The Black Vault

Redefining Disclosure

Skip to content

H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

[ Facebook comments] - NEW! Don't have a FREE Black Vault account? You can still comment using your Facebook, AOL, Hotmail or Yahoo! accounts at the bottom of the page.

This section is designed for foreign politics, outside the United States. The Black Vault serves many different countries, and this forum will hold threads regarding world politics, events, etc.
Post a reply


H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

Postby jdchaser » Mon Apr 13, 2009 7:34 pm

So I was looking at this house bill before congress now called H.R. 669

I'll quote two paragraphs and then I'll link it to you guys. Honestly, I like the idea of protecting us against "Invading animals" however, I don't think they've put a lot of thought into it. I mean not only "Bye bye pet hamster" but also "bye bye zoo's" (Most zoo's and/or exhibits)

H.R. 669 stands for House Resolution 669 and is titled "The Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act". It is a bill currently before Congress that if passed will change the way that the US Government classifies animal species that are not native to the United States. H.R. 669 will make it illegal to breed and sell many animals that are very common in the pet trade.

Anyone with pet fish, birds, reptiles, or small mammals will be affected by this bill. Any company selling product or services for pet fish, birds, reptiles or small mammals will be affected by this bill. Would you be impacted by "The Nonnative Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act"?

* Virtually all fish in an aquarium are not native to the United States
* Most pet birds are species not native to the US
* Most reptiles kept as pets are not native to the US
* Hamsters, gerbils, guinea pigs and ferrets are not native to the US


Now, I'd like to hear your guy's input.

Here is the site. Apparently they go to vote This Friday!!!!

http://www.nohr669.com/

I tried to add a poll on this one, but I couldn't get the polling option to work
Why are you hiding the truth from me when I can see it in plain sight? The only thing this proves is how blind you really are.
jdchaser
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:41 pm
Top

Share On:

Share on Facebook Facebook Share on Twitter Twitter Share on FriendFeed FriendFeed Share on Digg Digg Share on Delicious Delicious Share on Technorati Technorati Share on Tumblr TumblrShare on Google+ Google+

Re: H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

Postby Nesaie » Mon Apr 13, 2009 8:29 pm

WTF?

Does Hawaii count as the US? There are native tropical fish and birds there. Can they still be pets in the lower 48? What about in Alaska?

Locally, in Seattle, there are escaped tropical birds (parrots and such) who survive in a park called the Arboretum by the UW. What would happen to them? They're not native.

Then, what happens to German Shepherds, grey squirrels, or Obama's new dog from Portugal? None of those are native.

Don't these people have something better to do? Who is sponsoring this legislation? Who lobbied for it? PETA?
Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen... - Zbigniew Brezhinsky
User avatar
Nesaie
 
Posts: 1289
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Top

Re: H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

Postby bionic » Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:52 pm

I don't see that bill passing
“Whether you sniff it smoke it eat it or shove it up your ass the result is the same: addiction.”
― William S. Burroughs
(love&forgive yourself..and everyone else)
User avatar
bionic
 
Posts: 9732
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Top

Re: H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

Postby jdchaser » Tue Apr 14, 2009 6:36 pm

Nesaie wrote:WTF?

Does Hawaii count as the US? There are native tropical fish and birds there. Can they still be pets in the lower 48? What about in Alaska?

Locally, in Seattle, there are escaped tropical birds (parrots and such) who survive in a park called the Arboretum by the UW. What would happen to them? They're not native.

Then, what happens to German Shepherds, grey squirrels, or Obama's new dog from Portugal? None of those are native.

Don't these people have something better to do? Who is sponsoring this legislation? Who lobbied for it? PETA?


Hawaii is a US state. I guess they didn't put enough thought into that if they can't reconize that part.
Why are you hiding the truth from me when I can see it in plain sight? The only thing this proves is how blind you really are.
jdchaser
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:41 pm
Top

Re: H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

Postby Wing-Zero » Tue Apr 14, 2009 10:58 pm

Cool, so in a couple weeks my doberman is going to be illegal contraband.

Awesome.
War is an extension of economics and diplomacy through other means.

Economics and diplomacy are methods of securing resources used by humans.

Securing resources is the one necessary behavior for all living things.

War = Life
User avatar
Wing-Zero
 
Posts: 3139
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: California Uber Alles
Top

Re: H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

Postby jdchaser » Wed Apr 15, 2009 8:04 pm

Apparently it's been pushed back to the 23rd. (4/23/09)

Another thing they forgot is all those animals that get stuck to things. I mean what about seafood? Isn't most of it
Why are you hiding the truth from me when I can see it in plain sight? The only thing this proves is how blind you really are.
jdchaser
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 2:41 pm
Top

Re: H.R 669 (House Resolution 669)

Postby Nesaie » Thu Apr 16, 2009 12:51 am

Just goes to show you how stupid government is.
Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen... - Zbigniew Brezhinsky
User avatar
Nesaie
 
Posts: 1289
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Top
Post a reply







The Social Network Buzz

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to World Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. we believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed an interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

[ ]