#legislation and regulation

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

average United States contains 1000s of pet tigers in backyards" factoid actualy [sic] just statistical error. average person has 0 tigers on property. Activist Georg, who lives the U.S. Capitol & makes up over 10,000 each day, has purposefully been spreading disinformation adn [sic] should not have been counted

I have a big mad today, folks. It's a really frustrating one, because years worth of work has been validated... but the reason for that fucking sucks.

For almost a decade, I've been trying to fact-check the claim that there "are 10,000 to 20,000 pet tigers/big cats in backyards in the United States." I talked to zoo, sanctuary, and private cat people; I looked at legislation, regulation, attack/death/escape incident rates; I read everything I could get my hands on. None of it made sense. None of it lined up. I couldn't find data supporting anything like the population of pet cats being alleged to exist. Some of you might remember the series I published on those findings from 2018 or so under the hashtag #CrouchingTigerHiddenData. I've continued to work on it in the six years since, including publishing a peer reviewed study that counted all the non-pet big cats in the US (because even though they're regulated, apparently nobody bothered to keep track of those either).

I spent years of my life obsessing over that statistic because it was being used to push for new federal legislation that, while well intentioned, contained language that would, and has, created real problems for ethical facilities that have big cats. I wrote a comprehensive - 35 page! - analysis of the issues with the then-current version of the Big Cat Public Safety Act in 2020. When the bill was first introduced to Congress in 2013, a lot of groups promoted it by fear mongering: there's so many pet tigers! they could be hidden around every corner! they could escape and attack you! they could come out of nowhere and eat your children!! Tiger King exposed the masses to the idea of "thousands of abused backyard big cats": as a result the messaging around the bill shifted to being welfare-focused, and the law passed in 2022.

The Big Cat Public Safety Act created a registry, and anyone who owned a private cat and wanted to keep it had to join. If they did, they could keep the animal until it passed, as long as they followed certain strictures (no getting more, no public contact, etc). Don’t register and get caught? Cat is seized and major punishment for you. Registering is therefore highly incentivized. That registry closed in June of 2023, and you can now get that registration data via a Freedom of Information Act request.

Guess how many pet big cats were registered in the whole country?

97.

Not tens of thousands. Not thousands. Not even triple digits. 97.

And that isn't even the right number! Ten USDA licensed facilities registered erroneously. That accounts for 55 of 97 animals. Which leaves us with 42 pet big cats, of all species, in the entire country.

Now, I know that not everyone may have registered. There's probably someone living deep in the woods somewhere with their illegal pet cougar, and there's been at least one random person in Texas arrested for trying to sell a cub since the law passed. But - and here's the big thing - even if there are ten times as many hidden cats than people who registered them - that's nowhere near ten thousand animals. Obviously, I had some questions.

Guess what? Turns out, this is because it was never real. That huge number never had data behind it, wasn't likely to be accurate, and the advocacy groups using that statistic to fearmonger and drive their agenda knew it... and didn't see a problem with that.

Allow me to introduce you to an article published last week.

This article is good. (Full disclose, I'm quoted in it). It's comprehensive and fairly written, and they did their due diligence reporting and fact-checking the piece. They talked to a lot of people on all sides of the story.

But thing that really gets me?

Multiple representatives from major advocacy organizations who worked on the Big Cat Publix Safety Act told the reporter that they knew the statistics they were quoting weren't real. And that they don't care. The end justifies the means, the good guys won over the bad guys, that's just how lobbying works after all. They're so blase about it, it makes my stomach hurt. Let me pull some excerpts from the quotes.

"Whatever the true number, nearly everyone in the debate acknowledges a disparity between the actual census and the figures cited by lawmakers. “The 20,000 number is not real,” said Bill Nimmo, founder of Tigers in America. (...) For his part, Nimmo at Tigers in America sees the exaggerated figure as part of the political process. Prior to the passage of the bill, he said, businesses that exhibited and bred big cats juiced the numbers, too. (...) “I’m not justifying the hyperbolic 20,000,” Nimmo said. “In the world of comparing hyperbole, the good guys won this one.”

"Michelle Sinnott, director and counsel for captive animal law enforcement at the PETA Foundation, emphasized that the law accomplished what it was set out to do. (...) Specific numbers are not what really matter, she said: “Whether there’s one big cat in a private home or whether there’s 10,000 big cats in a private home, the underlying problem of industry is still there.”"

