Family Facing $4 Million in Fines for Selling Bunnies

I think the biggest underlying problem in stories like this, or the lemonade stand, or any other small business type entity, are the classifications of a small business and how hard it is for a truly small business to keep up with regulations that are really instated for what I would say is a medium to large business that still is able to classify itself as "small business."

The regulations for a small business classification according to SBA.gov:

Manufacturing: Maximum number of employees may range from 500 to 1500, depending on the type of product manufactured;

Wholesaling: Maximum number of employees may range from 100 to 500 depending on the particular product being provided;

Services: Annual receipts may not exceed $2.5 to $21.5 million, depending on the particular service being provided;

Retailing: Annual receipts may not exceed $5.0 to $21.0 million, depending on the particular product being provided;

General and Heavy Construction: General construction annual receipts may not exceed $13.5 to $17 million, depending on the type of construction;

Special Trade Construction: Annual receipts may not exceed $7 million;

Agriculture: Annual receipts may not exceed $0.5 to $9.0 million, depending on the agricultural product.

I work for a small business that has less than ten employees, makes less than a million a year, has to carry 5 licenses where 4 of those should be condensed down to two since they do the same things, has to carry a surety bond....the list goes on. It is unfair to regulate truly small business against these standards in my opinion.

"they" are just making examples in the last frivolous attempts to induce fear and make struggling to survive a crime in it self, its simply just silly..

reply to post by zarp3333

If I lived in that town I'd be willing to show up for a We The People demonstration. Maybe the inspector needs a gentle reminder that there are simply millions more of us than them

Not a bad idea and something to keep in mind for when TSHTF in 2012 when the FDA really starts to put the BITE on farmers.


Another good point of attack is UNIVERSITIES. Students absolutely LOVE demonstrations and the USDA employee I was talking to at a party said there will be seminars and classes given at the local university to HELP (gag barf) farmers.


We need to get the word out that all those increased prices in food looming on the horizon are NOT going to the farmer but into the pockets of the Cargill and MacMillan families (owners of Cargill) and the like.

Please understand farmers have ONE buyer, the Food Cartel who sets the price they will pay the farmer. The spread between farm prices and consumer prices has been widening for years. Making the food cartel rich and bankrupting farmers.

This means the added cost of the new regulations can not be passed on to the consumer but the "added cost" WILL be passed on and pocketed by the Ag cartel


Remember the 2008 food riots worldwide???

...Today three companies, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Bunge control the world’s grain trade. Chemical giant Monsanto controls three-fifths of seed production. Unsurprisingly, in the last quarter of 2007, even as the world food crisis was breaking, Archer Daniels Midland’s profits jumped 20%, Monsanto 45%, and Cargill 60%. Recent speculation with food commodities has created another dangerous “boom.” After buying up grains and grain futures, traders are hoarding, withholding stocks and further inflating prices.... www.globalissues.org...

A common thread is Cargill and V.P. Dan Amstutz

1. Amstutz wrote the World Trade Organization Agreement on Ag. This forced open borders with no tarrifs or local farmer price supports (Third world countries could not subsidize farmers but the EU and the USA could)

2. He wrote the 1996 farm bill known as "Freedom to Fail" it eliminated price floors and removed "production controls" including land set asides and farmer-owned grain reserves. Result Prices collapsed. 2nd link

3. He went to work for Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs ???? Oh yes, they are in there too.

How Goldman gambled on starvation
2010-07-02, The Independent (One of the UK's leading newspapers)
www.independent.co.uk...

This is the story of how some of the richest people in the world – Goldman, Deutsche Bank, the traders at Merrill Lynch, and more – have caused the starvation of some of the poorest people in the world. At the end of 2006, food prices across the world started to rise, suddenly and stratospherically. Within a year, the price of wheat had shot up by 80 per cent, maize by 90 per cent, rice by 320 per cent. In a global jolt of hunger, 200 million people – mostly children – couldn't afford to get food any more, and sank into malnutrition or starvation. There were riots in more than 30 countries, and at least one government was violently overthrown. Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it "a silent mass murder", entirely due to "man-made actions." Through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations [controlling agricultural futures contracts] were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into "derivatives" that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in "food speculation" was born. The speculators drove the price through the roof.

