........Only when the most marginalized minorities are protected are we all safe.......
 
 
DESPICABLE MINORITIES

News from New Jersey:

“Seventeen fighting roosters intercepted this week on a Continental Airlines flight from Puerto Rico to Newark revealed what authorities are calling a major supply route for an underground gaming industry.”

“Agents with the New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, who made the arrest…”

“Cock-fighting, raising fighting birds and possessing fighting birds is illegal in New Jersey and many places, but it is legal and respected as a legitimate sport in many cultures and in places like Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic…”

“over the past century the sport has fallen out of favor in much of Europe and most of the United States, where it is specifically prohibited by law in all states but Louisiana and most parts of New Mexico.”

“The United States Department of Agriculture, acting on a tip, notified the SPCA of the arriving roosters. Authorities at the federal agency said transporting fighting birds into the nation and from state-to-state, even into states where the birds are permitted to be raised, violates the federal Animal Welfare Act.”

“the humane society has been a primary force in trying to toughen the punishment for possessing fighting birds, engaging in animal fighting and even being a spectator at a fight.”

Saturday, October 30, 2004
BY BRIAN T. MURRAY
Star-Ledger Staff
It’s all there. “Underground gaming” conjures a picture of crooked gamblers and a nameless threat from the feared “underground.” While illegal in New Jersey, “places ‘like’ Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic” are cited (out of many countries worldwide) because “Americanizing” immigrants from these countries is a worry on the minds of many East coast residents today. Okay, they are a detestable minority. So how are they to dealt with?
The New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty is given arrest powers and “makes the case.” This same group, tries to toughen “the punishment for possessing fighting birds, engaging in animal fighting and even being a spectator at a fight.”

