Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Yesterday there was a hearing scheduled for AB 1122 in the California Assembly in front of the Appropriations Committee. It was canceled at the last minute by the bill's author. This was likely due to the efforts of USARK, The Reptile Nation and many other groups opposed to the bill. USARK and the Reptile Nation were responsible for 5,127 emails and hundreds of phone calls to the Assembly Members on the Appropriations Committee over a 24 hour period. There were many other animal interests that mobilized against AB 1122 as well... but USARK is not able to track their efforts as we are able to do for our own members. This is not over! This bill will probably be scheduled for a new hearing in the near future. Stay Vigilante!

Click here to see the latest action on AB1122.
www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_1101-1150/ab_1122_bill_20090506_status.html

Thank you to the Reptile Nation and ALL the other animal interest groups that combined to temporarily derail AB1122!!!

There is Strength in Numbers... Protect Your Rights!

-----
Rock On!!!

In my oppinion USark membership is a must for all responsible herpetoculturists in the US!

Herpetoculturists who are nott members of the USark make me blue as the thoungue of P. terribilis.
Oby

I attended the meeting in Sac on AB1122 and digitally recorded the proceeding. I plan to attend every meeting I can but live in Santa Cruz so I cannot guarantee it. Several commitee members voiced concern over the wording of the bill, fiscal cosiderations, ethical implications and the sweeping prohibitionist philosophy of the bill. I am going to speak on record next go around and I am drafting a personalized letter for my districts assembly member, I have many ideas for combating this type of thing as well as the federal bill being considered but am asking anyone who cares to please give up some advice. All animal hobbyists and commercial interests are at stake locally and nationally and I hope we can rally together to defeat this attack. If you live in Cali and can make it then please show up to give opposition. Thanks, Dan Bjerk.

just some random thought off the bottom shelf..

You have to turn the other cheek
If your governent wants to kill your animals; surrender the shirt on your back to your local Police and rant a line to your local news.
Implore descision makers to stop the slaughter of companion animal diversity, and in stead, give them your bare back to whip.
It must be better to whip you half to death and spare your animals, in stead of killing your animals and sparing you.
Implore descision makers to take out their anger on you in stead of your animals. The animals are innocent, punish the owners, if the government must.
You are the last line of defence standing between your government and your companion animal. Make sure the last line of defence stands tall until back is whipped bloody red.

Regards
oby

I am not interested in turning the other cheek and I do not believe government is "out to whip my back". The fact is that politicians have very limited knowledge concerning this industry and might be easily led astray if misinformed. They get a lot of new legislation thrown at them daily and cannot always tell fact from fiction. I believe we hold the high ground but we must continue to promote this hobby/industry in the best possible light and demonstrate that its indeed good for society as a whole. We should use everything that is available to us to do so. I will simply pick up every detail I can and follow the legislative process through its due course. I refuse to turn the other cheek, though.
Dan.

You don´t want to turn the other cheek?! Jesus said turn the other cheek. I am not a very religious person but I often respect the word s of Jesus, for they are often wise. Infidel!

If Jesus is not good enough for you, then perhaps be an advocate or a thief.
If you wish to be the advocate, then you need to read;
Richard Dawkins, the selfish gene
Susan Blackmore, The Meme Machine
Rosalind Hursthouse; Ethics, Humans and other animals - An introduction with readings
Eugène Lapointe, Embracing Earths wild resources - A global conservation vision

Clifford Warwick, Fredric L. Frye and James B. Murphy, Health and Welfare Captive Reptiles

You will need to read other books too, but those are a good star. The last one is AR crap, but still it is very convincing. This book is used as scientific suport in the norwegian Animal protection associations position against the private keeping of reptiles and amphibians. This book needs to loose credibility... and there are many others like it unfortunately.
The advocate must support the responsible keeper in morals and ethics, in the legislation-debate and voice out words of wisdom in lightning fast trains of thought against Articles in newspapers, blogs. From this point the advocate may specialise into many other fields.