SOURCE: www.wanttoknow.info...

Another Cargill VP was Dwayne Orville Andreas.

In 1971 Dwayne Andreas became Chief Executive Officer of ADM [Archer Daniels Midland Company], and is credited with transforming the firm into an industrial powerhouse. Andreas remained CEO until 1997. He was one of the most prominent political campaign donors[6] in the United States, having contributed millions of dollars to Democratic and Republican candidates alike.... en.wikipedia.org...

Perhaps America's champion all-time campaign contributor is Dwayne Orville Andreas

...his $25,000 cash donation to President Richard M. Nixon's re-election bid in 1972 became a focus of Watergate inquiry into abuses surrounding unreported campaign money. According to an investigative memo uncovered in 1992 that quotes President Nixon's personal secretary Rosemary Woods, Andreas delivered $100,000 in $100 bills to the White House shortly before the 1972 election. Woods stored the money in a basement safe for about a year, when the President had her return the cash to Andreas.

"Andreas, ... has continued donating generously to many Democratic and Republican candidates -- Over the years he has given money to Senator Bob Dole, President William Jefferson Clinton, President George Herbert Walker Bush, President James Earl Carter, Jr., Michael Dukakis, Jack F. Kemp, and Jesse Jackson, among others. Between 1981 and 1994, Senator Dole and his political foundations collected $178,000 in contributions from Andreas, members of Andreas' family and A.D.M. executives, according to Common Cause, a nonpartisan watchdog group in Washington. Andreas and A.D.M. have also given more than $2 million in 'soft money to the Democratic and Republican parties since 1991, according to federal records.

"Meanwhile, Dole has become known to some as Senator Ethanol because of his longtime, staunch support of federal tax subsidies for corn-based ethanol, a gasoline additive. A.D.M., which produces sixty percent of all U.S. ethanol, has been a major beneficiary.....

And in September 1995, Catherine Bertini, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture and Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Program, stated "Food is power. We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize."

HMMMmmm, In 1995 we get the WTO Agreement on Ag. In 1996 we get "Freedom to Fail" and the new HACCP food regs that result in a sharp increase in food borne illness. This along with the MSM propaganda is used to push through the Food Modernization Act. Meanwhile Pres. Clinton admits the wiping out of third world farmers was INTENTIONAL!

Seems Catherine Bertini knows something we do not...

If you studied the ANTI FEDERALIST PAPERS then you must be aware that we were supposed to be SOVEREIGN and thus have the same rights as a king...

You will also learn that the constitution is NOT your friend and is the document that they have used for over 200 years to steal our rights away...usually using the pretense of Our Safety to do so...

The mere existence of the Anti Federalist Papers should be enough for most people to see that the Constitution was indeed the initial subversion of our rights i.e. the CONstitution is "unconstitutional" as how can so many of the founding fathers have been so opposed to it if it was "ALL GOOD" like they want people believing?

No surprise to me then that FOX, CNN and MSNBC all cry "thats unconstitutional" and also the fact that our military is sworn to protect it.....

If you studied the IRS and the history of the tax codes then you know that the tax codes were intended to tax big business and other "traders" who contribute little or nothing to the economy... it was not intended to tax our LABOR/real work.

If you studied SOVEREIGNTY then you must also be aware of your STRAWMAN or rather the "method tptb use to get the Sovereign to Submit to their Authority" as much of it is Voluntary yet you will be hard pressed to find anyone who knows this and even fewer who are brave enough to not submit!

Now, just like they have taught you to use "LOGIC" to explain everything away... you proceed to attempt to justify all their actions with some code or statute or other LOGICAL reason that we must submit.

Loving your hangman indeed.

I am my own business. I function as a private sub contractor and as a small business owner.
I receive no assistance from any form of government as I am perfectly aware that via this assistance they also seek to control my actions.

