Following the lead from the Left our vehicles will go extinct and our buggy's will be pulled by your children or you will be walking. Arguing with these left wing nut lunatics is easy and rather refreshing until the second you have them on the ropes you get labeled as some kind of IST or ISM because they ran out of other ammo.

"(unless to animals owned by people)". This is exactly what animals I am referring to in my comment. Maybe I should have said PET Animals to be more clear and this would include horses and even other farm animals left to starve. Wild game animals already have legal protections as do farm raised food animals.

Indeed. The one major conservative/libertarian position that Trump has not gone along with is federalism. I only hope some of the judges he appointed will surprise him on that issue.

What to you mean "gets"? Haha! I know. In one to five years time the quickening will begin.

👍 Exactly.

Man...So many things are not the purview of the federal gov. Lordy... Don't get me started on health care...

I understand, completely. I have an innate appreciation for "consistent support of the constitution". But, in reality it reminds me of something an old-timer once told me. You can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first. The brutal reality is that our government is going to interfere...pretty much in all things. I feel your pain...

This should a States Right issue, not for the Fed Gov. This issue was lobbied by the myriad of animal rights organizations. A lot of these animal tortures are posted on Facebook which ends up making people angry and in turn, they urge their respective congressman to do something about it.

As I said, animals do not have rights. Punishment for harm done (unless to animals owned by people) is wrong - despite anyone's feelings about them.

I concluded that a long time ago.

It is not happening on the local level and you know it, with a few exceptions.

I see this differently, so let's agree that we disagree.

I think I bow out.

It makes no sense to debate this issue.

👍

👍 Yes, as soon as the radical left gets more control.

There is no point in continuing the discussion.

Local governments in each state set their policies and punishments. Simple. No top down lordship needed. If people give a damn in the state it gets done without interfering with other states right to self determination. Life in a proper more constitutional republic.

I want the constitutional limits that are the law of the land to apply.
Apparently you want to exceed constitutional limits when it appeals to you (as in this particular case.) The liberals that you dislike want to exceed constitutional limits when it appeals to them. You have made hundreds of posts against the liberals trying to do so.
While I agree with the goal of protecting animals from torture, the law is unconstitutional. The goal of the law is not relevant. If you want a federal law to do something that is unconstitutional, then there is a process to change the constitution.
I do not consent to have my rights and liberty destroyed by illegal acts of the federal government. No leader gets my consent to pass unconstitutional laws due to arguable circumstances. Not Trump, not Obama, not Bush, not Clinton, not Reagan, not Carter, not Ford, not any member of con-gress, not the Supreme Court, no one. Dictatorship is created from such action.
Principles do matter.

Animal defenders also object to slaughter houses and methods of slaughter, more so even than to isolated cases of mistreatment of pets. Confining animals in tight cages and coops is also defined as cruelty. Eventually animals may be phased out of the food chain, unless world-wide food shortages and famine send humans back to meat consumption or even cannibalism. I personally would like to see more attention paid and objections directed at cruelty to other humans, such as torture, murder, drones, bombs, invasions, sanctions, wars, confiscation, and plunder.

This is truly a bad precedent.
Owner's of animals already have protection - their rights are violated when someone harms their animals. But animals themselves do not have rights.

We may not have to wait long before this is tied to gun control again - e.g. hunting,

I don't agree with any new laws, Federal or State, as long as we still have existing laws going unenforced! Cruelty to animals does touch a raw nerve yet I continually see the devastating actions by very evil people allowing animals to starve to death and here in my state it is a simple misdemeanor and they get a slap on the wrist where they should go directly to jail and for extended periods. I can't speak on the legal ethics or if the state or feds should be involved but IMO strict and severe punishments should be in order wherever animal cruelty is found.

I fully expect the definition of "animal cruelty" to include all hunting, most farming, and meat in general as soon as the radical left gets control.

"It is not hypocrisy to support one unconstitutional law while opposing all other unconstitutional laws?"

No.

"Self government demands that we respect the rights of others, not to use the federal government to dictate over others with unconstitutional laws. "

You are fully aware that this has never been the case. There is no such thing as "self government" that compels people to respect the rights of others, Those in force make sure that one group hates the other, legally.

"I know you don't want the personal feelings of others in NY, DC, Chicago, etc to dictate what actions are correct for you. You have expressed that position hundreds of times here in the Gulch."

Hundreds of times? Wow! I should have made a count and lead a journal on it.

You are demanding purity in a dirty world. It'll never happen and you need to make distinctions not rigidly apply principles.

That is what Trump is doing and it is the only way until the dirt can be reduced to the level that we may apply principles again.

Read the entire constitution. It was intended to restrict the actions of the central government to only those things explicitly stated. The ninth and tenth amendments underscore that intent:
9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
10. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Yes, there are thousands of unconstitutional laws on the books. They are there because someone insisted "someone has to do something" even when it is clear that the federal government has no authority to do so. I am not "singling out" this law. It is just the latest in a long history of the federal government breaking the law of the land in order to gain power over the people. Unconstitutional laws are always claimed to be for good purposes, and they are always used to expand government power beyond the constitutional limits, and making excuses for more of the same.
It is not hypocrisy to support one unconstitutional law while opposing all other unconstitutional laws?
Self government demands that we respect the rights of others, not to use the federal government to dictate over others with unconstitutional laws.

Grassroots activism at the local level.
If it's that important to you then create or join a group and change the local laws.
It is not something that a central government has the authority to do.
I know you don't want the personal feelings of others in NY, DC, Chicago, etc to dictate what actions are correct for you. You have expressed that position hundreds of times here in the Gulch.
Self government demands that we respect the rights of others, not to use the federal government to dictate over others with unconstitutional laws. Convince others that your argument is valid and get them to change local laws.