This will end the hobby: AMENDMENTS TO LACEY ACT IN HOUSE COMPETES ACT HR4521

[Cnidariaphile]

So the USA has enough funding in the FWS to run a psy ops outfit? Here in canada they cant even afford to hire new officers and enforce what laws are already in place. So when does the U.S FWS get their new m1a2 abrams and f22s?

Have you ever known a taxpayer funded entity to tell you, “actually we have plenty of funding”. No matter how much they have they will always sing the “we are underfunded, poor us” song. They have way more money than they need. Further, How much do you think it costs to post a few messages to a forum?

 

[Lyss]

while reefers have large enough numbers to make enough noise to put up some resistance, it does not translate to resistance when half of them don’t want to believe they are being regulated out of existence. Divide and conquer. Label me “crazy” if you want, but all I’m saying is at least make a phone call or email to your senator saying you oppose this section of the bill. Even if this bill does not pass there will be another, and another just around the corner. Stay vigilant reefers, or enjoy your fate. Much love to everyone.

You make like partially good points that are clouded by inappropriate and paranoid assertions is the problem.

The thing is, nobody sits around writing pieces of legislation like, “those reefers, man, let’s GET them!” There’s a bigger picture.

The process is working like it should — that’s what professional associations like the one vocally opposing this are for. They work with folks in firms like mine to build awareness and motivate ppl to take action.

 

[DopamineKata]

Although I’m a “new member” it’s likely I have been reefing longer than you have been alive.

Unless you're one of the oldest people alive that's doubtful. If so, good on you for living FAR beyond most people. But what exactly does your being a reefer have to do with your conspiracy theory?

It's a shame you avoid forums. Otherwise you'd have known that a person coming out of the woodwork and making an account to post wild claims is a GIANT red flag. 99.9% of the time they're a shill or a nutjob.

 

[Cnidariaphile]

Unless you're one of the oldest people alive that's doubtful. If so, good on you for living FAR beyond most people. But what exactly does your being a reefer have to do with your conspiracy theory?

It's a shame you avoid forums. Otherwise you'd have known that a person coming out of the woodwork and making an account to post wild claims is a GIANT red flag. 99.9% of the time they're a shill or a nutjob.

In other words: don’t listen to him because he is “new” and /or “crazy”. Forget whatever the content is. Aaaaaand this is why I avoid forums.

 

[Acros]

Pets are a 100 billion dollar industry in the United States. Would they shut it down overnight? I find it hard to believe.

Pet Industry News & Pet Product News | APPA Press Releases

Stay informed by access press releases from APPA, Global Pet Expo, The Pet Summit, PetsAddLife and APPA members.

www.americanpetproducts.org

 

[DopamineKata]

In other words: don’t listen to him because he is “new” and /or “crazy”.

Do you often listen to people you have no history with when they make wild claims? Especially if those claims look a lot like other paranoid rants from people in your past that you already know have a few screws loose?

 

[Lyss]

Pets are a 100 billion dollar industry in the United States. Would they shut it down overnight? I find it hard to believe.

Pet Industry News & Pet Product News | APPA Press Releases

Stay informed by access press releases from APPA, Global Pet Expo, The Pet Summit, PetsAddLife and APPA members.

www.americanpetproducts.org

This is what I was thinking, too. If nothing else there will be a lot of pushback on making changes that would effectively squash the entire industry, even if the bill were to pass w/the amendment as written.

Republican or Democrat, one thing the US is, is overwhelmingly pro business. It would be very difficult to kill the industry, let alone political suicide. I’m already imagining the kind of oppo campaign that could be run against it, w/little kids crying b/c their fish are getting taken away lol.

Does that mean if you oppose this amendment you shouldn’t act? No. It just means simmer down

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

Again no. It’s says unless 1. Imported into the US already in more than minimal quantity 2. Transported between states etc. this is literally saying that species we are already importing will not be affected.

Although being in the minority and generally not opposed to this bill, the very nature of law is what makes this dangerous. Although I am not a 'true law' attorney, I do work in tax law which works on some similar principles. The concern here is the ambiguity of the law and who decides what.

• If you make a law to specific, people can easily find ways around it by changing a minor fact. This would then take an act of congress to make updates. It can then be shot down very easily for being 'arbitrary and capricious'.
• 
  
• If you make the tax law to broad, then it it too broad and can be challenged on the avenues of the vagueness doctrine or maybe even due process.

Given the previous two points, most laws are going to err on the side of over broad with the fallacy that reasonable people can agree on what this constitutes. As someone who wants to prevent something from being imported, I would work on the following paragraph in two ways

1. I would make an argument that the amount of corals, fish or animals is always minimal quantities. Given that they have not defined minimal, this is up for interpretation and someone can make some determination on what is minimal and simply dial up or down said determination to get said species to be included / excluded.
2. If point 1 did not work, I would then start breaking down the species classification. Of the 7 classifications (Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, and Species), species is the lowest level and thus very easy to make an argument that something is of a specific species over minor differences. By dividing the population as small as it can go, any thing could potentially fall under the minimal quantities clauses. (imagine if someone define each name version of an SPS as it's own species simply because it is a difference color or has different length corralites)

Overall, I am still supportive of this law even if written in such a way that it is going to have negative impacts on the hobby. If we could trust people to do the right thing, we wouldnt have lion fish hurting the florida keys, murder hornets in the north west, pythons in the florida swaps (granted some of these could be stowaways but most likely discarded pets) . Although the horse is out of the barn on some items, the general spirit of this law is to try and stop stupid people from being stupid for which i support.

 

[Bato367]

Although I still don’t get from what a read, a full band on fish and corals, I’ve signed the petitions and emailed my reps.

