Posted on 12/10/2008 6:33:57 AM PST by Dutchgirl
A crack SWAT team of sherrif's deputies, health inspectors, and Ohio Department of Agriculture officials busted into the Manna Storehouse food co-op in LaGrange, Ohio, in a raid last week. The co-op is also the home of the Stowers family, so Katie Stowers, her children, and her in-laws were held at gunpoint while the agents took tens of thousands of dollars worth of meat, plus computers and cell phone. Chad Stowers, Katie's husband, wasn't home because he is a U.S. Navy Seabee currently in Iraq.
Their crime? The warrant listed the reason for the raid as "beef."
Manna may, perhaps, have needed a license to run a retail food establishment. Mostly a coop, they did sell some leftover products in a small store on the property. The exact nature of the business is in dispute, which is why the Stowers' wrote letters to various agencies asking for advice on how to proceed. Obviously, the best way to reply to that request was with a SWAT team.
The folks over at Peace Chicken (yes, that's a real site, compete with chicken death doomsday clock) are seriously peeved. They offer, from the Lorain county sherrif's page, a list of the legit justifications for a SWAT raid:
* Hostage Situations: the holding of any person(s) against their will by an armed or potentially armed suspect. * Barricade Situation: the stand-off created by an armed or potentially armed suspect in any location, whether fortified or not, who is refusing to comply with law enforcement demands for surrender. * Sniper Situations: the firing upon citizens and/or law enforcement officers by an armed suspect, whether stationary or mobile. * High-Risk Apprehension: the arrest or apprehension of armed or potentially armed suspects where the likelihood of armed resistance is high. * High-Risk Warrant Service: the service of search or arrest warrants where the warrant service matrix or policy recommends or requires the use of SWAT. * Personal Protection: the security of special persons, such as VIP’s, witnesses, or suspects, based on threat or potential threat to the well being of those persons. * Special Assignments: any assignment, approved by the SWAT Operations Commander, based on a high level of threat and/or need.
Not on the list:
* Licensing Confusion: when a farm might be a retail establishment, or it might not, based on high level of threat from pitchforks and/or women and children.
>>>>>I can see rules for co-ops being different, so long as the co-ops do not sell food to the general public. <<<<<
The DA affidavit clearly states that an informant appeared at the co-op, paid $5, and was instantly a “member” and eligible to buy products at retail, which he proceeded to do.
By the reasoning on this thread, Costco and Sam’s Club are immune from food and health inspections in their stores.
Do I have that down correctly?
>>>>>>”If you have nothing to HIDE, then why not let us in, mein Herr?”<<<<<<<<
Yes, standing up for health inspections and food safety makes me a Nazi.
Right.
>>>>>I am against government control of all food sources.<<<<<<
This is not “control of food sources”, this is about the proper licensing of a retail food outlet which is selling food products to its $5.00 “members”.
Again you find them guilty on an accusation. Guess that DOES make you a “nazi”.
In principle, I think rules could be extended to cover co-ops and still be consistent with the "l"ibertarian perspective.
Even if the co-op itself isn't selling food to the general public, the co-op members will be intermingling with the general public after eating the co-op food (and any infectious bacteria present in that food). That means even if I never visit the co-op I could still be made sick because of their products.
That risk could justify requiring a license from the co-op. Of course, even if it was theoretically justified it still may not be practical to require a license if there aren't many co-ops and the food they sell isn't very bug-friendly.
YOU used the “N” word, not I.
And I was referring to your flawed LOGIC justifying police action, not to health inspections in particular.
>>>>>>Didn’t you go after another poster for this kind of crap?<<<<<<<<
No, I didn’t. I went after him for calling me a “Sheep”, which is an ad hominem. It means pejoratively a mindless animal who follows the leader (shepard).
Convsersely, identifying your apparent political position on food safety as “anarchist” may be harsh but it’s certainly not an ad hominem attack on you personally. Or it shouldn’t be seen that way.
>>>>>Are you getting what I’m saying? Anarchy has nothing to do with it.<<<<<<<
Yep, I get it. But I think you should pick your battles more wisely.
Food inspections and food safety and licensing were put into place for good reasons, and if you travel to countries that don’t have them you’ll see exactly what those good reasons are. Disgusting. Diseases. Illnesses.
IMO the co-op people were challenging very reasonable laws and tilting at windmills. Why didn’t they get a lawyer if they were really serious, or just pay the darned license fee?
Ah. They had “a cause” and “a mission”. They’re “a co-op”.
Uh huh.
>>>>>YOU used the “N” word, not I.<<<<<<
“.....why not let us in, mein Herr?”
Was that Austrian you were speaking?
>>>>Guilty until proven innocent?<<<<<<
Whether they are guilty or not is an open or shut case determined by the evidence obtained in the search warrant.
The charge is failing to get a required retail license.
>>>>>Guess that DOES make you a “nazi”.<<<<<
Why do you put you ad hominem attack in “quotes”?
That sounds like liberal speak to me. And it most certainly was an attack that was meant as an insult.
Disgusting. Diseases. Illnesses.
Guy we have that now. They load our food with crap and buy from China. At one time the FDA might have had a mission that was worthy but they've gone the way of many Gov entities. I don't think dead squirrels and birds in my pickles is acceptable. Or rat feces.
The Teutonic peoples have long had a totalitarian streak in them when it comes to their forms of government. As in, long before AH was even born.
PS - When someone ACTS like a sheep, it is not an ad hominem attack to refer to them as such, particularly when they are, as you were in your post, “speaking” for others and trying to drag THEM down into their own “sheepdom”.
Of course, “Yoyo” is NEVER an ad hominem, is it? However, if you were, by some miracle, NOT simply attacking me personally, but were in fact making reference to my “ever-changing” positions on some issue, then I encourage, nay defy, you to provide an example.
>>>>>Well now I know why you approve total government control. <<<<<
Yeah! I do! You’re absolutely right!
Not merely a Nazi, not just a Communist! But a guy who wants *clean and safe food*!
Tricycles with training wheels! Circular fans without blades! Dull scissors for everyone!
Manna Storehouse is under investigation to determine whether it is a retail food business without a license.
Under investigation doesn't mean "guilty".
The article also said: "Protection of health is one of the important roles of government," Serazin said. "That's what this is all about."
The government ain't my mommy. But they're trying.
>>>>>Permit= taxation buy another name= governmental control <<<<<
Facebook grammar=”taxation buy another name”
Conservative grammar=”taxation by another name”
The FDA are just postal workers in smocks. Disinterested, unaccountable bureaucrats ‘armed’ with the junk science de jour with the sole aim of perpetuating their own jobs rather than any concern for the health of Americans.
Coming to a theatre near you....socialized medicine. “Where your kidney transplant will be done by a guy behind the counter at your local DMV” with a gubbermint stamp of approval. God help us all.
You’d think someone who is so SENSITIVE to ad hominem attacks wouldn’t engage in them, wouldn’t you?
But it just goes along with the flawed logic in most of your posts on this subject.
The sheriff’s department doesn’t HAVE any semi-autiomatic weapons, indeed. If you believe THAT I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.
Heh. OK. I'll take that under advisement.
Ahhhhhhh!
ANOTHER ad hominem attack. It just COULDN’T have been a typographic error, could it?
If you trust the FDA for that you are mistaken. And I have a feeling that you know that. Bureaucracy never protects the "little guy". You know that too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.