "animal exploitation" and that includes pet ownership. This is just the first step. It would seem they've gotten their hook$ into wsome fed critters.

This is just the first step. I've seen this played out with great success in Kalifornistan with guns and sport fishing.

Even animal people I know are applaudng this. I get pretty much the same responses I used to get when I pointed out that confiscation was the ultimate goal of the grabbers. My tinfoil is too tight.

Just a small adjustment to numbers, wording & definitions is much simpler than a whole new law. They have already had great success dividing people into "rescue" and "breeder" camps. If you disagree then you are pro puppy mills.

They play chess. Too many people are playing checkers.

 

[BAM-BAM]

(1) the term ‘animal crushing’ means actual conduct in which one or more living non-human mammals, birds, reptiles, or amphibians is purposely crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, impaled, or otherwise subjected to serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 and including conduct that, if committed against a person and in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, would violate section 2241 or 2242);


So all you snake killers beware!

"impaled".... bow hunters beware!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Absalom]

Well, if you consider all the activities expressly NOT covered by this law, one wonders why it is needed since current laws on the books against animal cruelty should cover people who do this for pure fun.

Has there been an epidemic of interstate sales of “animal crushing” videos lately?

“(1) IN GENERAL.—This section does not apply with regard to any conduct, or a visual depiction of that conduct, that is—

“(A) a customary and normal veterinary, agricultural husbandry, or other animal management practice;

“(B) the slaughter of animals for food;

“(C) hunting, trapping, fishing, a sporting activity not otherwise prohibited by Federal law, predator control, or pest control;

“(D) medical or scientific research;

“(E) necessary to protect the life or property of a person; or

“(F) performed as part of euthanizing an animal.“

 

[kmyers]

Like many legislation we are more concerned about the unintended consequences pointed out. Not so much what the bill says but how it can be interpreted because of the exact wording. In Texas in 2005 there was a traveling bill and law to define traveling. The wording was such that it may not have legalized the act but it became a defense if arrested for doing it which was clarified in a 2007 law. The other big issue is if a bill becomes law how easy it might be to redefine the law once it is on the books. Expanded background checks is a fine example, it exempts certain things: parent or grandparent buying a gift for a child or grandchild. But, once on the books adding a rider to a "must pass" bill which strikes such an exemption down and politicians pushing the we must pass this to law to help people. Easy to see it becoming similar with an animal cruelty bill and who knows which direction things go.

 

[Kurusu]

Well... We are animals. Those activists are causing us great pain and psychologic suffering and probably damage. Maybe we could put them behind bars and get on with our much relieved lives. Some of them are, I believe, true "nut cases" unfit to live in society and downright dangerous


Edit. Hey! Cage! Do you think this could fly?

 

[Kitgun]

This is a bad bill should not have passed should not have been signed.

 

[LVSteve]

Based on the current wording, the proposed act seems very "open ended" and seemingly would lead to court interpretation on a case by case basis.
This would, IMO, then lead to varied decisions depending on each state and judge where a case may be heard and would likely end up at the circuit level or even the USSC.

That can hardly be a surprise. By the standards I was used to seeing in the British Parliament, it is pretty clear that there isn't a single legislative body in the US capable of drafting legislation properly. Most legislation here is a vague framework with the result much time and money is wasted in courts at a later date. The only folk who do any good out of this are the lawyers. Now, considering how may legislators are lawyers and I think there is a good RICO case here.