If you wish to be the thief, Then you need to read;
Eric Hansen, Orchid fever
Bryan Christy, The lizard King

Actually I haven´t read that last one yet, But I will as soon as I can afford to buy a copy.
The thief needs to dissapear and accept the role of the ass hole. Thieve´s act may earn no personal glory, sometimes the opposite, but may still be of great value to a cause.
A thief may be a hacker, cracker, courier or a sneaky silent spy who seldom voices any public or formal oppinion. Many thieves find egoistical benefit in their thieves guild membership.

Some warriors advance in both these skills and specialize into a variety of battle mages.

Then you have the brutes, rough like coarse sandpaper and tough like Dirt Harry. The brute may confront the AR meme directly in a variety of ways, hence the many different variants of brutes. The brute may be a weekend warrior or an amateur hobbyist with a special twist. The Brutes will often act independently even though they all stay united and true to principle.

Then you have the animal, sometimes acting like a chimp, and sometimes like a leopard. This critter will sometimes bring the enemy out of their good skin.
The animal has to read;
Peter J. Ucko and G.W. Dimbleys notes on The Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals

A very rare and mystical variant of the animal, which which repels AR BS like water droplets on newly shed snake skin, may pray as seldom as once a year, but when a beast is on the hunt, the AR activists shake in pure terror. Unfortunately there is no easy way o become a beast except for years of hard work and participation.

Then there is the coward which lives in sympathetic symbiosis wit the beast, he is also a good soul to have on the team. He is a little nervous and indecisive, appearing as easy pick for the AR meme. Often fleeing in confrontation he is the bait which draws the AR Activist right into the trap of the beast.

Then there´s the ethical artist, who will gut an enemy with a piece of artistic aesthetic; http://www.maniacworld.com/bird-loves-ray-charles.html Then there is the book keeper, with his memory of an elephant he is a much valued resource to the reptile nation and really.. Every person will fit in a different position because of their basic disposition. We do not need alot of people doing the same thing, We need an army of people who are all doing different things in my opinion, As long as we all follow a single principle, that of responsible bioculture, we will find that our natural disposition will keep us united when need be.

mmz..
I hope I didn´t answer your question, and that you find some value in this. I think russian authors answer your question much better than me, see pic below.
I think you pose very interesting questions that are fun to speculate around.
I hope more people voice their opinion on these matters, I think I have much to learn myself about this topic.

Kindest regards
oby

Turn the other cheek is a good concept. It depends on the situation . When someone takes a cheap shot at my character or directs unflattering remakes at me, Silly stuff. I simply ignore them.

One the other hand if someone threatens me on a physical level turning the other cheek is not in my nature.
By physical I'm not necessarily referring to something violent. I'm talking about something that could possibly restrict my ability to do or own something.

I would never agree with someone who would expect me to go along with anything that would compromise my personal freedoms in even the slightest way.

The snake in the picture is an anaconda I had as a kid. The date says 1970 I think it was 72, no matter. By the time I was 14 my personal collection included , cobras , rattlesnakes , large constrictors, odd ball snakes like elephant trunks, lyres , and whatever else I could get. By 16 I also had lion fish, sea horses, sting rays, raccoons ,squirrels , possums , hawks, owls , crows , various small animals and most everything else.

This was in addition to hanging around and working for some of the most notorious and important reptile and animal dealerships of all time. I got to see and work with some of everything you name it from monkeys to rare fish and reptiles.

By my early twenty's Id seen the game in it's entirety. Not once did anyone , not the dealers , the zoo guys or my family ever try to discourage me in anyway shape or form. Everyone understood that I knew what I was doing . I was raised to be a responsible person. I never cared about the animal business or being part of the crowd. I would barely talk to most of the guys if at all. It was always about the animals. That's all I cared about.

I was no angel but the care of my animals always came first. Not only did I have the technical knowledge but I had the hands on as well. At fourteen I had a lot more game then most of the " experts " ever will. I can only Imagine what the Internet gurus would have been telling me if the net existed back then.

