Quote:
|
I'm not sure this law is the answer to anything, but I have to question the reaction that it is "unconstitutional" because it makes a person do something that they don't want to do, or infringes on "rights". What provision of the Constitution is being violated? Not every restriction on one's property or how they use that property (and that's what dogs are, for purposes of this discussion) is "unconstitutional.
|
Bill of Rights which include Civil Liberties
Freedom of choice, i.e. 1. free will.
1. Freedom of thought is also known as freedom of conscience and refers to the right of an individual to hold a particular thought, belief or viewpoint regardless of those held by others.
Quote:
|
You'd foster much more respect if you'd just offer the smoking gun and quit with the belittling of law abiders. Unless you can't.
|
The ONLY RESPECT I DEMAND is to respect my FREEDOM OF CHOICE. My FREEDOM to do whatever with my property. Smoking gun? The only smoking gun is CA law makers who write laws that make people feel good THINKING they are going to solve this problem. It will solve nothing but fleece the public of their hard earn money. If I were you, I'd demand a paper trail and see where it's (the money) going. Probably in PETA's pockets.
My last statement on this subject. Here's some food for thought:
Regarding enforcement who’s going to identify owners who don’t follow this new law? Will it be like insurance companies wanting doctors to rat out their patients so they are uninsurable? Will Veterinarians be left to enforce this? Where will these Police come from? Who will they be? Will they knock on your front door? It seem to me that the only people who will have their pets intact will be people who break the law. Are they now criminals? Who's going to collect the fines? What's going to happen if they don't pay those fines?