Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
These are the kooks were dealing with here folks dam rodents scratching snakes eyes out and all the hard work it takes to rehab a goldfish...........
"Snake food was almost exempt from the proposal. After all, pythons have to eat, and they like their lunch alive. But at a heated meeting, Commissioner Pam Hemphill questioned how it could be humane to sell live animals to be fed to other live animals.
"If a snake is caught with a rodent in a box, the rodent can scratch its eye and cause an infection," said Hemphill, who noted that reptiles on display at the California Academy of Sciences eat dead, frozen prey. "The snake can't escape, and the rodent might be stuck for one or two days in the box with the snake because the snake's not hungry right then.
"So it doesn't seem very humane to me," she continued. "And if the frozen [food] works, then I think the killing of the animals to be food is probably more humane."
It is legal in San Francisco to sell live animals for eventual human consumption, and the proposed ban would not stop markets from selling live fish, poultry, turtles or seafood for that purpose.
Rebecca Katz, director of San Francisco Animal Care and Control, said her agency supports a ban on pet sales — particularly one that includes the so-called smalls, such as hamsters, which are euthanized at her city shelter at a higher percentage than any other domesticated animal. Although she did not advocate for the inclusion of fish, she is not against it.
"We're the agency that receives the old, filthy fish bowl with the goldfish at risk and have to determine whether we can make them healthy and adopt them out or flush them down the toilet," Katz said. "These are the lucky ones. Most people just flush them themselves."
My goodness, the people of San Francisco won't be happy until everybody is driving a Prius and eating only granola and pine cones.
Only it's not as if the people of San Francisco demanded this proposed ordinance--it's something proposed by the San Francisco Animal Control and Welfare Commission. And no one's even sure if anyone in the city administration has any interest in pursuing this.
Quote:
So far, even the city’s Board of Supervisors, populated entirely by Democrats, seems uneager to pursue the idea.
Cammy Blackstone, a spokeswoman for supervisor Carmen Chu, tells NRO, The commissioners “don’t have a sponsoring supervisor [for the proposed legislation], so it’s a long way’s off. I’m not sure it will come before the supervisors anytime soon.”
Anyway, I'm a liberal who grew up near San Francisco and I think this whole proposal is as stupid as the proposed circumsion ban(which was mainly the result of one nutbag that somehow got the signatures to get it on a ballot this fall). Even if San Francisco somehow did ban the sale of pets, it'd be easy to drive south into San Mateo County to go to a pet store(or east to Oakland or north to Marin) to buy uh, goldfish to smuggle back across the city limits...(Actually you'd still be allowed to possess the goldfish...) You could also still buy live animals at markets for human consumption--because they obviously would have to shut down Chinatown if they tried to enforce a ban on that.
So anyways, as a liberal with a sense of humor I can get a laugh out of the UK op-ed piece below lampooning San Francisco.
Also a phenomenon that exists in Beverly Hills. Forgetting about a certain actor who made it famous? Also, Henry Waxman's district has the 2nd largest number of gays of any district in California (only Pelosi's has more, and it has more gays than the other San Francisco district represented by Jackie Speier). Your neighbors have probably done it.
FWIW, I highly doubt this measure will pass in SF.
Also a phenomenon that exists in Beverly Hills. Forgetting about a certain actor who made it famous? Also, Henry Waxman's district has the 2nd largest number of gays of any district in California (only Pelosi's has more, and it has more gays than the other San Francisco district represented by Jackie Speier). Your neighbors have probably done it.
FWIW, I highly doubt this measure will pass in SF.
We all thought the circumcision ban wouldn't even get ballot votes but alas, they proved us wrong. And most likely, they will probably go through with it as well as this one. The McDonald's toy ban has already been signed into law. So anything's possible in San Francisco. I never thought I'd see the day where a circumcision ban would actually be proposed meanwhile abortion is widely advocated and remain legal in the same city.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
