New Law

[Guest]

Learned from Horst today the new Federal law that came out of his and similar protests of his shop.

 

Don't have the precise wording but ... (sort of a quote) 'Any activities or obstructions that interfere with the processing and marketing of any animal products is subject to five years in Federal Prison'. " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" /> " title="Applause" />

 

This covers everything from a butcher shop to a slaughter house to a fur farm to the furrier and his shop.

 

Also in the same legislature you can now slaughter and have inspected horses for human consumption.

 

Recently a guy got five years in the Federal pen for releasing minks into the wilds of northern Idaho for pleading not guilty. His girlfriend caught on and pleaded guilty. She got five years of probation where she has to be either gainfully employed or in school full time.

 

It's really put a damper on things PeTA.

 

OFF

[ew19975]

Hmmm, let's see how this will work out. I think the idea is good, but enforcement may become an issue.

[FrBrGr]

It's about time! " title="Applause" />

[Guest]

Don't think enforcement is a problem.

 

One of Horst's customers works for the FBI and he complained to her. She had to walk past them coming in the store.

 

A week later they were gone. Somewhere in the Justice System

 

So PeTA, kiss my

 

One other thin. Since this is a Federal Law, I don't think a Municipality can ban furriers any more than they could ban a butcher shop.

 

OFF

[ekcol]

Fuck this forum

Edited October 28, 2014 by Guest

[White Fox]

Indeed I highly agree that this is a great advancement. What it will take though will be a few folks sent to jail. Until they do that there will be a whole lot of give and take for people finding out the rules and circumstances. As long as legislature is really willing to enforce this, it could indeed be a huge deal.

 

Even an add in a paper with information about furriers in general could be thought of this way.

 

It will take some time. But as long as they are ready to enforce the laws this is huge news indeed!

[Guest]

Let's see what happens with this:

http://entertainment.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/08/11079053-kanye-wests-new-single-makes-peta-and-theraflu-sick?lite

 

In PeTA's face or what?

 

OFF

[ekcol]

Fuck this forum

Edited October 28, 2014 by Guest

[White Fox]

From what I am reading here it does indeed exist!

[Worker 11811]

Where's "here?"

[ekcol]

Yeah, can you provide a link to where you're confirming it? It sounds made-up to me.

[Worker 11811]

I wouldn't say it was made up but hearsay certainly isn't out of the question.

[Guest]

I'll get the text from Horst tomorrow.

 

OFF

[Worker 11811]

Cool! Not being contrarian. Just want to read for myself.

[Furbabe]

I'm happy about this, especially since People for Extortion, Terrorism, and Anarchy celebrated the opening of their new L.A. headquarters in the Echo Park District courtesy of Bob Barker's largess as well as that stupid West Hollywood legislation from last Fall.

[Worker 11811]

Well, if this statute turns out to have teeth, don't you think it would invalidate that law in H'wood?

[Guest]

Not sure of the exact law, but legislation is under way in Europe to completely restrict teh transport of animals for biomedical research. Especially primates. Note that primate research probably makes up to less than 0.1% of all animal use in research. I'll also add that if it wasn't for primate research half of us might have polio right now. We can thank Jonas Salk and primate research for eradicating polio.

 

At any rate, what does this have to do with fur? I can see the "logic" now, because we restrict transport of animals for research we should also restrict the tansport of animal products (skins). SO, we should all pay attention to matters such as this and write the appropriate authorities to disuade this potentially harmful law. Again, this is in Europe, I believe Italy. I'll get a link of the news report.

 

JA

[Guest]

furlessinCA; I don't think the intent of that law has anything to do with the fur industry which is quite powerful in Italy for certain.

 

The transport and abuse of primates has been an egregious practice for a very long time and it needs to stop.

 

Sorry I haven't talked to Horst yet. I'll try Monday.

 

OFF

[Guest]

I NEED to comment on the "abuse" of primates in research. First, yes there are cases of animal abuse by researchers. Poor care, poor condidtions, lack of appropriate analgesia, lack of appropriate anesthesia and so forth. But as with anything (e.g. riding dirt bikes) the actions of a few impact EVERYONE involved with the activity. Dirt bikers as a whole are labeled as "anti-environmentalists". The reality is there ARE meatballs out there that ruin the activity for everyone. Most dirt bike riders want to preserve the environment, they just choose to enjoy the environment in a different way. The same applies to wearing fur as we all know. Are fur farms "humane"? Afterall wearing fur is "frivolous"!

