Family Facing $4 Million in Fines for Selling Bunnies

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)

The answer is quite obvious... The big guys pay better.

You know, that's what those filthy criminals get for selling those bunnies without a license. They'll get what's coming to them, what they deserve for sure!


Wait...hold on...rewind...

BUNNIES?! WTF? Have they nothing else to worry about rather than people selling bunny rabbits? What in the name of Xenu is going on here?!

Time to find something I can start up on the side of the street that they don't have laws against, and make a profit and see what happens. LET'S DO THIS!

Originally posted by Evil3unnie
reply to post by coldbore

 

Girl With 'Illegal' Lemonade Stand Earns $1,838

To the OP I hope this is one case this guy will loose.

Off course they let the cute little girl off. they don't want to seem like monsters.

Originally posted by zerbot565
but failur to comply with a 10 dollar license cannot be accumulated in to a 4 m dollar fee , its just absurd
and beyond logic ,

id understand if they where put on a blacklist and banned from selling rabbits for a year or something like donating 100 rabbits to a local university or something ,

next thing you know you may not own a bicycle if you dont own a helmet licence, .

Yes, this is my thought, I'd push for a jury trial.

No jury is going to put a $4 million USD fine on decent folk.

I am rue to say it, but its time to call the ACLU as well.

They may decide to actually help, thou they usually are not big on
that for normal sane folk.

reply to post by crimvelvet


Yeah its all a subset of Codex Alimentarius.

Yes, that is the same name came up with by former nazi's.

Yes that is the same thing being used to put 7 of the 9 persistent poisons
back in the food chain.

Big fun , good stuff, right in line with rule #1 on the Guidestones.

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by ArMaP

 

An you may be correct, if thats the section of the code that this Nazi USDA
worker cited.

But think man, come on. I could find case after case where the big corporations are not
fined to the maximum. Why?

Why is Monsanto allowed to poision the whole entire United States food supply (barrring the little guy
organic famer) and they have a favored watch dog in The White House?

Please, tell me how thats fair or right?

I'm with you, this law is stupid, just so far beyond the line where stupid begins it's ridiculous.




But think man, come on

I love it, these five words appeal to 50 different things at once.

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
and what's the valuable lesson learned here, folks?


don't let the gov/mafia know how much you make.

But when you sell something to someone else, then you are "telling" them your secret, because the government can get to you through them.

The only possible way of that not happening (as far as I know) would be if the buyer agreed not to have any documentation of the purchase, probably making it illegal, but secret.

reply to post by crimvelvet


I doubt things are really like they presented in that article.

From what I could see from some quick searches, it's not illegal to sell eggs (it may be different in different states) if, again, you follow just some rules, like identifying a "best before" date.

Originally posted by OverMan
No one person knows all of the law.

No, but that's why they should have know about the laws related to what they were doing.

In these times, doing anything related to money (or any other type of income) and not expecting the government to poke its nose on it shows that they were either naive or had the intention of bypassing those laws.

The way they acted makes me think that they were just naive.

This Bunny Business has to stop! Them long eared Sons of a B. are a threat to our way of life. They should not be regulated by the departement of agriculture but by the DoD !

Control the food supply, and you control the people.

Also, the government always wants their cut - BIGGEST THIEVES IN EXISTENCE!


This is why people are getting upset - people are getting tired of the government spending their money on crap we don't want.

What about reverse intimidation by the masses? There must be a way to look up the inspector. What if a demonstration was held at his home or place of business?

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

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.

I fail to see what the heck is wrong with selling bunnies. Please enlighten me. Also why does one need a liscence to sell some pets?

seriously? Enlighten me, because at this point, who ever is running the show is getting ridiculous. It's almost as if they are literally trying to piss people off.

The USDA is a bunch of mason crooks. I had a run in with one of these creatures, his name is Mark Mcgruder, he is a certified liar. He falsifies inspection reports.

Originally posted by RisenAngel77
I fail to see what the heck is wrong with selling bunnies. Please enlighten me. Also why does one need a liscence to sell some pets?

seriously? Enlighten me, because at this point, who ever is running the show is getting ridiculous. It's almost as if they are literally trying to piss people off.

Well, because Animal Rights activists like PETA have established laws that make it more difficult for people to run animal mills, and that's what these people were essentially doing.

Just yesterday there was a thead on why some people don't like to pay taxes.

This is a fine example...bunny sales pay enough for all of us.

reply to post by ArMaP

I doubt things are really like they presented in that article.

