Being barred for speaking the truth

[grim]

this is the only thing in the arha rules about being banned so what one was broken


7. Ban Period Stipulations

a. If abusive language or abusive conduct is used. 1st Offense: not less than six months. 2nd offense: Not less than one year. 3rd offense: Not less than three years

b. If physical contact is involved. The individual that instigates the first physical contact is automatically banned for life; additionally a person is allowed to defend himself/herself.

c. If a person is found guilty of knowingly re-registering a hound that has already made champion or grand champion and then starting the hound over again in the open class competition. 1st offense: Not less than one year.

d. If a person is found guilty of knowingly running or showing a hound in the wrong class. 1st offense: Not less than one year.

e. If a breed inspector is found by the Watchdog Committee or ARHA President to knowingly falsify a measurement of a hound at registration time or at a hunt, the penalty shall be the breed inspector will be banned for a period of 6 months and he/she will lose all licenses they have.

[toldyouso]

None of the above is in the letter. Sean frizzel recieved a letter yesterday that i have not yet recieved and told me that no rule violation is quoted in the letter. When i recieve letter I will post for all to see. Then we can decide as a group what I did wrong. If the organization would do this their would not be a problem. Let us as members have a VOTE and a SAY in what goes on. Can I get a AMEN to that. LOL hahahaha!!!!!!!

[grim]

i support you frank and think this is BS
this is taken for wikipedia online encyclopedia under the first amendment freedom of speech
here is a link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of ... ted_States

as a citizen
we have a right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech allows us to have our say on any
subject we please but, does not include threats. As a right of the people we are allowed to
freedom of press. This right gives every citizen of the United States of America permission
to write and publish anything. We the people can write, type, text, e-mail, anything we
want for any subject.

[Chuck Prather]

Did Sean get kicked out too? If so why?

[Vicious Kennels]

frank h and s kennels will not enter or judge a little pack trial again until you are reinstated and as far as my personal dogs until fred is gone. You are a stand up guy and he on the other hand????? But on the upside see you at the pkc hunt next weekend.

[Bev]

i support you frank and think this is BS
this is taken for wikipedia online encyclopedia under the first amendment freedom of speech
here is a link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of ... ted_States

as a citizen
we have a right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech allows us to have our say on any
subject we please but, does not include threats. As a right of the people we are allowed to
freedom of press. This right gives every citizen of the United States of America permission
to write and publish anything. We the people can write, type, text, e-mail, anything we
want for any subject.

No offense, but I read this excerpt on Wikipedia, and the fact that it was full of misspellings and bad grammar when such tools to correct that are available, I dismissed it as a credible source. Besides, it is taken out of context and quite incomplete. The subject of Freedom of Speech is thrown around here from time to time -- especially when someone's post is cut or edited. Freedom of Speech is often misinterpreted as Freedom from Censorship, and we all know that doesn't exist.

The First Amendment's original intent was more more political than private. Basically, Congress cannot pass any law limiting the ways in which a person may verbally or symbolically express himself “about the government,” but it has, over time, been interpreted to encompass artistic and personal forms of expression as well. Freedom of Speech does not trump all other rights. Which means that we, as individuals, cannot say whatever we want, whenever we want, to whomever we want, and be protected under the First Amendment. Not when it infringes upon the rights of others, especially rights such as those “inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

There are limitations on Freedom of Speech. For example, the First Amendment provides less than full protection to commercial speech, defamation (libel and slander), speech that may be harmful to children, speech broadcast on radio and television, and public employees’ speech. Even speech that enjoys the most extensive First Amendment protection may be subject to regulations of the time, place, and manner of expression. Additionally, certain forms of speech are not always protected under the First amendment because they can violate other laws that are not specific to speech. For instance, actions or expressions such as egging on a crowd to incite a riot, or threatening to kill or cause bodily harm are illegal, despite being forms of speech. That is one of the ways in which infringing on the rights of others limits our own rights. Shouting “fire” in a crowded theater is another prime example commonly used to illustrate limits on our freedom of speech.

Yes, you have a right to your ideas and opinions about pretty much anything at all. You have a right to express them. That is the essence of freedom of speech and expression. You do not, however, have the right to publish your ideas wherever you want without the approval of the owner of the media where you want to publish. You do not have the right to order a website or a blogger to publish your comments whether they want to or not. That isn't freedom of speech. That's dictating what speech will be published, and in practice, it is the complete opposite of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. Freedom of the Press means the media can publish what they choose…or not. It has the right to "refuse any material it deems objectionable." How often have you seen those words in the front of a magazine or newspaper? You want to exercise your right to publish anything you want? Go buy your own form of media.