The (Federal) USDA is given a Federal law (the Animal Welfare Act) that makes importation, interstate shipment (even to or from States or communities where it IS LEGAL) or “where the birds are permitted to be raised.”
Who could be against this? Cockfighting is cruel. Cockfighters are few in number. Many cockfighters come from American families that have raised and fought chickens for as many as five generations. Georgians descended from Civil War veterans, Texans descended from men that died fighting for Texas’ freedom, and central American Americans and South American Americans and Pacific island Americans, Phillipino Americans, and Asian Americans of all stripes are all better described as recent immigrants from Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. (This latter comparison is a tough one for a Cubs fan that admires Sammy Sosa to accept as negative, but I will try.)
Federal law (in such a case) that usurps State law is welcomed by many. Granting arrest powers to quasi-governmental anti-animal use zealots is also welcomed. Even spectators are to be arrested, fined, and jailed. These precedents (like so much of the radical animal rights agenda and the environmental extremists agenda, and the socialists’ anti-private property agenda) must only be considered in isolation. Speculation about legality, where such precedents lead, or how they can or will be expanded to include other human/animal interactions are to be ignored or demeaned if mentioned. With this in mind, think of the future possibilities:
Those who do not own dogs and fear certain breeds should get USDA to put those breeds (and others certainly to come) under the AWA and treat them like certain chickens and have the Humane Society of the US “enforce the law”.
Bird hunters that don’t hunt bears should get the USDA cover the interstate shipment of bear bait or bears or bear parts taken with bait or dogs under the AWA and have, say, the Defenders of Wildlife “enforce the law”.
Urban cat owners should get the USDA to cover breeding dogs or puppies under the AWA (to make the city safer for cats and reduce the dog “overpopulation”) and have HSUS or PETA deputized to enforce the law.
Single, professionals (that rollerblade or kayak) on the North Shore of Chicago should get the USDA to cover all predators and predator hunting nationwide under the AWA and have the Natural Resources Defense Council “enforce the law”.
New York City joggers (that use Central Park) should have the USDA get the AWA amended to allow them to cover any use of trees (logging) or use of grass (grazing) under the AWA and have the Sierra Club or Wilderness Society “enforce the law”.
Urban Californians should get the USDA to cover all animals and equipment used by rodeos or circuses under the AWA and then prohibit them out of hand and have it all enforced by the Animal Welfare Institute.
Elite trout fishermen should get the USDA to include non-native trout, Great Lakes’ salmon and certain trout and western largemouth bass (and all the equipment and fishermen that pursue them) under the AWA and have Trout Unlimited “enforce the law”.
Bird watchers and birdfeeders should get the USDA to put cats under the AWA and have the Audubon Society “enforce the law”.
There is no end to this list. Sooner or later I will hit one you think would be “good”. For some of us, frighteningly, nearly all of them sound good. The more things sound good for us, the more deaf we are to objections based on how this perverts our Constitution or how the same model can be used back on us and our pursuits eventually.
I think it is safe to say that we are all with the sanctimonious majority or in the detested minority in many of these issues. We are all tempted to make “those guys” stop what they are doing. We let our emotions jeopardize our realization of the importance of private property and the protection of minority rights. As we clamor to eradicate the Electoral College (as we did State Legislature appointment of US Senators in 1914) we ignore and shout down the disappearance of government safeguards intended to protect minority rights and community life.
Just as cockfighting is being smothered (Federal laws, negative media, and national campaigns to eliminate it where it is legal) so too will hunting, fishing, trapping, and many other animal uses be similarly eliminated. One small minority at a time is converted from free men and women that own animals to subjects bent to a national “will”. It gets easier and quicker as time goes on. Just look at the Endangered Species Act. Each expansion and new abuse sets a precedent that lets the “right court” cite it if there any objections from others afterwards.
Don’t buy this stuff about me being “in league with” or “paid by” cockfighters. Don’t listen to people accusing me of being cruel to animals. If you don’t like cockfighting, don’t go. If you can’t see the similarity to hunting (dead animals) or dogs (property) or a free society as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, I suggest you give it some thought. Only when the most marginalized minorities are protected are we all safe. When one minority is sacrificed, the ones doing the sacrificing are only encouraged and their appetites whetted. All other minorities are thereby threatened. While we all like to think we are the majority, as sure as God made little apples, each of us has some connection to some minority or minorities that irk others. When irks are enshrined in law, the rule of law morphs into the rule of power. Whether enforced by the ASPCA or written by perpetual politicians, the rule of power is repugnant and only leads to tyranny. Mutual tolerance protects mutual rights and like the old song, The Cat’s in the Cradle, the next generation (like the son) will surely grow up “just like me”(sic us).

Jim Beers
31 October 2004
If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at
http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewforum.php?f=91

Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact:
JimBeers7@earthlink.net
Source: http://www.allianceforamerica.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=2437&sid=2f75d41b392cc4e4b721c806c97b79a9
 
 
 
 
 
Do You Think The "Humane" Endorsed Politicians Would Be Able To Target "Sportsmen" If "Sportsmen" Knew The AR Agenda?
 

Politicians targeting ‘sportsmen’


THE DECIDING VOTE in Tuesday’s presidential election could be cast by a recently recognized bloc called “sportsmen,” which includes hunters, anglers, target shooters and gun collectors.

In his book, “My Life,” President Bill Clinton declared Democrats lost the White House and some Congressional seats in 2000 because they failed to appeal to hunters and shooters. Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee, which has a rich hunting tradition.

Both parties have been working hard to try to gain as many of those votes this year as possible.

A survey of licensed hunters and anglers in Florida, New Mexico and Ohio suggests the percentage of sportsmen who will cast votes in these key swing states will be well above the national average. The survey, released last week by the bipartisan Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, showed that 75 percent of sportsmen in Ohio are considered “likely voters,” and the number jumps to 80 percent in New Mexico and 82 percent in Florida.

The survey also noted that other states with large populations of sportsmen, such as Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Wisconsin, likely will see the effects of the sportsmen’s vote. The survey, conducted by Roper Starch Worldwide, revealed 85 percent of hunters are registered to vote and 74 percent voted in the 2000 presidential election.