In my Contractor role I understand that there are 1000's of codes, rules and regulations that make it virtually impossible for me to operate without the assistance of a Sub contract company as only these large companies can afford to chart those waters and this is no accident, it is completely on purpose to prevent small companies or sole proprietors from being able to enter the industry. I could make 30-40% more if I could do it alone.

In my small business role I have had the pleasure of going head to head with MASSIVELY LARGE LAW FIRMS and their lackeys. They have sent me cease and desist letters, left similar messages on my answering machine, emailed me the same letters, contacted my sales partners with the same warnings yet ultimately they have never taken me to court.... do you wonder why?

Because they feed off of intimidation primarily plus the fact that they are totally STRETCHING the definitions of the law, they know it, they know I know it and they know I can prove it in court.

Most people would seize up and submit without thought and that, that is what they desire the most.

Everything I have said here applies directly to this BUNNY case and failure to understand this is not the fault of the author

One last thought about "rules and regulations" please.

I use to work for GTE which became part of VERIZON...
Thats right, I am not a kid in my parents basement, I have been ALL OVER and it has been ALL OVER me....

It occurred to me one day that there was simply NO WAY for me to do my job RIGHT according to the codes, regulations, restrictions and rules.

This meant that anytime my superiors wanted to mess with me then they could and if they wanted to build up a stack of pink slips to the moon that they would eventually use to get rid of me then they could.

That is what it is all about... so many laws that you cannot possibly know them all and once you have a good idea of what the laws are and how they directly affect your business, your job etc etc, you soon understand that there is no way to comply with all of them all of the time and I assure you all that this was the original intent!

Do you really think I will be surprised if, after this post, a bunch of LAW ABIDING CITIZENS try to come on here and justify todays tyranny?
Better yet, they will come here and spew all they have been taught and nothing that they have learned, they will recant every word that TPTB have used to make it all seem reasonable...

Whats wrong with you! You question our laws!!!
The laws written by a bunch of elite racists who were only momentarily opposed by a faction of their peers with a Moral Conscience and these were the ANTI FEDERALISTS.

Originally posted by CarlitosAmsel


Do you know every petty law or regulation your government or government agency comes up with behind your back? And would you expect to become financialy ruined for the rest of your life for such a small matter as selling a couple of bunnies to many??? If your answer is NO, then please, dont write stuff like the one above.

edit on 22-5-2011 by CarlitosAmsel because: (no reason given)

I am aware of the laws that regulate the business i engage in. I have been farming commercially for several years, and have even sold rabbits in the past. I am most certainly VERY familiar with the laws.

And to characterize this as 'a few bunnies' is not accurate. The owner admits they had several 'large contracts' and were the 'go to guys in the county' for rabbits.

To characterize that as a lemonaid stand is disingenuous.

IF the discussion was about how many of the regulations and laws are twisted by big business to hurt the little guy, then I would totally agree. But as long as the OP is about the specifics of this case, I have to maintain these people are guilty of being ignorant of the regulations in relation to their business.

reply to post by OverMan

....That is what it is all about... so many laws that you cannot possibly know them all and once you have a good idea of what the laws are and how they directly affect your business, your job etc etc, you soon understand that there is no way to comply with all of them all of the time and I assure you all that this was the original intent!

No truer words were ever spoken.

Unfortunately Incrediblelousminds doesn't look past his nose he because he has been brainwashed to be a good little "Team Player" If he has been running a small business selling eggs and what not WITHOUT getting all the permits etc. HE is now on the FDA/USDA radar as a maverick to be brought to heel. It may currently be legal to not have the permit but it frosts the butt of the little Hitlers in officialdom and they can not wait to nail your rear to the wall as soon as they are let of the leash.

This is based on my experience and that of several others who operated within-state businesses that suddenly became Federally regulated because of that fracking Commerce Clause.

The little Hitlers decended on all of us all over the country (internet support group) with absolutely idiotic demands and put every single one of us in my neighborhood out of business. A year later I talked to someone who was a new start-up in the same business who kissed the butt of the SAME inspector (OH she was SOOoo Helpful) and the "RULES" were completely changed!