It's amazing how many people feel they know what's appropriate for others . People say things like we have to accept the fact that compromises are going to be made. They might accept that fact, I never will. I understand that I might get stuck having to deal other peoples poor decisions . This is what life has become for all of us. We live in a politically correct society that's completely incorrect.

Ernie Eison
WESTWOOD ACRES REPTILE FARM INC.

I agree completely with your opinion and stance on this matter. I was also raised around very responsible herpetoculturists and herpetologists and was trained and informed to the hilt. I never realized then how it could so positively affect me now. Positive mentors. I will not turn the other cheek when it comes to fighting for my liberties or those of others. Little stuff, no problem. This is big stuff to me. I am just getting back into the hobby and feel like the rug is getting swept from beneath my feet. I joined USARK and opposed HR669 and I am following AB1122 and I have come to accept and appreciate the fact that rights are not taken away from us, we give them away. That is why I wish to fight for my rights, not give them away and will not turn the other cheek.

Hi Dan,

One thing that I think gets lost in the hysteria is that many of us use our "exotic" animals/pets to not only learn about and appreciate nature ourselves, but also to help LOCAL WILDLIFE by doing educational presentations at museums, schools, parties, etc. I know for a fact that I (a Joe Nobody with a couple snakes including a rainbow boa) have saved the lives of at least half a dozen local snakes by doing presentations and rationally talking to school children. And a neighbor across the street, who thought a 3 foot black racer was going to attack her 8 year old kids, is now much less fearful, and now seems unwilling to kill snakes that she sees in her backyard... simply because I explained to her the facts. I'm sure many other reptile hobbyists are educating the public as well, and in a much bigger way than I am.

Anyway, thanks for being vigilant, we need more people like you.

Thanks,
Ed

Ed,
Thanks for the kind words. A few years ago I returned from Alaska after spending close to four years in the Bering Sea. I collected data aboard fishing boats for the federal government. My faith was tested in every way with regard to federally managed natural resources and I was feeling pretty dismal about it. I was having a hard time digesting the complex nature of resource management with regard to government, stake holders, shareholders ( the public ), media and those of us who risked our lives to insure a future for Alaskan fisheries. I was still feeling down about the whole thing till I was asked to give a couple of reptile and amphibian presentations to kids. I did not have many animals to show and my presentation was far from perfect. The kids loved it though and I think I had as much fun as they did, maybe more. It was a pivotal time for me and basically it helped to turn my thinking around. I was offered a small sum for my services and I just asked them to use the money to purchase books for the kids. It felt really good. I am not just looking out for myself, I want those kids to have the same opportunity to enjoy the natural world that I have had. Lets all help each other out.
Thanks,
Dan.

Dan
"I was offered a small sum for my services and I just asked them to use the money to purchase books for the kids."

Thanks for sharing
What sum were you offered, and who offered the sum?
I think that sounds really interesting.
When I tried to do somewhat the same thing, show reptiles and amphibians to kids, amd the government thought I was mad. Certainly they didn´t want to sponsor such thing.
I still think that herps are great for kids though, If you could share some more info abut your project I think that may help a lot of kids in Norway who also like reptiles and amphibians.

regards
oby

Just recieved this, haven´t had the time t read it but I figure it is some important [bleep].
oby

There seems to be some confusion about the status of AB 1122 - Permission to Cross Post
 
As per the author (Ted Leiu - Dem, Torrance) during Appropriations Hearing on
this past Weds., Leiu would make amendments on CONTENT and then re-submit bill
next week during the Weds. Appropriations meeting.
 
I just spoke with his office to verify that what I heard IN PERSON during the
hearing is true, and that was verfied, "they are working on amendments and will submit bill again next week"so we have our work cut out for us still on
this CATCH ALL bill by the Animal Rights organization API & Born Free USA & California Animal Association (a shell organization), all of which are backed by HSUS. They continually claim in testimony at the hearings of over a million CALIFORNIA MEMBERS... I don't know ANYONE who knows them or is a member....
 
