Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy1999  Commercial breeders hire lobbyists to spread propaganda, and misinformation. At one time I believed that it would be OK for animal rights groups and the commercial breeder to fight it out, but this was until I realized some extreme animal rights group are against any breeding, and as I said before, the small home breeder has no one watching their back. So you have extreme animal rights groups who would like to end all breeding and the commercial pet industry who would also like to put the home breeder out of business. Both money-backed organizations are after the home breeder. After all, if there were no home breeders, the pet industry could charge whatever they wanted for pets. That why I'm always suspicious when someone is screaming about the fact that this or that bill will hurt the home breeder, this is a very common technique used by the commercial breeder lobby. So this time I wanted to read the bill for myself and see if what they were saying about it was true, that why I wanted to talk about specific points in the bill. The commercial breeder's lobby always seems to spout three things, "We don't have a problem", and when that doesn't work anymore, "There are already laws in place," and of course, let's not forget, "This bill will effect the home breeder." This bill will have serious repercussions on the commercial breeder, not the home breeder.
|
When you mentioned the extreme groups vs. commercial breeder lobbies, I had to dig around a little to see what you meant. While I did find that HSUS is very active nationwide in promoting these type bills, I could find no mention of any commercial breeders groups. I'm not saying they don't exist but, if they do, could you post some info on them? You make it seem like a conspiracy to do away with the home breeder so, as a home breeder, I would like to know of any such efforts. Thanks in advance for any info. More to the point of the Indiana bill, I see it not so much as a squeeze play on the home breeder but as an end-around of due process. If you will notice,
House Bill 1468 originated in the Courts and Criminal Code Committee, not the Agriculture Committee. It begins by addressing parolee conduct then, in a real stretch of procedural logic, magically turns into a breeder restriction bill in the middle section before returning to its opening purpose (parolee conduct) and then some mish-mash of parolee conduct vis a vis animal cruelty at the end. How is this reasonable, logical or practical?
Who got to the Parole Board, the extreme animal rights groups or the commercial breeders' lobby? As I said before, this bill is just a mess. It's beyond me how this bill got this far considering its origin and content. It seems like due process is the real victim here, more so than any type of breeder. It is stated that this bill is "A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning criminal law and procedure." Does that sound like anything that we've been discussing here?