Good OP my friend.

To all. The sooner we all just admit that we live in a Facists country, the sooner we can have our Republic back again.

When the rules and laws get twisted in favor of big business, it does not take but a decade or two for it to really show up. They have it set on wall street to break the law, pay the fine and come out billions ahead. Yet know one ever goes to jail.
The whole idea of jail is too take away your future. Maybe we can find another way to take the future of the corupt in big corps.

Originally posted by burntheships

Why are corporate monsters like BAYER, MONSANTO, and Chevron allowed to "get away with murder",
while The Big Government kills off the little guy?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7cbd1d16f615.jpg[/atsimg]

Wow this is a fine example of how The Government is a
bloated beast that needs to be put on a starvation diet!

“The first thing (the investigator) said was ‘My name is so and so, I’ve been in the USDA for 30-plus years, and I’ve never lost a case,’” John recalled, continuing. “He said, ‘I’m not here to debate the law, interpret the law or discuss the law, I’m here just to do an investigation.’” biggovernment.com...

In other words, I am here from The Government, and we are going to screw you to the wall.



biggovernment.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 21-5-2011 by burntheships because: (no reason given)

Nice post, and what I find extremely odd is that PEOPLE do not realize from whence "Government" CAME!!!!

To protect and SERVE!! WE the people ELECT public officials TO SERVE US, not just cops, but mayors, city council people, senators and other representatives, IF they PASS any statute that would violate our free right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we may ignore it as if it had never been passed. There are many Supreme court cases which state this.

It is sad really, when the average Citizen does not know, and is not afforded an opportunity to sustain family life and to represent himself/herself by proclomation of right by being human.

reply to post by daddio


Politicians in North America want what they European Union have, centralized power, and the people's opinion doesn't mean a thing.

Here is a textbook example of why more and more people are losing respect and trust of the Federal Government. With cases like these, you don't need conspiracy theories to try to illustrate the corrupt self-serving nature of the huge bureaucracies involved in gov. agencies. Just look how they try to destroy small businesses while letting the big players get away with murder...literally in many cases. As you mentioned, corporations like Monsanto get away with all sorts of crimes since they can afford bribes...er...fines, and hire huge attorneys. The whole system is rigged and based on lies and deception on every level.

I hope this story gets out there to show everyone a good example what kind of system is in place. It seems the mainstream majority are still asleep and just let the corporations and bureaucrats run everything while everyone remains distracted by "partisan" rhetoric. S&F.

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by daddio

 

Politicians in North America want what they European Union have, centralized power, and the people's opinion doesn't mean a thing.

THIS is why we need to re-iterate the Declaration of Independence as often as possible and forget the Constitution which is a corporate document.

I absolutely despise refering to the Constitution in any way. The Bill of Rights is what matters and IT is seperate and DISTINCT FROM the Constitution. But again, who really cares?

At least thats my opinion. This family should be left alone and the Sheriff should step in and DO HIS DAMN JOB and tell the other "authorites", which have NO AUTHORITY, to feck off and leave this family alone or they will be arrest under 18USC 880, Extortion and Threats!!!

Government itself is destroying the economy with stupid, never-ending rules and regulations.

I am waiting for the day when the government tells us how to wipe our butts.

Originally posted by Common Scarecrow
Government itself is destroying the economy with stupid, never-ending rules and regulations.

I am waiting for the day when the government tells us how to wipe our butts.

We all need to do this!!

LAW Excess of Jurisdiction

Note; only Congress has the authority to enact law, any enactment of law by the Judiciary or the Executive office is in Excess of Jurisdiction: Article I, Section 1. “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

18 U.S.C. Section 1. “Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason.” U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 .Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)

“Any judge or attorney who does not report such judges for treason as required by law may themselves be guilty of misprison of treason,” 18 U.S.C. Section 2382.

