Friday, February 02, 2007

SB 2254 Rejected in committee 7 to 0

So what are the supporters of this bill saying about the rejection?

. . . .the legislature doesn’t represent the majority of North Dakotans.

The legislature is nothing but grain farmers and retired people.

This puts the fox in charge of the hen house.

We'll just take this to a referendum . . . you will hear from the true majority.

People just don't pay attention. . . .

The legislature is full of big business buddies . . . .

Money is the only thing the legislators care about.

I wonder what they would say if it went their way?


This legislation was mainly "mandated ethics" but the problem being "ethics" are not a measurable item and means different things to different people.

Example:

Hunting some game with dogs in unacceptable in some areas and is accepted in other areas.
Using some bait scent is okay with some and not with others.
Using bait itself is okay with some and not with others.


We can go on and on.




Stuck in the middle of the ethics argument are the "property rights" of those farmers/ranchers that were advised, encouraged, and financed by government agencies to start up their non-typical livestock farms/ranches could have been told to stop.

Some will say this bill only limited the hunting/shooting on the non-typical livestock farms/ranches but it was seen by the legislative committee for what it was, just the beginning of the actual ban.

Thanks to those legislative committee members that were able to see through all the BS smokescreen of "mandated ethics."

1 comment:

Eric J. Burton said...

That is a good thing this bill will not be come law.