As CAA's "constitutionally deficient supposed legal" counsel stated:
 
The intent of the bill is to ban LIVE ANIMAL SALES.
 
Let's not sit back folks! Hammer the Author's office! Leiu is running for CA Attorney General.
One would think an attorney running for Attorney General would KNOW CONSTITUTIONAL LAW! Call and him & let him know if you would vote for him for Atty. General!
(916) 319-2053 and especially his District office: (310) 615-3515 (El Segundo, CA)
 
 
Here again is our analysis: Remember, our intent is NOT TO COMPROMISE but to show how STUPID and MALICIOUS this bill really is, written intentionally to STOP THE SALE OF LIVE ANIMALS. Period.
 
April 23, 2009
Assemblymember Ted Lieu In Re: OPPOSE AB 1122
Capitol Office
Sacramento, CA
Dear Ms. Meyers:
First, let me thank you for your kindness for providing the
opportunity to address our concerns over the issues that AB 1122
presents. We are indeed heartened that you are an animal lover.
Whether a two-legged or four-legged "constituent", one can expect
compassion from you!

As I previously stated, our goal is to implement no-kill policy
statewide. We firmly believe that punitive laws such as AB 1122,
though fraught with benevolent intentions, will result in the
opposite of protecting animals. It will cause not only suffering
by humans, but likewise for the animals that would be supposedly
protected. These animals would instead be brought into shelters
where the likelihood of death by contagious disease would only be
surpassed by the reality of shelter euthanasia. In other words,
if you are a puppy, kitten or any animal, the least safe place to
be is a shelter.

We understand Assembly member Lieu's concern for puppies sold
haphazardly on street corners, but this is more of a local
phenomena in some areas in Southern California and is rarely seen
in Northern California where no-kill policy is prevalent.
The vague and undefined terms in AB 1122 serve to only breed fear
that many longtime traditions and hobbies will fall prey to
misinterpretation. These include but are not limited to:
transport and transfer of rescued animals by volunteer good
Samaritans, animal shows and exhibitions such as dog shows,
equestrian trials, cat shows, reptile exhibitions, agility
events, herding and hunting trials. It is often a common practice
that animals be transferred, sold or placed at such events. AB
1122 could make simply the act of participation in such events a
criminal act.

As written AB 1122 will cause more problems than it solves -
  SECTION 1. Section 597.4 is added to the Penal Code, to read:
  597.4. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully
  sell, trade, barter, display, or offer for sale, trade, or
  barter, or give away as part of a commercial transaction a live
  animal on any street, highway, public right-of-way, commercial
  parking lot, or at any outdoor special sale, swap meet, flea
  market, parking lot sale, carnival, or boardwalk.

Under California law a dog show with supply vendors is considered
a "swap meet" and this would put all dog show exhibitors at risk
of breaking the law. This could have a negative impact in the
millions of dollars on the California budget as exhibitors from
other States will not want to take the risk of being charged
under the Penal code and/or having their dogs impounded. The
famous and highly successful Eukanuba Dog Show, once a $65
million dollar windfall for Long Beach, has now been moved to
Florida due to concerns with punitive laws in California that
could jeopardize the exhibited dogs. Should this bill pass in its
current form, thousands of other animal shows, expos,
exhibitions, and trials will be forced to follow suit. The
resulting economic impact on California would have been
avoidable, especially during this recession.

Just the mere inclusion of the word "display" can certainly be
interpreted to include exhibition events such as dog shows. Is
the intent of this bill to make criminals of those exhibitors who
display their animals? Is it the intent of this bill to include
exhibitors that display their animals that are for sale at these
events which in many cases is a longtime tradition? Kittens,
rabbits, birds and reptiles are often offered for sale at these
shows.

  "It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully display a
  live animal on any street, highway, public right-of-way,
  commercial parking lot, or."