"Obviously a judgment, though final and on the merits, has no binding force and is subject to collateral attack if it is wholly void for lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter or person, and perhaps for excess of jurisdiction, or where it is obtained by extrinsic fraud. [Citations.]" (7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure, supra, Judgment, § 286, p. 828.).

Another federal statute permits any citizen to file a lawsuit in the federal courts to obtain a court order requiring a federal official to perform a mandatory duty and to halt unlawful acts. This statute is Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Action to compel an officer of the United States to perform his duty. The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the plaintiff.
This is one of the most important tools to fight corruption in government offices that is immunized by the mob mentality of the system. The federal crime reporting statute requires anyone knowing of a federal crime to promptly report it to a federal court (or other federal officer), and requires federal judges to receive that information and any evidence, as part of his administrative duties. (The judge has no immunity for misconduct related to this administrative requirement).

Title 18 U.S.C. § 2. Principals.

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.

(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.Note: The legislative intent to punish as a principal not only one who directly commits an offense and one who "aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures" another to commit an offense, but also anyone who causes the doing of an act which if done by him directly would render him guilty of an offense against the United States. Case law decisions: Rothenburg v. United States, 1918, 38 S.Ct. 18, 245 U.S. 480, 62 L.Ed. 414, and United States v. Giles, 1937, 57 S.Ct. 340, 300 U.S. 41, 81 L.Ed. 493.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 3. Accessory after the fact. Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States had been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 4 (misprision of felony). Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Every person who, under color or any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any State of Territory, subjects ... any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.

Cut the text in half, here is the rest...

Title 42 U.S.C § 1985 Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights;

(1) Preventing officer from performing duty. If two or more persons ... conspire to prevent ... any person from accepting or holding any office, trust, or place of confidence under the United States, or from discharging any duties thereof; or to injure him in his person or property on account of his lawful discharge of the duties of his office, or while engaged in the lawful discharge thereof, or to injure his property so as to molest, interrupt, hinder, or impede him in the discharge of his official duties.

(2) Obstructing justice; intimidating party, witness, or juror. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, or to injure such party or witness in his person or property on account of his having so attended or testified, or to influence the verdict, presentment, or indictment of any grand or petit juror in any such court, or to injure such juror in his person or property on account of any verdict, presentment, or indictment lawfully assented to by him, or of his being or having been such juror; or if two or more persons conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the law, or to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or attempting to enforce, the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws;

(3) Depriving persons of rights or privileges. If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire, or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving, either directly or indirectly, any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws, or for the purpose of preventing or hindering the constituted authorities of any State or Territory from giving or securing to all persons within such State or Territory the equal protection of the laws; ... or to injure any citizen in person or property on account of such support or advocacy; in any case of conspiracy set forth in this section, if one or more persons engaged therein do, or cause to be done, any act in furtherance of the object of such conspiracy, whereby another is injured in his person or property, or deprived of having and exercising any right or privilege of a citizen of the United States, the party so injured or deprived may have an action for the recovery of damages, occasioned by such injury or deprivation, against any one or more of the conspirators.

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1985 pertains to a conspiracy to interfere with civil rights, (1) to prevent an officer from performing a duty; (2) obstructing justice; intimidating party, witness, or juror; (3) or depriving persons of rights or privileges.

Title 42 U.S.C. § 1986. Action for neglect to prevent conspiracy;
Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in the preceding section [42 USCS § 1985], are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses to do so, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on the case; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action, and if the death of any party be caused by any such wrongful act and neglect, the legal representatives of the deceased shall have such action therefore, and may recover not exceeding five thousand dollars damages therein, for the benefit of the widow of the deceased, if there be one, and if there be no widow, then for the benefit of the next of kin of the deceased. But no action under the provisions of this section shall be sustained which is not commenced within one year after the cause of action has accrued.

In Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) the Supreme Court addressed the availability of a cause of action directly under the Constitution in Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678 (1946), in which damages were sought against Federal Bureau of Investigation agents for violation of fourth and fifth amendment rights. The Supreme Court held that "where the complaint, as here, is so drawn as to seek recovery directly under the Constitution or laws of the United States, the federal court must entertain the suit. Id. at 681-82. "Where federally protected rights have been invaded, it has been the rule from the beginning that courts will be alert to adjust their remedies so as to grant the necessary relief." Id. at 684."