From what I could see from some quick searches, it's not illegal to sell eggs...

It is REGULATED! That means the ATS member will get themselves hung out to dry if they sell or give away eggs from their chickens without being injected, inspected, detected, infected, neglected and selected.

Eggs and poultry ARE regulated but smaller enterprises are left to the state to regulate at this time.

HOWEVER The Food Safety Modernization Act just signed into law is a complete game changer and gives the FDA the right to regulate ALL farming activities. the regs will be "MODIFIED" for very small producers. As the Supreme Court decision on the commerce clause shows, "[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce." and therefore is not exempt from federal government regulation. If wheat grown and used on the farm is covered then the tomato or laying hen in your backyard could be too!

What everyone keeps missing is that very nasty bit of political sleight of hand called the "Commerce Clause" This is what will bite us ALL in the rump after the Ag Cartel finishes killing off the family farms.

A farmer was growing wheat for his own use...

“The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce” The Supreme court found against the farmer!!!

The Commerce Clause: www.fff.org...

Enter Roscoe Filburn, an Ohio dairy and poultry farmer, who raised a small quantity of winter wheat — some to sell, some to feed his livestock, and some to consume. In 1940, under authority of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the central government told Mr. Filburn that for the next year he would be limited to planting 11 acres of wheat and harvesting 20 bushels per acre. He harvested 12 acres over his allotment for consumption on his own property. When the government fined him, Mr. Filburn refused to pay.
Wickard v. Filburn got to the Supreme Court, and in 1942, the justices unanimously ruled against the farmer. The government claimed that if Mr. Filburn grew wheat for his own use, he would not be buying it — and that affected interstate commerce. It also argued that if the price of wheat rose, which is what the government wanted, Mr. Filburn might be tempted to sell his surplus wheat in the interstate market, thwarting the government's objective. The Supreme Court bought it


The Court's opinion must be quoted to be believed:

[The wheat] supplies a need of the man who grew it which would otherwise be reflected by purchases in the open market. Home-grown wheat in this sense competes with wheat in commerce. As Epstein commented, "Could anyone say with a straight face that the consumption of home-grown wheat is 'commerce among the several states?'"

Here is the FDA's opinion on YOUR rights to food:

FDA's Response to FTCLDF Suit

* "There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food." [p. 25]

* "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds." [p. 26]

* "Plaintiffs' assertion of a 'fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families' is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish."

[p. 26]

* "There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract." [p. 27]

Back to information on eggs:

USDA FACT SHEET: Shell Eggs from Farm to Table

What government agencies are responsible for the safety of shell eggs?
Many government agencies cooperate to ensure the safety of shell eggs from farm to table.

USDA Agencies

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

* AMS is responsible for the Shell Egg Surveillance Program to assure that eggs in the marketplace are as good as or better than U.S. Consumer Grade B quality standards.....

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)

* APHIS conducts activities to reduce the risk of disease in flocks of laying hens....


...U.S. Food and Drug Administration

* The Egg Safety Rule went into effect July 9, 2010 for egg producers with 50,000 or more laying hens. Under the requirements of this rule, egg producers are required to implement safety standards to control risks associated with pests, rodents, and other hazards; to purchase chicks and hens from suppliers who control for Salmonella in their flocks; and to satisfy testing, cleaning, and refrigeration provisions to prevent SE.

* These facilities must register with FDA and are required to maintain written plans summarizing their safety practices....



State Agriculture Departments

* State agriculture departments monitor for compliance of the official U.S. standards, grades, and weight classes by egg packers who do not use the USDA/AMS shell egg grading service....

Egg Safety Final Rule
July 7, 2009


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced a regulation expected to prevent each year approximately 79,000 cases of foodborne illness and 30 deaths caused by consumption of eggs contaminated with the bacterium Salmonella Enteritidis.

The regulation requires preventive measures during the production of eggs....

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by ArMaP

 

I doubt things are really like they presented in that article.

From what I could see from some quick searches, it's not illegal to sell eggs...

It is REGULATED! That means the ATS member will get themselves hung out to dry if they sell or give away eggs from their chickens without being [url=http://www.arlo.net/resources/lyrics/alices.shtml]injected, inspected, detected, infected, neglected and selected.

No true. I sell eggs and chickens. I know several people who do. In NC, if we keep the amount of eggs and birds under the limit, we are never bothered. Been doing it for years and havent had a problem yet because WE FAMILIARIZE OURSELVES WITH THE LAWS REGULATING THE BUSINESS WE ENGAGE IN!

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.