This phrase as written means no:
  * walking the animal (a sidewalk is a public right-of-way)
  * driving the animal (seen in the car window is a display on a
    street, highway, or public right-of-way)
  * taking the animal to the vet or Petco (display in commercial
    parking lot)

It means animals shall be housebound and can't even be taken to
the vet or exercised by walking.
The Committee Analysis does recommend removing the comma after
"display" and adding one after "transaction", but that's
insufficient. The words "trade, barter," were stuck from the bill
between the words "sell," and "display,". They struck the wrong
words:

Better wording:

Replace "display," with "barter, trade,"
Strike the "or" before "offer for sale"

Add a comma after "transaction"
  "It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully sell,
  barter, trade, offer for sale or give away as part of a
  commercial transaction, a live animal on any street, highway,
  public right-of-way, commercial parking lot, or at any outdoor
  special sale, swap meet, flea market, parking lot sale,
  carnival, or boardwalk."

That gets an animal being seen in public as no longer a crime and
puts the onus on the transaction itself, where it belongs.
In addressing the issue of making criminals out of now presently
law abiding citizens, let's examine this part of the bill:
  Section 597.4 is added to the penal code to read;
  (b) (1) A person who violates this section for the first time
  shall be guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine not to
  exceed two hundred fifty dollars ($250).
  (2) A person who violates this section for the first time and
  by that violation either causes or permits any animal to
  suffer or be injured, or causes or permits any animal to be
  placed in a situation in which its life or health may be
  endangered , shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
  (3) A person who violates this section for a second or
  subsequent time shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
  (c) A person who is guilty of a misdemeanor violation of this
  section shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed one
  thousand dollars ($1,000) per violation; the court shall weigh
  the gravity of the violation in setting the fine.

We respectfully ask what is the intent of this section:
  2) A PERSON WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTION FOR THE FIRST TIME AND
  BY THAT VIOLATION EITHER CAUSES OR PERMITS ANY ANIMAL TO
  SUFFER OR BE INJURED OR CAUSE OR PERMIT ANY ANIMAL TO BE
  PLACED IN A SITUATION IN WHICH ITS LIFE OR HEALTH MAY BE
  ENDANGERED SHALL BE GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR ...

This is out of place here and does not seem to fit with the rest
of the bill but could be misused as a catchall for all sorts of
things. Any sporting event an animal participates in involves
risks: agility competitions, horse jumping events, hunting and
most certainly rodeos ..... It appears on the face to apply even
if the animal(s) are not injured, just the potential of harm is
good enough for being guilty of breaking the law. There is no
mention of intent and thereby, even accidents could be included
such as a traffic accident involving a horse trailer where the
horse is injured. This is so vague that it could be used to
harass anyone with a working animal or use any incidental injury
as a Penal code violation.

  d) A notice describing the charge and the penalty for a
  violation of this section may be issued by any peace officer;
  animal control officer, as defined in Section 830.9; or humane
  officer qualified pursuant to Section 14502 or 14503 of the
  Corporations Code.

Animal Control is not a non profit approved by the IRS and state
of California. It is a PRIVATE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION which is a
PRIVATE CORPORATION. They do NOT get their powers (which they
don.t have anyway) from 14500 thru 14503. A Municipal Corporation
is a PRIVATE CORPORATION. That's why Animal Control cannot be
delegated powers by the Legislature. Only police
departments/sheriff's offices are state trained and certified,
and therefore, state authorized government law enforcement. Peace
Officer salaries etc. are partially funded by the state. They are
in effect State Officers. Animal Control officers are NOT funded
in any way by the state. They can try to read it any way they
want, but it remains unconstitutional to delegate law enforcement
powers to private entities. The CORPORATE CODE IS NOT ABOUT STATE
LAW ENFORCEMENT. IT IS ABOUT PRIVATE CORPORATIONS.