I have no problem with a law ending the private ownership of big cats, and with ending cub petting practices. What I do have a problem with is that these organizations purposefully spread disinformation for years in order to push for it. By their own admission, they repeatedly and intentionally promoted false statistics within Congress. For a decade.

No wonder it never made sense. No wonder no matter where I looked, I couldn't figure out how any of these groups got those numbers, why there was never any data to back any of the claims up, why everything I learned seemed to actively contradict it. It was never real. These people decided the truth didn't matter. They knew they had no proof, couldn't verify their shocking numbers... and they decided that was fine, if it achieved the end they wanted.

So members of the public - probably like you, reading this - and legislators who care about big cats and want to see legislation exist to protect them? They got played, got fed false information through a TV show designed to tug at heartstrings, and it got a law through Congress that's causing real problems for ethical captive big cat management. The 20,000 pet cat number was too sexy - too much of a crisis - for anyone to want to look past it and check that the language of the law wouldn't mess things up up for good zoos and sanctuaries. Whoops! At least the "bad guys" lost, right? (The problems are covered somewhat in the article linked, and I'll go into more details in a future post. You can also read my analysis from 2020, linked up top.)

Now, I know. Something something something facts don't matter this much in our post-truth era, stop caring so much, that's just how politics work, etc. I’m sorry, but no. Absolutely not.

Laws that will impact the welfare of living animals must be crafted carefully, thoughtfully, and precisely in order to ensure they achieve their goals without accidental negative impacts. We have a duty of care to ensure that. And in this case, the law also impacts reservoir populations for critically endangered species! We can't get those back if we mess them up. So maybe, just maybe, if legislators hadn't been so focused on all those alleged pet cats, the bill could have been written narrowly and precisely.

But the minutiae of regulatory impacts aren't sexy, and tiger abuse and TV shows about terrible people are. We all got misled, and now we're here, and the animals in good facilities are already paying for it.

I don't have a conclusion. I'm just mad. The public deserves to know the truth about animal legislation they're voting for, and I hope we all call on our legislators in the future to be far more critical of the data they get fed.

[kaurwreck]

If you're following KOSA, you should also be following state legislation, which is much more rapidly adopting tech regulation related to child safety than Congress. For reference, in 2023, 13 states adopted 23 laws related to child safety online.

Even if your locality hasn't adopted similar tech regulation, online platforms, apps, and websites are rarely operating in only some states. When regulations become patchwork, it's often easier for companies to adopt policies reflective of the most stringent regulations relevant to their service for all users, rather than try to implement different policies for users based on each user's location.

I know this because that's what happened when patchwork data privacy regulations began swelling — which is why many webites have privacy policies reflective of the GDPR that apply even to users outside of Europe. I also know this because I'm a tech lawyer — I'm the wet cat drafting policies for and advising tech and video game companies on how to navigate messy, convoluted, and patchwork US regulatory obligations.

So, when I say this is how companies are thinking about this, I mean this is how my coworkers and I have to think about this. And because the US is such a large market, this could impact users outside the US, too.

[ivygorgon]

An open letter to the U.S. Congress

Stop Elon Musk from stealing our personal information!

6,399 so far! Help us get to 10,000 signers!

I am writing to urge you to stop Elon Musk from stealing our personal information.

It appears Musk has hacked into millions of Americans’ personal information and now has access to their taxes, Social Security, student debt and financial aid filings. Musk's so-called Department of Government Efficiency was not created by Congress—it is operating with zero transparency and in clear violation of federal law.

This violation of our privacy is causing American families across the country to fear for our privacy, safety and dignity. If this goes unchecked, Musk could steal our private data to help in making cuts to vital government programs that our families depend on—and to make it easier to cut taxes for himself and other billionaires.

We must have guardrails to stop this unlawful invasion of privacy.

Congress and the Trump administration must stop Elon Musk from stealing Americans' tax and other private data.

▶ Created on February 10 by Jess Craven · 6,398 signers in the past 7 days

📱 Text SIGN PUTWGR to 50409

🤯 Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409

[venacoeurva]

TBH everything public has been or will be scraped (Tumblr just made it easier for a select few specific models and gave them more data... including data that should not have under any circumstance so I would imagine there's gonna be some legal rammies for that?) and at this point I'm just twiddling my thumbs waiting for actual legislation to make doing AI training fiscally and legally inconvenient and an elaborate hoop jump because companies won't stop until it hits that point to no longer make it worth it and make it no longer that unicorn investors were sold. They've been happy to collect and sell our data for ads everywhere for years, it ain't surprising so many sites stoop to this.

