Skip to main content

Now they're coming for fido and kitty ...

... and they're bringing the scissors.

I've always considered Bob Barr something of a loose cannon, but this time he's got me:

Los Angeles, California, the city that has contributed mightily to American culture, including the O.J. Simpson murders and circus trial, Britney Spears’ crazy escapades, the Rodney King riots, and so much more, is now forcing pet owners to have their pets sterilized, whether they want to or not, under threat of criminal sanctions (Click here for the story). Even if a pet owner has paid thousands for a pure bred cat or dog and does not wish to have the animal neutered, the recently enacted law requires them to do so. Only a limited category of pets are excluded from the Draconian ordinance, including law enforcement dogs, pets belonging to professional breeders, those that have competed in sporting shows or competitions, and seeing eye guide dogs. Similar legislation is pending at the state level in California, and undoubtedly if the legislation finds its way to Gov. Schwarzenegger’s desk, the Big Government Governor will sign it.

But wait, it may get even worse. Already some busybodies, concerned over how to enforce the intrusive ordinance, are calling for mandatory implantation of RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) Chips in pets in order to facilitate tracking down pet-owner scofflaws who might try to resist or violate the ordinance. (Of course, if such procedure results in harm or death to your pet the city will assume no responsibility.)


When the government comes to check on whether or not I've had my own pets neutered, that's when some official will discover whether or not I own a firearm.

Comments

tom said…
Oh, they won't bother to ask you. It's so much easier to get the information from the pet stores, vets, animal rescue groups, neighbors, anonymous tips to 1-800-FIX-PETS, etc. Then they can just send you the ticket or court summons in the mail. Much safer that way. You might sic your dangerous unlicensed attack gerbils on them if they came in person.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...