If you believe there should be no rules then you are.Originally Posted by BestBeagler
I think the big divide is really whether or not having a group like PLF which does not really care about the future of falconry file go to court about violations of constitutional rights that have not yet occurred and people who believe they should be able to monetize their falconry license should be able to do so.
If jackbooted storm troopers actually did break down someone's door, shove their wife to the floor and handcuff her and then proceed to take apart the whole house I would be the first guy to support going to court to prevent that from ever happening again. Even if it happened in CA and I generally just assume that what happens in CA doesn't really reflect the rest of the country. On the other hand, in the absence of such a serious abuse of power I believe that a approach that doesn't involve the courts and which is not as public is a better approach.
I have some serious reservations about why the people who are reported to have had their rights trampled on are not the plaintiffs in this case. That raises some
serious red flags for me. Something is not kosher. PLF has some sort of smoke and mirrors show going.
If you look at everything that PLF does you can see exactly how much they love to beat their chest and get as much publicity as possible.
They took this case because it was yet another constitutional case for them to argue and it is likely they did so for free.
I think that falconry is getting everything that AFC paid for and more.
Reply With Quote