“There are nearly 40 million sportsmen of voting age in the United States. If all of us had voted in the 2000 presidential election, we would have equaled 36 percent of the entire vote,” said Doug Painter, president of the Hunting and Shooting Sports Heritage Foundation

Both presidential candidates covet sportsmen’s votes, along with congressional candidates such as Jim DeMint, who is seeking the Senate seat vacated by retiring Democratic Sen. Fritz Hollings. Gun rights and hunters’ rights are such strong issues that the National Rifle Association brought its big guns to Columbia on Friday evening at the Colonial Center to show support for DeMint, who is in a tight race with Democrat Inez Tennenbaum.

The NRA, which claims 4 million members, has endorsed President George W. Bush and launched a $20 million campaign against challenger John Kerry in up to 15 states. In the past few weeks, South Carolina television stations have aired NRA programs, from a 30-minute attack on Kerry to 30-second spots supporting DeMint.

To woo hunters, Kerry has made several highly publicized hunting trips with an entourage of reporters and photographers, including a goose hunt in Ohio a week ago. He also issued a “Sportsmen’s Bill of Rights,” which addresses everything from advocating gun ownership to promoting better access to hunting and fishing.

In the third debate with Bush, Kerry made a point of declaring he was a hunter and had been since the age of 12 and was a gun owner, but many gun and hunting groups consider that to be camouflage.

At a National Shooting Sports Foundation-sponsored presentation to the Southeastern Outdoor Press Association in Springfield, Mo., in early October, NRA president Kayne Robinson said Kerry is “using the media to fraudulently present himself as pro-gun and pro-hunter.”

Kerry’s voting record on gun issues does not endear himself to many gun owners and hunters. He has the endorsement of such anti-gun groups as the Brady Campaign and anti-hunting groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the Humane Society of the United States and the Fund for Animals.

Kerry also enjoys a strong “green” rating for his environmental voting record, with the League of Conservation Voters giving him high grades.

Bush, on the other hand, has been criticized for his environmental record. A survey by the National Wildlife Federation, a nonpartisan citizens group, showed that hunters and fishermen are concerned about the Bush administration's plans for oil and gas drilling on prime public land, slow action to control mercury emissions, and the potential effect on hunting and fishing by global warming.

Hearing reservations from hunting and fishing groups, Bush backed off a plan to allow development in some isolated wetlands under the Clean Water Act.

Following a meeting with sportsmen’s groups at his Crawford, Texas, ranch in April, the president pledged a wetlands policy shift from “no net loss” to an “overall increase” in wetlands. His plan calls for conserving 3 million wetland acres during the next five years, and he proposed additional spending in the Farm Bill to encourage landowners to protect wetlands through financial incentives. He also pleased hunters by opening 50 wildlife refuges to hunting.

Attending the Crawford meeting were representatives of the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance, the National Wild Turkey Federation, BASS, Coastal Conservation Association, Ducks Unlimited, National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Pheasants Forever, Quail Unlimited, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, Safari Club International and Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.

As NBC Nightly News observed recently, “In this political season, the hunters have become the hunted.”

Source: http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/sports/10060068.htm
 
 
Does The Gov. Know That
Only when the most marginalized minorities are protected are we all safe?
 
 
 
Gov. Undecided On Cockfighting
    SANTA FE— Gov. Bill Richardson said he's undecided on whether the Legislature should ban cockfighting in New Mexico.
    Richardson so far hasn't had to decide on the issue because bills on the issue presented in the Legislature since he took office haven't made it to his desk.
    But the issue is likely to come up again in 2005, and star Pamela Anderson recently wrote to Richardson, urging him to support a ban on the sport.
    New Mexico is one of only two states that allows cockfighting, which animal rights activists say is cruel but proponents say is a vital part of their culture.
Source: http://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/251201nm10-31-04.htm