Buzz Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 I'm not surprised at all by the obvious TYPO. Most of our elected officials don't take the time to read any of these bills and amendments that they vote on. They have their staff read and tell them what it said. So this is what I think happened........... All of the staffers are morons and said " You know it's the stuff that they make those Styrofoam coolers out of." So they all sat down and said, "We can't have that stuff littering our beautiful streams." The law was born. These guys are all a little bit lazy IMO. If fishing was easy it would be called catching.
Zack Hoyt Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 I would recommend contacting your reps and raising a stink. This is far from stupid. Zack Hoyt OAF Contributor Flies, Lies, and Other Diversions
Members DLM84 Posted August 25, 2009 Members Posted August 25, 2009 I wonder if it wasn't a sneaky way the Peta people could get the Dem's to ban fishing? After all *in the PETA people's eyes* we are just out there to torture those poor little helpless defenseless fish and animals.
RSBreth Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 It does make me worry though, what other laws could be out there that are that are a result of ignorance. Almost all of them. I think it was Mark Twain who said no new law should be made without throwing out an old one. Makes sense to me.
tippett7 Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 Anyone remember the billboard on 65 about 5 years ago that had a picture of a yellow lab with a hook in his mouth? It said "Would you do this to your dog, Save the fish". Some people are out there to end all fishing.
Flysmallie Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 I can't believe what an uproar this has caused. It's a mistake, plain and simple. It will be corrected and life will go on. Nobody is going to jail for some tupperware. Â Â
Zack Hoyt Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 Mistakes will happen.......but to get a law passed, there are safe guards to rpevent this. If the reps were doing their job, it would have been caught. Negligence is a sueable offence in many other job positions. Zack Hoyt OAF Contributor Flies, Lies, and Other Diversions
Al Agnew Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 Point is, though, that it WAS a mistake and not some secret nefarious agenda. Tell me...the law has been in effect for a while, and posted in lots of places. How many of you realized the type of plastic was wrong and didn't ban styrofoam until somebody finally caught it and pointed it out? How many people other than the legislators saw the law in print and never realized it? Get over it. And if you think there are enough MO legislators of either party to vote for something that backhandedly bans fishing in this state, you're probably delusional. Not to mention that if that was the reasoning behind that law, it was seriously flawed, since the people the law affects most directly are the canoe rental party crowd, not anglers. I just can't see getting your panties in a twist because of this...there are lots of stuff going on that are far, far worse.
FishinCricket Posted August 25, 2009 Posted August 25, 2009 So how does this new law (once te wording is corrected to ban styrofoam) effect those of us who use styrofoam minnow buckets? Ihave one I haven't used in years (don't minnow fish much anymore).... Can anyone post a list of all the fishing related items that have styrofoam in them? Maybe they can ban aluminum cans and those red potato sacks next? Lord knows those two types of items are 80% of the trash I pick up I the Niangua every year.. (another 10% is canoe paddles, life vests, and the occasional drunk floater)... cricket.c21.com
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now