The house of representatives is presently debating HR 1248 as we speak. A ban on big cats. So private citizens can't hold tigers or lions as pets
The democrats contend that the big cats need to be banned because it's a potential hazard to people's neighbors. The big cat could eat some neighbor's child
The republicans contend that private citizens have a "freedom" to own big cats. And they're very upset that democrats have advanced such a bill. They also big cat ownership should be a state's rights issue
They're also loudly yelling about how democrats are focused on banning big cats as the US economy melts down. Meanwhile, mind you, they're openly blocking any resolution that would stimulate the US economy, help ordinary people out, prevent gas price gouging, etc
But they're still standing on their pulpit virtue signaling about how it's the democrats who are "doing nothing" because they wanna ban big cats
This is America
Now I tell you truthfully, the big cats should be banned. I do not want my neighbor owning a fucking tiger. OK? I want my government to stop my neighbor from owning a god damn tiger. I don't give a fuck about any of your awful "muh big government" lolbert bullshit. I DON'T WANNA LIVE NEXT TO A MOTHERFUCKING TIGER THAT UNIRONICALLY MIGHT EAT ME ON ANY GIVEN SUNDAY WHEN I'M WALKING OUT IN MY DRIVEWAY TO MY CAR
OK?
So why are the republicans blocking this thing? Arguing against it? Just ban the god damn big cats. And then move on to all of the very important, meaningful financial legislation the democrats are trying to advance which will help people and which republicans are presently blocking
Honestly, you can make fun of the democrats on this one but it is a good bill. You should not be able to own fucking tigers. It's a nuisance to everyone around you
Overstepping of federal jurisdiction. The glowies can only regulate interstate commerce (i.e. if a cat is transported from Texas to Oklahoma) but in state they have no authority.
I maintain this seriously is a good bill. This should be a no-brainer. No human being should unironically be advocating for the private ownership of tigers and lions. You have neighbors. Neighbors have to live next door to your lions and listen to them roar and smell their shit. Your actions don't affect only you
And I further maintain, that democrats have no choice but to focus on legislation like this since they've advanced numerous, numerous bills on stuff that would actually help people out which republicans all voted against
Leo Nelson
i hope you get eaten by your crazy neighbor's tiger you fat fucking faggot
Ayden Ward
Well I wipe my ass with your constitution because I don't wanna live next to your dumb fucking tigers
Adam Jones
I want to marry a cute tigress and have lots of cubs with her
See? This is what everyone on the left correctly points out. All republican voters are aspirational voters. They're poor people, huge losers most of the time, who aspire to one day become winners. To become big wigs. To become CEOs. To become billionaires. To become landlords. To become tiger owners
But lemme let you in on a little secret, rightwinganon. You will never own a tiger
Bentley Baker
>The republicans contend that private citizens have a "freedom" to own big cats. And they're very upset that democrats have advanced such a bill. They also big cat ownership should be a state's rights issue Correct. No constitutional authority to do this. cf. United States vs Dewitt.
>The glowies can only regulate interstate commerce (i.e. if a cat is transported from Texas to Oklahoma) Actually not even then. Only if there was an explicit provision in the Constitution forbidding the possession of said cats ala Prohibition.
Gavin Murphy
>ban big cats or something >no the shitbulls are fine just like the niggers
It's an awful thing to do to someone. Why would you want to enslave some poor family? Why would you want to become part of the problem in humanity?
Aaron Davis
Best part? It'll be mandatory to spay/neuter big cats. The US is about to sign itself out of every endangered big cat recovery program LOL
Henry Thomas
cats have a better temperament and are less dangerous than fucking pitbuls the pit bull population in proportion to their population, mauls and kills more people than the big cats
kill all shitbulls, love big cats
Lincoln Jones
It would almost certainly be challenged in court and get overturned.
Dominic Butler
If you were given a choice by anyone you'd choose to live next to a pitbull than a tiger. 100%. No debate. You can pretend you wouldn't but we all know you would
Benjamin Green
Tigers take lots of planning and also effort to keep in cages. Shitbulls are in the millions in the USA. Exterminate shitbulls
>enslave owner offers to rent, renter agrees to pay the amount requested to live there. it's called a deal. there is no slave here.
just what would you do if you inherited rental properties? would you let people live there for free? how would you pay property taxes and maintenance of the buildings?
Noah Davis
So you are saying democrats are hopless losers with no aspirations? Yeah fuck democrats
Grayson Myers
tiger 100%
tiger owners invest themselves way more in their pets so as a consequence they'll usually be more mindful and keep their tiger in a proper space where it can't harm others pit bulls are owned by hood rats and retarded women with 0 courtesy manners and concern for the well being of others
Andrew Taylor
No. There's nothing voluntary about a landlord-tenant relationship. It's pure slavery. Nothing less. Nothing less no matter how much "actually slavery is freedom" innuendo you rightwing capitalists add to it
If I somehow inherited rental property or something I'd sell it
Levi Watson
We have aspirations. Our aspirations just aren't to become vicious, domineering slavedrivers and oppressors of our fellow humans
Jaxon Hernandez
What a stupid fucking blog post OP
If this country worked the way was designed your local jurisdiction would handle it so if you live in an area with a bunch of fucking idiots no one can have a tiger but let's say you live out in the middle of nowhere in another state and another jurisdiction well maybe you can own a tiger there but at least you have The Choice to move.
Yeah I knew you were gonna try to double down on the stupidity. Every Any Forumsack does. But everyone knows IRL you'd be opting for the pitbull
Hunter Adams
if you don't like the deal on a rental unit, don't rent there. the world doesn't owe you a deal in your favour.
sell it to who? it's a rental property. only other landlords will want to buy it and rent it out hahahaha
David Reed
>owning you're own business is white supremacy. Fucking kill yourself in a brutal way
Matthew Rogers
There needs to be a constitutional amendment securing the right to own tigers
Luke Nelson
No. That's not how it works. Like I said, nothing voluntary about a landlord-tenant relationship. No one chooses to rent. If others choose to be landlords, I can't help that. I oppose our capitalist society but that doesn't mean it changes