So I'm just gonna sit here and make uglier watermarks, bout as much as I can do as an individual, and there are much more heinous things happening in the world right now.

[fairyfawm]

for people in aotearoa nz: 10 days to submit on the act party's regulatory standards bill! here is a linktree with a bunch of resources - it's got some that explain the bill, various articles/submissions from people who know what they're talking about, and the email address to send your submission to.

[redgearguru]

What 5 U.S. States Attack Your Second Amendment Rights The Most

Did you know 21% of Americans think their gun rights are under attack? This shows how big the fight over gun laws is in different states. Knowing which states limit gun rights the most is key for anyone wanting to protect their Second Amendment rights. In the U.S., laws about guns vary a lot from state to state. Federal laws set a basic standard, but states add more rules. This can really affect…

[uptownthots]

the loud and proud resentment MRA types have towards women for having the "privilege" of feminism. Like ignoring the fact that being a group of people so oppressed you have to develop a political movement dedicated to your liberation is not a privilege, I think a lot of MRAs misattribute (and grossly misrepresent) feminist work to [patriarchal, misogynistic] society (e.g "society only cares about women!" "society only believes victims if they're women!") because if they acknowledged that whatever supposed privileges women have are a result of decades of years of political work and resistance, rather than just Society™️ giving us preferential treatment, they'd have to subsequently acknowledge that the reason men (supposedly, according to MRAs) don't have these privileges is because the don't care to do the work, and not because "society" is like. oppressing them.

[bluemanedhawk]

I feel like there need to be legal regulations established on the black-and-magenta checkerboard so that it doesn't become something where all the meaning of it is lost because it's overused in incorrect situations. It's like the Red Cross and Red Crescent except nowhere near as big of a deal.

[usadvlottery]

US Immigration and Customs Laws encompass a complex framework governing the movement of people and goods across the United States' borders. These laws are designed to regulate immigration, prevent illegal entry, ensure national security, and facilitate lawful trade and travel. They cover a wide range of topics, including visa requirements, border security measures, customs duties, import/export regulations, and enforcement mechanisms. Compliance with these laws is crucial for maintaining legal status, preventing unauthorized entry, and upholding the nation's safety and security. Various government agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, oversee the enforcement and administration of these laws.

[eternalistic]

The FTC announced last week that it would host a competition challenging private citizens to find solutions to protect people from AI-generated phone scams.The scams can use AI to clone a loved one’s voice, making it sound like they’re in trouble and tricking unsuspecting people into coughing up big bucks. The FTC is offering a $25,000 reward to anyone who can innovate a solution, essentially leveraging the same AI technology to protect consumers, Maxson said. Applications will open in January. The agency previously held similar crowdsourcing competitions to help combat robocalls.

[toni-onone]

Is the food safety the best in the world in the United States of America? No!

This documentary looks at the food safety within the food industry in the United States and the finger pointing between government agencies and the industry. It shows gaps , much denial and monetary gain that obviously takes priority over consumer safety. 🚨👀👂🏾🤔🤯👨‍👩‍👧‍👦👶🏽👵🏾🏡🚑 www.netflix.com/us/title/81460481 In the United States of America so many people get sick and unfortunately some die from…

[hellborg]

Americans just wanna get high and beat their dick, is that so wrong?

[lizclipse]

not to be an advocate for the devil or anything, but how common is aflatoxin in the food supply? the guidance in the UK[1] doesn't mention washing, and the regulations i can find show 3ppb for the UK[2] and 20ppb for the US[3], are those levels risky still?

i'm mostly asking because... well i guess i'm curious? i rarely wash rice, so it's kinda selfish, but i also am not a fan of sensationalising food health since that kinda thing has a really bad history and can cause undue anxiety

im also kinda wanting to bring up the fact that, while advice like this should generally be followed if you can, it is not a hard-and-fast rule across legislative boundaries (the best example i can think of is that raw eggs are find here in the uk thanks to stricter regs). it's generally worth knowing how safe your food is, and pushing for regs where it's lacking

Dear people living on your own for the first time:

Here’s some advice I wasn’t told from the myriad of posts before that I wish I’d been given before

Wash the OUTSIDE of your pots and pans as well as the cooking surface. I’ve had a few roommates now who have only cleaned the inside and I’ve had to replace a $150 set of cookware twice.

