The petition to save Rocky!

n162501357_30267820_1914088.jpg
 
I think its her.
 
http://www.9wsyr.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoid=252465@video.wixt.com&navCatId=5

Liverpool (WSYR-TV) - Rocky the snakehead fish had a few visitors Saturday and they weren't members from the Department of Environmental Conservation.
Rocky's owner invited the public to his home because he says he's received lots of requests to see the fish ever since he started his fight to keep his pet alive.
Rocky's owner is also selling t-shirts to raise money for local animal shelters and rescue groups.
Rocky was supposed to be killed last month by the DEC. It is considered illegal to own a snakehead fish in New York. The DEC postponed the killing because of all the attention Rocky has received.
 
SoCalDiscus said:
This animal was purchased legally, and the government is attempting to enforce a law enacted after the purchase. According to the US Constitution, they can't punish this man for owning this animal. Killing this animal is punishment to the owner who has under the laws at the time of purchase had committed no crime.

Quoted from http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html "Ex post facto ex post facto adj. Formulated, enacted, or operating retroactively. [Med Lat., from what is done afterwards] Source: AHD In U.S. Constitutional Law, the definition of what is ex post facto is more limited. The first definition of what exactly constitutes an ex post facto law is found in Calder v Bull (3 US 386 [1798]), in the opinion of Justice Chase: 1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender."
Click to expand...


He should be able to keep his Rocky. I also signed the petition.:swear: It is amazing what the law will try and throw at people. The guy has been very responsible for his Rocky for 10 years. Why can't they attach the grandfathers clause. Crap look at all the people that turned 19 before the drinking age changed ( I was one of them). I know this isn't in comparisons to the Rocky story. But look at all the people that were able to get into bars and still drink and drive. And they are worried about one fish. More people drank and drove in 1986 than ever in the last decade.

So why does the government think they have a right to outlaw someone to keep something 5 years before the law changed. Yup. Loopholes....It would be a different story if Chris took Rocky out of the tank and vicously used him for malicious intend. But not the story. Just had to put in my two cents worth.
 
mee-mee said:
Yup. Loopholes....It would be a different story if Chris took Rocky out of the tank and vicously used him for malicious intend. But not the story. Just had to put in my two cents worth.
Click to expand...


Now, I can't get the mental image out of my head of Chris, walking Rocky on a leash and sicking him on the neighbor who ratted him out. HILARIOUS!
 
BreellaBlue87 said:
Now, I can't get the mental image out of my head of Chris, walking Rocky on a leash and sicking him on the neighbor who ratted him out. HILARIOUS!
Click to expand...


That is what went thru my mind also....since snakefish can walk on land also....:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom