Laws with (loop)holes
Today’s unexpected question (or maybe it was yesterday). Did I have a secret cache of fish hooks, in case the urge to tease a trout became overpowering. Now, here’s the thing: I do have a fishing rod with a reel. Been in my “life’s cargo” for many years. In fact, when I showed the kit to my nephew, last summer, he wondered aloud from what museum I had taken my prisoner. Elder abuse!
I feel sure that the rod and reel will serve me well for years to come, given the infrequent use. If I remember, I will purchase a small package of hooks, and the mandatory license. I might even go for a slog through the wood to a stream I trolled, years ago. Or not. Now that fish is available on demand at the local grocery, I don’t have the same compulsion to nourish biting bugs, in return for the sport of capturing a small fish better suited to keeping our streams clean. I might change my mind, if nothing more distracting comes along.
Our dog met a seal, this afternoon. I saw the photos. Not sure what the two species might find as a common interest, but the conjunction was worth mentioning.
The federal government is busy updating the laws about firearm ownership, based on “name”, and like any law that hasn’t been proved by fire, there are loopholes. Sorry! Anyhow, many of my neighbours are aghast, fearing a wave of confiscation and the loss of their natural right to shoot stuff. Whether or not any actual hunting goes on is immaterial; this is a concept.