To equate animal control officers and humane officers with the
same powers, responsibilities, risks and arming them as peace
officers will surely lead to demands for the same salaries,
pensions and other benefits that will amount to hundreds of
millions of dollars in costs to the state annually. Humane
Officers are a huge liability to the state because of vague laws,
implied powers and the resulting deaths and damages to the
citizens of the State of California . (Pending WRONGFUL DEATH
LAWSUIT of senior citizen, Los Angeles ). We are deeply concerned
that the unconstitutional transfer of police power to "humane
officers" casually mentioned as enforcing parties will serve to
only expand illegal actions by so-called "humane" organizations
against innocent Californians and their animals. The California
Constitution clearly and emphatically states that no law may be
enacted that would confer power to private corporations.

The Corporations Code illegally grants powers to a Society for
the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and Humane Society, a
private corporation, the ability to authorize employees of that
corporation, to enforce peace officer powers of arrest,
enforcement of warrants, carry a loaded firearm while on duty,
and powers to affect an arrest using force. While a Judge of a
local Superior Court is involved in the appointment of a Humane
Officer, the court itself does not grant these powers. The
Corporations Code allows privately employed humane officers to
illegally display and wear a law enforcement badge. While the
Corporations Code requires certain educational qualifications,
these qualifications are not certified by the Commission on Peace
Officers Standards and Training. The Corporations Code illegally
requires local cities and counties to pay $500.00 to a private
corporation to augment the salaries of Humane Officers.

What IS THE DEFINITION OF POLICE POWERS IN THE CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION? There is none as there is no such thing as police
powers - it is VOID for vagueness. This is why VOID FOR VAGUENESS
is described in our California Constitution just for laws like
CPC 830.9, CPC 832, CPC 836 and many more that are complicit with
and lobbyied for by the Animal Rights syndicate. These laws are
left to interpretation for the layman and the untrained and
heavily armed humane officers that prey on the citizens through
illegal search and seizures of property with/without illegally
issued warrants from judges who also don.t understand the
California Legislature's vague laws. _VOID FOR VAGUENESS creates
the unconstitutional 5th Amendment Takings of Citizen's
Constitutional Rights to own and sell Property; and Interferes
with the Commerce Code of the United States and the basic
principals of Free Enterprise._

AB 1122 states that animals (private property) cannot be sold
from public property which could also face challenge due to three
California precedent cases: putting for sale signs on a vehicle
parked on the street, (Ventura County and City of Los Angeles);
limiting yard sales (City of Los Angeles) all violating the
constitutional rights of free enterprise, the right to sell
property and limiting commerce. (Cases supplied upon request)

  Article 2. SEC. 12. No amendment to the Constitution, and no
  statute proposed to the electors by the Legislature or by
  initiative, that names any individual to hold any office, or
  names or identifies any private corporation to perform any
  function or to have any power or duty, may be submitted to the
  electors or have any effect.

We respectfully request that the words "animal control and humane
officers" be struck from this bill and that exemptions be added
protecting events such as obedience trials, cat and dog shows,
horse competitive conformation and sporting events, rescue
missions, animal transport and many more events nearly too
numerous to mention that would be jeopardized by broad
interpretation of AB 1122.

THE BILL STATES ANIMAL CONTROL AND HUMANE ORGANIZATIONS ARE
EXEMPT. WHY?
ANIMAL CONTROL AND HUMANE ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD NEVER BE EXEMPT
WITH REGARD TO ANY CRUELTY LEGISLATION. HOW CAN WE ALLOW
EXEMPTION OF THOSE WHO ARE SUPPOSEDLY THERE TO PROTECT AND SERVE
FROM THE SAME LAWS WE MUST FOLLOW?
(See Attached recent photos from the SPCA of LA and Los Angeles
County Animal Control. DVD available.)

