CA SB917, Why It is Wrong+ Doesn't Stop "Abuse"; Law Passed 2 Years Later

Did you know it is illegal to show, display, transfer, offer for sale or rehoming, an animal outside at a public place, parking area, common area, including a park, or any public area for most part?
First violation is $250 and subsequent can rise to misdemeanors. The code is chaptered under the same section as animal abuse (malicious mischief) but is not a direct PC 597.1 violation, as they codified it under PC 597.4 purposely.  https://www.animallaw.info/statute/ca-cruelty-%C2%A7-5974-selling-or-giving-away-live-animals-any-street-highway-public-right-way

Certain exceptions apply such as 4H, certain dog shows, AND (not surprisingly)-- non profits that are based on animal intake for rehoming  [A public animal control agency or shelter, society for the prevention of cruelty to animals shelter, humane society shelter, or rescue group regulated under Division 14 (commencing with Section 30501) of the Food and Agricultural Code.]

This law is largely the work of groups like HSUS and ASPCA and those animal rights groups that would push a law outlawing rehoming, selling, transferring or even giving away an animal or pet, illegal. As written, it made the selling of crabs on Fisherman's Wharf illegal, and then was later to stop the transfer/sale of animals at Farmer's Markets, despite there being an "exception" for swap meets and flea markets. Some cities locally do not allow any animals or pets to be offered for sale, period, regardless of the law, and do not allow any animals inside the swap meet or flea market either.  It also made showing or having dogs outside illegal at dog show or cat shows or bird or rabbit show.

Most people do not understand the basis for this law and believed that it is an innocent law which creates no harm. What the public does not understand is that a member of the public can be punished for alleged animal abuse, BUT the "non profit" group or person cannot or is not punished simply because the "non profit" is exempted from such charge under the law. So if the "non profit" was guilty by actually engaging in animal abuse, he/she would be exempted, yet if the member of the public was NOT guilty, he/she would be guilty under this even if he/she did not do any animal abuse at all. In other words, the actual behavior of committing "abuse" is not the action of actual abuse--- but simply the selling, transfer or giving away of the animal outside. This is the most asinine law we have ever seen and should be struck down.

http://petdefense.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/legal-look-at-sb917-under-ca-penal-code/