 

The point is: currently there are VERY STRICT guidelines on animal care and use. Indeed every university has an animal care and use committee (IACUC). I am part of the animal care and use committee at my university. We scrutinize every and all proposals for animal experimentation even the ones that seem innocuous.

 

Anyone who is doing primate research is at a R1 university, a Stanford, a Yale, a University of Alabama, Birmingham (UAB, I know they do have some primate research as a researcher who was at a med school where I worked left that university for UAB). R1 universities have FULL TIME veterinarians plus 24 hour care for ALL animals as animal research is critical for elucidating mechanisms for disease and other conditions. Indeed the focus of reserch of the primate researcher mentioned above is on organ transplants. Let's face it, in many of our lifetimes we remember the first heart transplant performed by Dr. Christiaan Barnard in Cape Town, South Africa. I know I rember it. It was international news. Now heart transplants are routinely performed and recipients live long and (hopefully) productive lives. Why? Because of animal research.

 

It is correct that there were certainly abuses. This CANNOT be tolerated! But it was also NOT the majority of animal use. Further it only puts at jeopardy the useful data that researchers may be able to gather from poorly kept animals. Animal use now, especially in the U.S., is very strict. I will be the first to admit it is not without good reason that animal use is very strict. Research animals should be well cared for, especially if we are to derive useful information from animal experiments.

 

If you talk to a researcher who does animal research, they will say, to a person, that they do not enjoy or like having to euthanize animals (a common misconception). It is a very distasteful process. Personally I've had to euthanize many rats. I do not take that lightly, even though they "are just rats".

 

We have to consider the goals of animal use. Again we are all united in the CHIOCE to wear fur, something that many (most?) people view as frivolous and unecessary. When it comes to research though, this is a completely different issue. The public, as a whole, views medical research as necessary for enhancing human health. If it wasn't for animal research none of us would be as healthy as we currently are. Indeed, I have epilepsy. I have lived seizure-free for over 25 years now. Why? Because of the drugs developed through animal research.

 

Lastly, I agree whole-heartedly that animal abuses MUST STOP, but we also need to use what is available to us to solve problems. Further if we CHOOSE to utilize animals or animal products, that should be our choice, correct? I don't think any of us would tell a vegan that he or she HAS to eat meat, just so long as vegans respect our choice to wear fur.

[Guest]

Here it is folks:

 

The Act itself http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ374/pdf/PLAW-109publ374.pdf and the 19192 Public Law http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/legislat/pl102346.htm

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Enterprise_Terrorism_Act

 

A little more background .. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903791504576586790205241376.html

 

and another http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/factsheet%3A-animal-enterprise-terrorism-act-%28aeta%29 crying in their beer.

 

Normally I agree with AlterNet but we part on this one .. http://www.alternet.org/rights/141328/the_animal_enterprise_terrorism_act:_the_most_dangerous_domestic_terror_law_you%27ve_never_heard_of/

 

This has little to do with free speech and a lot to do with being overemotional and trashing others perfectly legal activities.

 

I think the government has taken a deeper interest in the Law for the protection of smaller and more vulnerable enterprises such as furriers and a wide variety of small animal breeding farms.

 

I liken it to "emotional" abuse of a child or spouse which is a perfectly legal prosecutable personal act when no property is actually damaged. Much as in the case of any furrier being constantly picketed and harassed. If they need to pull out the "terrorist" label then so be it. Whatever it takes to bring civility to the situation.

 

OFF

[Joe]

Thank you, lobbyists.

 

Now how do we confirm this?

[Guest]

Go let a bunch of mink loose from a mink farm or picket Nicholas Ungar Furs in Portland, Oregon and I'll bet you'll be doing time in no time at all.

 

As Horst said "One day they were picketing outside as usual and the next day they were gone. They haven't been back".

 

This was after he had complained to a customer who happened to be an FBI agent. It was a week after that they were gone.

 

OFF