In the interest of correct legislative code designation of this
bill now under SECTION 1. Section 597.4 is added to the Penal
Code, to read:

597.4., we suggest that due to the context within of "sale of
animals", it should instead be placed under the following codes:
Food and Agriculture Code 16441.5 (Civil Penalties and Remedies)
(new) for horses and other livestock;
Food & Agriculture Code 30505 (General Provisions) (new), or
30950 (Regulation) (new), or 31400 (Violations) for all other
animal sales.

If the true intent of the proposed legislation is to eliminate
the sale of puppies which have been smuggled in from Mexico to be
sold at flea markets in Southern California, there are already
laws that can and should be enforced to the fullest extent, and
there are federal agencies that handle this type of crime,
including the U.S. Border Patrol Puppy Task Force. There are, in
fact, figures published that such puppies are coming across the
border in the thousands, many dying in transit. The proposed
legislation as written, if enforced against all private
individuals with a single litter of puppies, will use so much
manpower and budget dollars that it will compromise and
negatively impact the strategy needed to control and eliminate
the illegal importation and sale of puppies and will create an
increasing hazard to health of both humans and animals in the
State of California. If domestic born puppies are confiscated by
animal control agencies and confined with sickly imports they
will be put at risk of contracting contagious diseases,
potentially resulting in death, creating an even greater burden
on State and County budgets. To place these puppies into shelters
places them in harm's way and the unnecessary tax burden on both
local and state government and already overburdened budgets is
something that State and local governments cannot afford.

Yet, another aspect should be discussed in light of public
safety. Many people sell or place rescued animals do so in public
places to protect their families and homes from becoming a target
for criminals. One highly publicized crime occurred in which the
family was selling a litter of Yorkshire Terrier puppies and
invited the prospective buyers to come to their house to view the
pups and parents. What happened next was a home invasion with
multiple armed assailants in which the family was terrorized at
gunpoint and the pups including the mother dog were stolen, which
was all captured on the family's home security videotape system.

Even now, this type of home invasion and robbery is ever more
prevalent to even those re-selling vehicles or even furniture. It
has long been known that in many cases the visitors inspecting
puppies at the breeder's residence for purchase return later to
steal the pups out of the family's yard. Taking away the ability
for people to act in the interest of their own security by
meeting in a public place should not be removed as an option as
violent crime could escalate which would be a far worse outcome
than the present issue AB 1122 tries to solve.

Furthermore, to avoid criminalizing an entire sector of presently
law-abiding citizens, as well as addressing the fact that this
bill creates a new "crime" consideration should be duly given to
the protocol for crime or infraction laws. In many cases, when a
new crime or infraction thereof, is put into law, such as the
seat-belt and cell phone laws, the first offense merits only a
WARNING. Second offense would be better served with a mandatory
assignment of community service within the local municipal animal
shelter; and any subsequent offenses be designated as civil
offenses with appropriate fines. To place this new offense of
"selling animals" within the Penal Code, will only serve to
increase enforcement costs to the State and thereby costs will be
passed down to the taxpayer. There should also be exclusions of
any concurrent charges for the same event.

Please do not hesitate to contact us for further clarification
and input. We deeply appreciate this opportunity to address our
concerns and grievances with you.
Sincerely,
Diane Amble
Director
We the People Pets

My personal experience with the "just leave them be" philosophy has been dismal. That may have been acceptable 50 years ago, but certainly not now.
Far too many times I've seen the bulldozer and the dragline only weeks after leaving beautiful herps in the wild where I'd found them.
jsc
-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"
John Crickmer

Dear mister Ckickmer
Are you advocating the philosophy of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth then?
Tempt me no further for I would be more than pleased to elaborate on my opinion of that philosophy in respect to responsible animal husbandry.

Would you like to play with me on that thought friend?
Elaborate your thoughts please

Remember, US terrarium animal populations are hanging by a thin thread.
In this spirit I built "the hanging bandit vivarium" but actually the prototype is only a terrarium, because it cannot support the weight of a lot of water, should it be furbished as a paludarium.

Best wishes
obeligz
Vivarium consultant, reptilweb, REXANO