Let us hold these idiotic physcopathic legislators accountable!!! TODAY!!!

Things like this are why we need Ron Paul.... badly

reply to post by daddio

IF they PASS any statute that would violate our free right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we may ignore it as if it had never been passed. There are many Supreme court cases which state this....

In my humble opinion there are few key issues that need to be addressed on the state level to help bring these little Hitlers to heel.


The fully informed jury movement: www.fija.org...

FIJA seeks to require that juries be informed of their nullification rights. Informed jury amendments have been filed as an initiative in seven states and legislation has been introduced in the Alaska state legislature.

...the right of juries to judge both the law and the facts -- to nullify the law if it chose -- became part of British constitutional law.

It ultimately became part of American constitutional law as well, but you'd never know it listening to jury instructions today almost anywhere in the country....

Now a remarkable coalition has sprung up to challenge this secrecy as undemocratic, unconstitutional and dangerous. Though organized by libertarian activists, the Fully Informed Jury Amendment movement includes liberals and conservatives...

...many groups in this country feel the government has overstepped its power in some way and that there must be protection for the natural rights of American citizens. They are defending not only the right to protest or carry a gun or not wear seatbelts but challenging the right of the government to decide such matters without the mediating effect of a jury's judgement of fairness in a particular case....

Judges: Appointed vs elected? That is another question we as voters need to think very very carefully about.


Another weapon, one every single one of us should be pushing for, is state law allowing voters to recall federal Senators and Representatives as well as state officials.
Recall Congress Now Org

However this will be a bitterly fought battle. The last thing TPTB wants is their pet legislators worried about what the voters want instead of what they have been bribed to do.

While 18 of the 50 United States offer their citizens an opportunity to recall their elected officials, it is a fact that in our nation’s history, no federal legislator has yet been recalled.

It has not been for lack of interest. Rather, the process has languished in part due to debates on whether or not legal authority exists for recall of U.S. Senators and Congressmen; and, in the case of Idaho, interference by a state court prevented recall of a federal legislator....

After reviewing the body of law and opinion concerning recall, it is apparent that if recall of federal legislators is to succeed, it will likely only be after an intense battle in the federal court system as to the degree to which the courts will go to allow the literal meaning of the Tenth Amendment to be in force and effect.

As this author reads this language, it appears clear that " the States ‘ and " the people " living with in them, should be recognized to have the right of recall.

But in order to implement a strategy that will enable recall petitions to result in actual removal of errant Senators and Congressmen, considerable legal and political obstacles will present themselves and can only be overcome by understanding the lengths to which those opposed to recall can be expected to go...

Eighteen states have recall provisions. Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin all have recall of some kind available to their voters. Only seven of these states require any grounds.
www.uscitizensassociation.com...

State Nullification - Tenth Amendment
State nullification is the idea that the states can and must refuse to enforce unconstitutional federal laws.

In the many discussions across several states, questions have arisen concerning exactly how the "Tenth Amendment Resolution" will help....

The principal motivation came from the myriad of federal mandates which have been placed and are planned to be placed on the states. State legislatures feel they have little choice but to implement these mostly-unfunded mandates and pass the cost for implementation to the state taxpayers. For most state legislators, this is a very frustrating dilemma.

The Tenth Amendment assures that we, the people of the United States of America and each sovereign state in the Union of States, now have, and have always had, rights the federal government may not usurp. Article IV, Section 4 says, "The United States shall guarantee to every state in this Union a republican form of government.....", and the Ninth Amendment states that..."The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people".

We have, through apathy and lack of will, allowed federal legislators and bureaucrats to assert their will over us and commandeer our funds for their own use.... most of it today outside the authority granted to them by the Constitution.

When a state passes this resolution proclaiming its sovereignty, that state may then claim exemption to most federal mandates under the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution....
by Colorado State Senator Charles Duke
www.sweetliberty.org...

reply to post by Common Scarecrow

I am waiting for the day when the government tells us how to wipe our butts.