This is where people get particularly hung up on the Freedom of Speech issue. They believe that exercising it makes them immune from punishment. Even if you exercise your right to Freedom of Speech in an acceptable manner, this does not exempt you from experiencing the consequences or backlash from your words. A privately-owned organization has the right to revoke membership at any time for any reason. Just like a company in hire-at-will states can let employees go at any time without notice, just like I can revoke somebody’s membership to this board at any time. My finger is on the switch, and there’s nobody with the power to dictate what I do or don’t do with my own holdings. Such is the case with NKC, UKC, and AKC. And just about any other venue in the world. Not that I necessarily support NKC's action, but it is what it is. NKC exercised their right to revoke Frank's membership to their organization. Frank is not protected under any Amendment in this instance.

Yes, you can say what you want, and if you own a form of publication you can print what you want, but it may cost you. As long as you’re willing to pay the price, then go for it.

[Jim Stinnett]

I smell fish!

[toldyouso]

Bev in your post that you placed on the internet on my behalf I thank you for the support. I am not sure if what you have written is the law or not but lets say that Tiger Woods is banned from Playing in the Masters at Augusta Georgia because he was unhappy with the way they run their Private organization r you telling me and everyone else that because its private that they can accept who they want and as well as kick you out when every they want. Here is the letter written to me by Mr. Del Morgan of NKC. Dear Mr. Miller You do have the right to your opinion BUT we have the right run NKC/ARHA the way we see fit and after reading your posts on The American Beagler Board is very obvious that you are not happy with ARHA. Since it is our goal to try to make everyone happy we are banning you from the ARHA effective October 17, 2011. All your judges and Master of Hounds licenses have been removed. You are no longer welcome at any ARHA events. Now being that I am a payed member and The ARHA has a set of BI laws and Rules and regulations are you saying that even if i obide by their rules and regulations that they still reserve the right to banned me anytime they like. If this is true then why have rules and regulations and a payed membership.And if it is not discrimination then why is not everyone being barred for being unhappy. Has anyone else been barred for being unhappy or maybe the question should be is their anyone else unhappy with NKC and ARHA if so speak up and i can say that most have done just that so let me know if you r banned and not welcome no more at there events. Maybe it is only me because my voice is louder then most. SPEAK UP AMERICA and call Del and Joyce and Fred and tell them How you really feel and for those that have already done so Thank You very much.

[Bev]

Now being that I am a payed member and The ARHA has a set of BI laws and Rules and regulations are you saying that even if i obide by their rules and regulations that they still reserve the right to banned me anytime they like. If this is true then why have rules and regulations and a payed membership.And if it is not discrimination then why is not everyone being barred for being unhappy.

I'm not sure what you mean about being a "paid" member. I don't recall ever paying a fee to be a member of ARHA. I paid dog registrations, I paid my club dues, I paid for a magazine subscription, but I didn't pay to be an ARHA "member" per se. In any event, we have left the First Amendment argument behind and are now talking about "breach of contract" and discrimination? You are asking the wrong prson. I do not sit on the board nor do I have any ownership in ARHA/NKC. You need to direct those questions to them. I will however offer some thoughts:

Does a two-party signed contract exist that says if you pay a membership fee that they are obligated to allow you to attend ARHA functions under any circumstances for a period of time? If not, then you cannot force them to let you play.

Discrimination laws only apply to protected groups. Do you belong to a protected group, i.e. handicapped or minority, etc? Can you prove that you were discriminated against on the basis of your race or handicap, etc?

Long and short of it is, you are not protected against being banned from the ARHA by any federal or contitutional law. You got angry and spoke out against them, and they decided to end their relationship with you. Simple as that.

But this?

Maybe it is only me because my voice is louder then most. SPEAK UP AMERICA and call Del and Joyce and Fred and tell them How you really feel and for those that have already done so Thank You very much.

I don't know you Frank - you could be the nicest person in the world, but this looks to me like an encouragement for others to join you on the kicked out bench. I don't think you'll will get many takers.

[Bev]

this is the only thing in the arha rules about being banned so what one was broken


7. Ban Period Stipulations

a. If abusive language or abusive conduct is used. 1st Offense: not less than six months. 2nd offense: Not less than one year. 3rd offense: Not less than three years

b. If physical contact is involved. The individual that instigates the first physical contact is automatically banned for life; additionally a person is allowed to defend himself/herself.

c. If a person is found guilty of knowingly re-registering a hound that has already made champion or grand champion and then starting the hound over again in the open class competition. 1st offense: Not less than one year.

d. If a person is found guilty of knowingly running or showing a hound in the wrong class. 1st offense: Not less than one year.

e. If a breed inspector is found by the Watchdog Committee or ARHA President to knowingly falsify a measurement of a hound at registration time or at a hunt, the penalty shall be the breed inspector will be banned for a period of 6 months and he/she will lose all licenses they have.

