Gotta love stupid laws / govt.

[jakesford]

CONNERSVILLE, Indiana — An eastern Indiana police officer and his wife who nursed an injured baby deer back to health are facing charges for rescuing the animal.

Connersville police officer Jeff Counceller and his wife, Jennifer, were charged this month with illegal possession of a white-tailed deer, a misdemeanor that carries up to 60 days in jail and a $500 fine.

The Indianapolis Star reports (http://indy.st/XP6JIL ) the couple found the injured deer in 2010 and named her Dani.

The state Department of Natural Resources told the Councellers to return the ailing deer to the wild, but they took it home and nursed it back to health.

The deer vanished last summer on the day when the DNR planned to euthanize the animal after the couple's request for a rescue permit was denied.

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/19609bfa181b45dea96f05d1276780cf/US-Deer-Rescue-Charges

[roliath]

wow pretty fucking stupid

[talisman]

Starting to really hate this country.

[SEB]

Starting to really hate this country.

x2

[Broncojohnny]

Someone post the "Zero Dark Ethanol" story from today's Wall Street Journal, it makes this look like nothing.

[01vnms4v]

Starting to really hate this country.

X3

[330CubeGt]

Makes 0 sense.

[krazy kris]

Only thing I can think of is the animal would get dependent on people and have no fear of people.

[Sean88gt]

Someone post the "Zero Dark Ethanol" story from today's Wall Street Journal, it makes this look like nothing.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324329204578270043967301294.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Ethanol is one of the only products in history that Congress subsidizes and mandates at the same time. That sounds pretty generous. Yet now a federal court has ruled the Environmental Protection Agency is illegally giving the lobby extra benefits that Congress never intended. That takes some work.

On Friday the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the EPA had abused the law with "an unreasonable exercise of agency discretion," and it vacated the 2012 cellulosic ethanol mandate. The 2007 Bush-Pelosi energy bill required blending fuels that can allegedly be made from switchgrass or farm waste into the gasoline supply, though no companies produced the product at a commercial scale. Guarantee a market, the thinking went, and somebody somewhere will fill it.

Except six years later, little has changed. The cellulosic ethanol industry produced zero gallons in 2011 and zero in 2012. But the EPA still required oil companies and refiners to buy 6.6 million gallons in 2011 and 8.7 million in 2012—and then to purchase millions of dollars of "waiver credits" for failing to comply with a mandate to buy a product that did not exist. This is the sort of thing that led to the Protestant Reformation.

In writing the law, Congress included a safety valve and told the EPA to set the mandate to meet "the projected volume available" in the event of a shortfall. But the EPA nonetheless argued that accurate projections would undermine "the objective of promoting growth in the industry" and creating "the appropriate economic conditions for the cellulosic biofuel industry to grow." In other words, only a fantasy mandate will motivate the industry to make enough of a fantasy fuel.

The three-judge panel found "no basis" in the law for such a dispensation and scored the EPA for "the adoption of an entirely new goal" that it simply invented. Judge Stephen Williams also noted the absurdity of the EPA's enforcement: "Apart from their role as captive consumers, the refiners are in no position to ensure, or even contribute to, growth in the cellulosic biofuel industry. 'Do a good job, cellulosic biofuel producers. If you fail, we'll fine your customers.'"

Since the EPA is making things up, the rational way to set the mandate would be to fine the cellulosic folks for a lack of mermaids and rebate the money to consumers who are paying higher prices because the oil companies can't do the impossible and buy an imaginary fuel.

[talisman]

Staggering.

[Baron Von Crowder]

wow pretty fucking stupid

I know that there are laws against keeping wild animals, in some cases to keep people from farming them, but there sounds like some descression should be used here, since they werent doing it for any of those reasons.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj

Ethanol is one of the only products in history that Congress subsidizes and mandates at the same time. That sounds pretty generous. Yet now a federal court has ruled the Environmental Protection Agency is illegally giving the lobby extra benefits that Congress never intended. That takes some work.

On Friday the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the EPA had abused the law with "an unreasonable exercise of agency discretion," and it vacated the 2012 cellulosic ethanol mandate. The 2007 Bush-Pelosi energy bill required blending fuels that can allegedly be made from switchgrass or farm waste into the gasoline supply, though no companies produced the product at a commercial scale. Guarantee a market, the thinking went, and somebody somewhere will fill it.

Except six years later, little has changed. The cellulosic ethanol industry produced zero gallons in 2011 and zero in 2012. But the EPA still required oil companies and refiners to buy 6.6 million gallons in 2011 and 8.7 million in 2012—and then to purchase millions of dollars of "waiver credits" for failing to comply with a mandate to buy a product that did not exist. This is the sort of thing that led to the Protestant Reformation.

In writing the law, Congress included a safety valve and told the EPA to set the mandate to meet "the projected volume available" in the event of a shortfall. But the EPA nonetheless argued that accurate projections would undermine "the objective of promoting growth in the industry" and creating "the appropriate economic conditions for the cellulosic biofuel industry to grow." In other words, only a fantasy mandate will motivate the industry to make enough of a fantasy fuel.

The three-judge panel found "no basis" in the law for such a dispensation and scored the EPA for "the adoption of an entirely new goal" that it simply invented. Judge Stephen Williams also noted the absurdity of the EPA's enforcement: "Apart from their role as captive consumers, the refiners are in no position to ensure, or even contribute to, growth in the cellulosic biofuel industry. 'Do a good job, cellulosic biofuel producers. If you fail, we'll fine your customers.'"

Since the EPA is making things up, the rational way to set the mandate would be to fine the cellulosic folks for a lack of mermaids and rebate the money to consumers who are paying higher prices because the oil companies can't do the impossible and buy an imaginary fuel.

Yeah, that's just dumb, and keeping the prices of gas up. Take something that could help with renewable energy research, and make it a money grab for the government. Same with CAFE standards.

[BERNIE MOSFET]

Yeah, that's just dumb, and keeping the prices of gas up. Take something that could help with renewable energy research, and make it a money grab for the government. Same with CAFE standards.

Petroleum companies don't care. If I were in their shoes I'd tack an extra 10% on to those "waivers credits" when I passed the cost along to the consumer.

[talisman]

In other somewhat related news, I found out today that our company is reversing it's long time policy of trying to have a 60/40 ft/pt mix in stores due to the health care reform. We will now being trying to achieve 60/40 pt/ft. Where I used to be able to hire a new FTer with minimal input from my boss, now HIS boss must approve ANY FT new hires. People are going to have to start working two jobs to make ends meet, which is going to be a neat trick since a lot of them can't find ONE job right now. I just can't even believe this shit.

[Baron Von Crowder]

Petroleum companies don't care. If I were in their shoes I'd tack an extra 10% on to those "waivers credits" when I passed the cost along to the consumer.

yeah, and I get to foot the bill. As a company they wouldnt need to care, they cant do anything about it. I cant either, but it is essentially taxation without representation.

[Kimmypie]

yeah, and I get to foot the bill. As a company they wouldnt need to care, they cant do anything about it. I cant either, but it is essentially taxation without representation.

This.