Down with politics, parties and conspiracies. We are all one.

You’ve got to fight, for your right, to party.

 

[BroccoliFarmer]

Although I still don’t get from what a read, a full band on fish and corals, I’ve signed the petitions and emailed my reps.

Down with politics, parties and conspiracies. We are all one.

You’ve got to fight, for your right, to party.

Isnt saying down with politics a brand of politics in upon itself?

 

[Bato367]

Isnt saying down with politics a brand of politics in upon itself?

I don’t know.

 

[Cnidariaphile]

This is what I was thinking, too. If nothing else there will be a lot of pushback on making changes that would effectively squash the entire industry, even if the bill were to pass w/the amendment as written.

Republican or Democrat, one thing the US is, is overwhelmingly pro business. It would be very difficult to kill the industry, let alone political suicide. I’m already imagining the kind of oppo campaign that could be run against it, w/little kids crying b/c their fish are getting taken away lol.

Does that mean if you oppose this amendment you shouldn’t act? No. It just means simmer down

Of course it would never happen that way, not overnight. Start with a “white list” so people are upset but too upset. No crying children because they still get to keep their “Nemo” and friends. Then piece by piece remove them from the list. They are playing the long game. Moving so slowly that people will hardly notice. That’s why it is important to fight from the start of the process. Have you noticed it has already begun?

 

[Cnidariaphile]

Why is it important to define “those imported in the last year”? How hard has it been to get shipments in during the last year because of grounded flights and lockdowns? So the numbers are already artificially low.
So they get much more leverage in what they call “ minimal quantities”.
Why not average the numbers out over the past 10 years? There is a reason it needs to be this last year

 

[Lyss]

Of course it would never happen that way, not overnight. Start with a “white list” so people are upset but too upset. No crying children because they still get to keep their “Nemo” and friends. Then piece by piece remove them from the list. They are playing the long game. Moving so slowly that people will hardly notice. That’s why it is important to fight from the start of the process. Have you noticed it has already begun?

Honestly I am questioning if you’re really reading the things I’m saying. Not just skimming but truly reading and getting me.

I don’t really have anything further to say here. You’re taking typical political process and making it a nefarious underhanded thing, and that’s part of why we have so few ppl trusting our institutions these days. The bottom line is that if you don’t agree with a political position or piece of legislation, get involved. My goodness no one here is stopping anyone. But drumming up harmful conspiracy theories is totally inappropriate.

 

[paintman]

Honestly I am questioning if you’re really reading the things I’m saying. Not just skimming but truly reading and getting me.

I don’t really have anything further to say here. You’re taking typical political process and making it a nefarious underhanded thing, and that’s part of why we have so few ppl trusting our institutions these days. The bottom line is that if you don’t agree with a political position or piece of legislation, get involved. My goodness no one here is stopping anyone. But drumming up harmful conspiracy theories is totally inappropriate.

Everything about passing legislation is nefarious! Just look at how enriched certain members of the legislature have become in the last year by buying stocks in companies just before they pass laws favoring said companies. It's not by accident certain members of congress have had their portfolios have outperformed the DOW, S&P 500, and Warren buffet's investments.

 

[tharbin]

I am against the passage of this bill. I don't know if it is really good bad or indifferent to the hobby. I'm not a lawyer. That said, this act is being included in a bill about America competing with other countries. I am fundamentally against any bill from any party that 'sneaks in' laws that do not directly pertain to the main thrust of the bill. Period, don't care which party, what idea. If it isn't germane to the central thrust of the bill it doesn't belong and is therefore suspect.

On top of that, whitelisting is nonsense. Do any of you think that any government employee will spend even 10 seconds to whitelist some half-inch long goby from Palau? Won't happen.

 

[Lyss]

Everything about passing legislation is nefarious! Just look at how enriched certain members of the legislature have become in the last year by buying stocks in companies just before they pass laws favoring said companies. It's not by accident certain members of congress have had their portfolios have outperformed the DOW, S&P 500, and Warren buffet's investments.

This has absolutely zero to do with the issue at hand so I’m not going to discuss the problem you’re talking about here. If you want to discuss whether or not members of congress should be allowed to hold stock and get involved in that issue there are bills regarding that and it is a separate conversation. It also in no way makes “everything about passing legislation nefarious.” I’m gonna jump out of this thread now b/c this nonsense is getting more and more inappropriate.

 

[paintman]

I am against the passage of this bill. I don't know if it is really good bad or indifferent to the hobby. I'm not a lawyer. That said, this act is being included in a bill about America competing with other countries. I am fundamentally against any bill from any party that 'sneaks in' laws that do not directly pertain to the main thrust of the bill. Period, don't care which party, what idea. If it isn't germane to the central thrust of the bill it doesn't belong and is therefore suspect.

On top of that, whitelisting is nonsense. Do any of you think that any government employee will spend even 10 seconds to whitelist some half-inch long goby from Palau? Won't happen.

Exactly! And people still think theres nothing nefariuos about how legislation is passed.

 

[paintman]

I can't even begin to imagine how much smoke is comming out from under the collars of the execs at Bertram Capital, after they dumped millions into BRS. LOL!
I bet this bill would die if BRS was a publicly held company. In fact I would be willing to bet all of congress would buy stock in BRS and then kill the bill in the middle of the night!

 

[MaxTremors]

I

Im sorry if invoking his name was a trigger word for you that immediately shut down rational thought. I apologize for the limbic hijacking. I needed to say where the term came from to give context so it did not appear as though I was calling anyone an idiot directly. That is not my intention.

Yes. So triggered. So much rational thought in your posts. Keep the clichès coming, they are glorious.