It didn't say anything in there about running naked through the clubhouse during a trial, or running back room poker games, or smoking weed in the field, either, but if they got wind of it (no pun intended) I'm thinking a person could get banned for that, too. I don't believe that's an all-inclusive list, and I don't believe there could be such a thing as an all-inclusive list...which is why companies and organizations retain the right to conduct their business the way they see fit, and take any immediate actions they deem necessary.

I know it seems like I'm defending them, but I'm not - I'm just presenting what's practical and realistic. There's really no case here. They've done nothing wrong or illegal. Maybe not very popular, but not wrong or illegal. I mean seriously, if you beller out in the middle of the cafeteria at work that your boss is a slouch and a failure, how long do you think you will continue to work there? Again, everybody's entitle to their opinions, but speaking them in certain venues may bring consequences. If one can live with the fallout, then go for it.

[grim]

III. General Rules for the Conduct of ARHA Licensed Hunts
d. All hounds entered in the hunt must be ARHA registered and their owner must belong to an ARHA club. When an individual becomes a member of an ARHA club, he/she forfeits all rights to pursue in a court of law, legal measures against the ARHA Little Pack National organization, the National Officers, including, but not limited to, the President of ARHA, Chairman of the Board, Secretary/Treasurer, Chairman of the Watchdog Committee, Committee Members, Chairman of the Hall of Fame Committee and Committee Members.
I MAYBE WRONG BUT THIS IS HOW I FEEL
EVERY ARHA CLUB HAS TO PAY YEARLY DUES TO BE A MEMBER OF THE ARHA AND TO HOLD TRIALS. THEN IN TURN YOU HAVE TO BELONG TO SAID CLUB AND HAVE YOUR DOG REG WITH THE ARHA TO COMPETE IN ANY TRIALS. I MAY NOT BE A COLLAGE GRADUATE BUT THIS SHOULD MEAN I AM A ARHA MEMBER. IF I AM NOT A MEMBER OF THE ARHA WHEN I JOIN A ARHA CLUB THEN WHY DO I FORFEIT MY RIGHTS TO PURSUE ANY LEGAL MEASURES IN A COURT OF LAW AGAINST ARHA. THIS JUST SHOWS ME THAT THE ARHA DOESNT CARE ABOUT ANYTHING BUT MONEY AS LONG AS YOU STAY IN YOUR PLACE AND DONT TRY TO RAISE ANY EYEBROWS ABOUT THEM TO STOP PEOPLE FROM SPENDING THERE HARD EARNED MONEY YOU ARE OK BUT AS SOON AS YOU CAUSE A FEW PEOPLE TO QUEATION THERE ACTIONS AND THEY LOOSE A FEW DOLLARS THEY SEND UP A RED FLAG. AND I DONT CARE IF THEY BAN ME OVER SAYING THIS CAUSE I HAVENT RAU IN AN ARHA TRIAL FOR YEARS BECAUSE I FIGURED THIS OUT YEARS AGO. IF THEY DONT WANT YOU AT ANY OF THERE TRIALS OR FUNCTIONS FRED WHY DONT THEY REFUND THE MONEY YOU SPENT TO REG YOUR DOGS WITH THEM CAUSE THE PAPERS THEY HAVE ARE USLESS FOR ANYTHING ELSE.

[toldyouso]

Bev i can not argue your points but again this is whats wrong in this situation no values or accountability for the people at the upper end of all r organizations only the little guy who trys to do the right thing is every punished and I am really disappointted that you do not think that any other people will make their voices heard. This is why the country is in the state that it is in we continue to let the people with power misuse there power and no one wants to do anything but complain behind closed doors. That is not me and yes i will take what every they believe i have coming but not without a FIGHT and i will not believe for one moment that the membership will not also take on this fight. If they will follow I will be glad to take the first bullet for any of these guys i have meet through the many years that i have gave to this organization 20 plus. I did not only say and do this for myself i am trying to make it better for all members of ARHA. I want the people at the top to do there jobs for the membership that pay there gift money every year. So again I say do not give your money to this organization who could care less about you as a Person or a Houndsman unless they r willing to change or at least listen to some of r ideas or bring back ELECTIONS OF OFFICERS NOT APPOINTTED POSITIONS what r they afraid of. JUST ASKING???????? Remember Del Morgan himself said and I quote I could care less if there was every another beagle trial because it does not effect my bottom line. End of quote. If this mind set does not change then why support his bottom line or lets show him that it will effect his bottom line.