The Seal Beach City Council on Monday night is expected to pass an ordinance banning all pigs within city limits "regardless of size, kind or sex." What about deliciousness (think choice chorizo, killer carnitas, hellacious hambone)?
Come off the ledge, little piggy devourers.
The Seal Beach ban only applies to keeping live ones, not eating (hopefully) dead ones.
Which brings to mind George Carlin's line about Muhammad Ali's banishment from boxing because he avoided the draft during the Vietnam War due to his religion. "He said, 'No, that's where I draw the line. I'll beat 'em up, but I don't want to kill 'em.' And the government said, 'Well, if you won't kill people, we won't let you beat 'em up.' "
Seal Beach is poised to say you can eat pigs within city limits, but you can't keep them alive. As Patch explains, the city already banned hogs, as section 7.05.120 of the Seal Beach municipal code reads:
No person shall keep any of the following animals: cattle; hogs; fowl; goats; horses; or mules.
City fathers and mothers with and without pieces of Babe between their teeth thought the law covered all members of the Suidae family. But a city staff report, presumably written by someone boar'd out of his/her skull, concluded pigs under 120 pounds are not covered by the hog definition, allowing them to squeak through the ban like a greased Arnold the Pig.
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
The corrected lingo going before the council Monday night reads:
No person shall keep any of the following animals: cattle; hogs; fowl; goats; horses; mules; or pigs regardless of size, kind or sex.
Yep, that should apply to all of 'em, although would taking home a doggie bag filled with pork chops from one of Seal Beach's fine restaurants be considering "keeping" a banned animal? We'll have to get Matlock right on that. Cooks at Beachwood BBQ are standing by.