• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

West Hollywood Fur Ban - What's Your Opinion?

What's your opinion of West Hollywood's ban on the sale of fur within city limits?

  • I think it's great! No one should be allowed to wear the skin and hair of an innocent animal.

    Votes: 2 7.1%

  • I have mixed feelings about it. Wearing fur is ok, but the city government should govern.

    Votes: 2 7.1%

  • It infringes on the rights of the store owners to earn a living by selling a common item.

    Votes: 8 28.6%

  • Does this apply to the $500 - $2000 leather shoes by Choo, Cavalli, Ferragamo, and others?

    Votes: 6 21.4%

  • I believe the ban is ridiculous. The fur industry harms no person.

    Votes: 14 50.0%

  • I believe it's un-Constitutional and should be elevated in the courts.

    Votes: 11 39.3%

  • The decision should be left up to the Capital markets.

    Votes: 11 39.3%
  • Total voters
    28
  • Poll closed .
since9

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Article: "Putting animal rights over fashion imperatives and its own vibrant shopping scene, West Hollywood's leaders have given final approval to a first-in-the-nation ban on the sale of fur clothing within city limits."

Please note it's not a ban on the wearing of fur; just on its sale. What's your opinion of this ban?
 
sFe

sFe

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2010
Messages
139
Location
Laurinburg, North Carolina, USA
I think they should only allow selling if they're able to verify the furs source and make sure they aren't; over harvesting wild, wasting the rest of the body, or torturing them.
 
A

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
I don't agree with it and I want to know what gives them the authority to ban it, but so long as they are obeying all Constititional rules then ultimately it doesn't matter what I think as they are legally governing theirselves. Now if they don't have the legal authority to ban the sale of fur then it should be fought.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
Fur? It's a byproduct of killing/eating meat. Wear it or throw it away.

Fur? It's a byproduct of killing/eating meat. Wear it or throw it away.
 
S

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
West Hollywood, huh? There was a California governor who once hit the nail right on the head by this statement, "California has an ideal climate for growing fruits and nuts."

Food for thought; Maybe we should give California back to Mexico. Can you think of a better revenge?:D
 
09jisaac

09jisaac

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
1,692
Location
Louisa, Kentucky
Herr Heckler Koch said:
Fur? It's a byproduct of killing/eating meat. Wear it or throw it away.
Click to expand...

You eat fox? or chinchilla? beaver? Very few furbearers are actually ate.

You can make that argument for leather but it don't particularly apply here.

I don't wear fur, ever (not because I find it wrong), but this is the government overstepping its bounds.
 
okboomer

okboomer

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
1,164
Location
Oklahoma, USA
I also eat these and spin their fur and tan their hides:

[video=youtube;xhiwhg75ftE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhiwhg75ftE[/video]
 
PrayingForWar

PrayingForWar

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,701
Location
The Real World.
09jisaac said:
You eat fox? or chinchilla? beaver? Very few furbearers are actually ate.

You can make that argument for leather but it don't particularly apply here.

I don't wear fur, ever (not because I find it wrong), but this is the government overstepping its bounds.
Click to expand...

I eat beaver all the time. Oh wait.... SVG is right.

Anyway I think we should ban west hollywood.
 
Last edited:
D

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
09jisaac said:
You eat fox? or chinchilla? beaver? Very few furbearers are actually ate.

You can make that argument for leather but it don't particularly apply here.

I don't wear fur, ever (not because I find it wrong), but this is the government overstepping its bounds.
Click to expand...

Not yet, but I hope to eat them one day.
 
Jim675

Jim675

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
1,023
Location
Bellevue, Washington, USA
Just for the fun of it I Googled the city council's pictures. Leather belts and shoes, one playing with a (leather) football. I'm sure several have nice leather seats in their cars.

Anthropomorphic images of Disney-esque furbearers makes the hypocrisy so much easier.

I think they should also outlaw smog-producing vehicles, all poisons, non-purebred dogs, and poor people and then triple taxes to install rainbow machines at every school - for the children.
 
A

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
09jisaac said:
You eat fox? or chinchilla? beaver? Very few furbearers are actually ate.

You can make that argument for leather but it don't particularly apply here.

I don't wear fur, ever (not because I find it wrong), but this is the government overstepping its bounds.
Click to expand...

As it is the local government and not the federal government, please explain how they are overstepping. I'm 100% against the ban, but I am curious as to what makes it illegal for a local government to ban this type of thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top