Well wait no longer because that day has arrived!

The "Food Safety Modernization Act" just being passed.


On the premise that it is always good to be prepared, Here is the "Official" information about what is in store for us in the not too distant future. Useful for convincing family or friends that you really are not crazy.

Links: FDA website:
Full Text of the Law
See the left side bar for information like Frequently Asked Questions

The law references the World Trade Organization and Good Agricultural Practices by NAME

These are from FAO and OIE (Good Farming Practices)

FAO GAPs (fruits and veggies)

What are Good Agricultural Practices?

A multiplicity of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) codes, standards and regulations have been developed in recent years by the food industry and producers organizations but also governments and NGOs, aiming to codify agricultural practices at farm level for a range of commodities....
www.fao.org... [has links]

This is a University PDF with Links to outside documents or web sites are marked in blue. Good Agricultural Practices. A Self-Audit for Growers and Handlers. ucce.ucdavis.edu...

OIE Good Farming Practices: Livestock
GUIDE TO GOOD FARMING PRACTICES FOR ANIMAL PRODUCTION FOOD .

Good Dairy Farming Practice.

Short Report of what the S.O.B.s are up to: OIE WORKING GROUP ON ANIMAL PRODUCTION FOOD SAFETY Report to the 77th General Session of the OIE International Committee - Paris, 24–29 May 2009

reply to post by burntheships


After reading this story, AS WELL AS the Fed's response to it which is included as a link at the end of the story, I can only conclude one thing.......Somebodies lying and I don't know if its the Rabbit Sellers or the Feds.
I know it's real easy to jump to the conclusion that this is another example of the Federal Government screwing over the little guy....but lets be honest here. The 'little guy' has a Hell of a lot of motivation to lie when he's looking at a 90,000 dollar fine!

Honestly I think I'm gonna assume its the rabbit sellers that are lying....for one thing, the original article, which I can only assume is the original story as the Rabbit Sellers told it, made it seem that they were fined for having some sort of random barely detectable rule violations involving rust and cage size....the truth is far different once you read the governments side. The fine isn't about that at all....its about the guy selling rabbits as PETS while being unlicensed!!!! Let me quote that section for you:

"Mr. Dollarhite contacted our Western Regional Office on March 16, 2006, and asked for a license application kit. He noted that he was selling rabbits to pet stores. The regional office sent him an application package that same day. However, Mr. Dollarhite never applied for a USDA license. After we conducted an investigation, we concluded that he has sold 619 rabbits without a USDA license. We issued a settlement offer to Mr. Dollarhite for $90,643 on April 19, 2011. This is a settlement offer only; he is not required to pay it and is entitled to request a hearing if he chooses. It is worth noting that $90,643 is not the maximum allowable civil penalty amount we could have sought."

So....yeah...unless i hear different I think I'm gonna have to side with the Feds on this one.

reply to post by burntheships


Sounds like they got some hardass federal inspector. They should never of sold any for food. That is how the USDA would of gotten involved.

Originally posted by CarlitosAmsel

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
sigh.

people on ATS would cry 'tyranny' for getting a speeding ticket in school zone.

These people ignored the law, and now are crying foul.

thank the animal rights activists for the laws these people ran afoul of.

edit on 22-5-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)

Do you know every petty law or regulation your government or government agency comes up with behind your back? And would you expect to become financialy ruined for the rest of your life for such a small matter as selling a couple of bunnies to many??? If your answer is NO, then please, dont write stuff like the one above.

edit on 22-5-2011 by CarlitosAmsel because: (no reason given)

why do you think people need to learn every petty law or regulation the government comes up with?
smart people learn the laws and regulations that pertain to the business they are going into, that is reasonable.

these people have no one to blame but themselves for not knowing the laws they need to know,
is the fine excessive? that depends on what the fines for other people who do similar things get.

this seems a bigger deal because of the smallness of the business, i don't doubt a bigger one that does the same thing would get fined more.