“its only one time, how bad could using metal on nonstick cookware really be?” very bad. don’t do this.

Buy a rice cooker. Buy the middle tier rice cooker. Cheap ones will burn your rice, high tier ones are too expensive. Rice is good and cheap and, really, you don’t actually have to wash it if you don’t care about making gourmet food.

Buy band-aids. You don’t think you need band-ads until you need a band-aid, and by then it’s too late. (if you don’t follow this advice, a paper towel and some tape is an acceptable solution while you go get real bandages and neosporin)

You are on tumblr, which means you probably spend most of your time in one spot on a computer or phone. if this spot doesn’t have a trash can in arm’s reach, put one there.

 I spent 4 years piling trash on my desk in increasingly precarious ways until I had a designated area to put it. Trash cans can and should go anywhere there is a frequent generation of trash, typical locations be damned.

If you live with one or two roommates, discuss placing empty boxes in the back of your fridge and freezer. You probably don’t need all the space that the standard 5-person-family fridge provides, and tupperware will be shoved back there and left to stink up the entire appliance.

Get a wall calendar, put it somewhere communal, and have everyone put their household-relevant schedules on it. Communication is by far the weakest link with roommates (even good ones!) and having something to reference for appointments is always good

[almatyconsultinggroups]

Comprehensive Legal Support in Transport & Logistic Legislation Regulation, Competition Law, and Litigation in Kazakhstan

Understanding Transport & Logistic Legislation Regulation is essential for companies operating in the transportation sector. Businesses must comply with national and international laws governing logistics, freight operations, and supply chain management. Proper legal guidance ensures seamless operations, prevents violations, and protects businesses from potential liabilities.

Advising on Transport Regulations

Companies engaged in transportation and logistics must adhere to industry-specific rules. Advising on Transport Regulations helps businesses navigate the complexities of legal requirements, ensuring compliance with:

Licensing and Permits – Securing the necessary authorizations for freight operations.

Customs and Border Regulations – Understanding import/export procedures and international trade compliance.

Environmental Standards – Adhering to sustainability guidelines in transport operations.

Safety Regulations – Ensuring compliance with occupational health and safety measures.

Expert legal advice on Transport & Logistic Legislation Regulation ensures businesses operate efficiently while avoiding legal risks.

Anti-Monopoly Regulation and Competition Law

In a competitive market, businesses must comply with Anti-Monopoly Regulation and Competition Law to prevent unfair trade practices. Kazakhstan’s competition laws regulate:

Market Dominance Abuse – Preventing monopolistic practices that harm fair competition.

Cartel Agreements – Prohibiting price-fixing, bid-rigging, and market division agreements.

Mergers and Acquisitions – Ensuring compliance with antitrust regulations in corporate transactions.

Consumer Protection – Safeguarding consumer rights by preventing deceptive trade practices.

Legal professionals specializing in Anti-Monopoly Regulation and Competition Law help companies structure their operations to remain compliant while maintaining a competitive edge.

Представительство интересов компаний в суде по налоговым спорам в Казахстане

Компании, работающие в Казахстане, могут столкнуться с налоговыми разногласиями. Представительство интересов компаний в суде по налоговым спорам в Казахстане включает:

Оспаривание решений налоговых органов.

Защиту прав бизнеса в судебных разбирательствах.

Урегулирование налоговых претензий.

Подготовку стратегий защиты в налоговых спорах.

Компании, получающие квалифицированную юридическую поддержку, могут минимизировать налоговые риски и успешно защищать свои интересы в суде.

Судебное представительство по земельным спорам в Алматы

Земельны�� вопросы могут стать причиной сложных судебных разбирательств. Судебное представительство по земельным спорам в Алматы охватывает:

Оспаривание прав собственности на земельные участки.

Споры по аренде и пользованию земельными ресурсами.

Урегулирование конфликтов между владельцами и государственными органами.

Разрешение вопросов градостроительства и землепользования.

Квалифицированные юристы помогут урегулировать земельные споры в Алматы, защищая интересы бизнеса и частных лиц.

Заключение

Комплексное юридическое сопровождение в сферах Transport & Logistic Legislation Regulation, Advising on Transport Regulations, Anti-Monopoly Regulation and Competition Law, а также судебное представительство по налоговым и земельным спорам в Казахстане позволяет компаниям минимизировать риски и успешно решать правовые вопросы. Профессиональная юридическая поддержка обеспечивает соблюдение законодательства, защиту бизнеса и стабильность операций.