More Regulations: NJ Drivers Can Be Ticketed $1,000 for Not ‘Restraining’ Animals in the Car
- Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:23pm by
Erica Ritz
- Print »
- Email »
A crime in progress? (Photo via L.A. Times)
Following on the heels of Mayor Bloomberg’s ban on certain sugary drinks in New York City restaurants, a wave of absurd regulations has seemingly begun emanating outwards. In neighboring New Jersey, drivers can be fined up to $1000 for driving with “unrestrained” animals in the car, and the Mayor of Berkeley, California is looking to ban sitting on sidewalks.
(Related: New York City to Ban the Sale of Large Sodas and Sugared Drinks)
According to CBS in Philadelphia, police and animal control officers will be authorized to ticket New Jersey drivers between $250 and $1,000 if they have “unrestrained” animals in the front seat of their car, on the driver’s lap, partially out the window, or even in the back of a pickup truck.
(Photo: Pet Supplies)
Dogs, apparently, should be placed in harnesses and then buckled in, and cats should go in a carrier which can be subsequently buckled in.
Ray Martinez, the head of the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, says it is part of a larger “Click It or Ticket” effort to avoid distracted driving.
“It’s not cute,” he condemned. “It’s actually dangerous for the driver. It’s dangerous for other drivers and it’s dangerous for that pet.”
According to the New Jersey Newsroom, the regulation actually falls under the parameters of animal cruelty, and the fine can be coupled with a six month term in jail and a disorderly persons offense.
Col. Frank Rizzo, police superintendent for the New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Animal Cruelty, further clarified that the fine occurs for each “offense.”
“So, if you have more than one animal loose in your car, just do the math…” he said.
WTXF-TV interviewed New Jersey residents, most of whom were sympathetic with the regulation:
But other New Jersey residents are chagrined: “It’s that time of year when drivers cruise along highways and scenic back roads with the windows down, wind blowing through their hair, music blaring and their faithful four-legged canine riding with his/her head out of the window,” the New Jersey Newsroom began.
“The image is almost as old as time, and this year it’s an image travelers will be seeing less and less …”
As for Berkeley, California, Mayor Tom Bates is looking to strengthen the ordinance that prohibits lying on sidewalks between 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
He explained: “The problem is it’s really not enforceable, because a person comes along and says ‘you can’t lie here,’ so they sit up and now they are sitting and are not violating the law.”
Watch KGO-TV‘s interview with the mayor and associated “sitters,” below:
If approved by voters in November, violators would receive a warning for four months, before being slapped with a $50 fine or community service.
Bates maintains that the measure is not an attack on the homeless, but, he explained: “Sometimes there will be so many people sitting on the sidewalk you can’t even use them. This also puts a lot of people off when they see people just sitting around on the sidewalk.”
Does the government too far in micromanaging the safety of a citizen’s dog, or saying whether a person can sit on public property? Or are these measures fine, since they are local and people have the option to move elsewhere?
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 710 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 562 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 383 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 376 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 364 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 376 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 383 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 312 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 376 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (169)
rebelwuf
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:02pmDoes this apply only to NJ drivers, or will a large number of OUT OF TOWNERS be suckered punched upside the the head with this ********? Because there ain’t no reason for someone to have to buy a bunch of animal harness crap (which they don’t have to use anywhere else) just to pass thru New Jersey.
Report Post »BlackAce41
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:15pmDoes this apply to also tying the to the roof?
Report Post »rickc34
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:26pmBlacklace- see Romney was way ahead on this one.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:30pmTen Fingers; Ten Commandments! Just about time to Burn all the Laws… and Start over Again!
Report Post »RightUnite
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:47pm@BLACKACE41…. Only if you’re planning on EATING YOUR DOG!
Report Post »black9897
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:56pmAh yes, the gang of thieves, liars , and killers (government) passing more arbitrary laws to scam people out of money. When it all goes down it won’t be good for either side. But mainly the government. Stand for freedom and never give it up.
Report Post »resme
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 5:05pm@lukerw, I love your comments, They always bring a smile to my face.
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 5:20pmWhat if someone transporting cows?
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 6:33pm“According to CBS in Philadelphia, police and animal control officers will be authorized to ticket New Jersey drivers…”
Sooooo, Animal Control officers are going to get flashing lights and sirens? How much will that cost? Will they also be showing up in Traffic Court when someone fights a ticket?
WHICH POLITICIAN HAS A RELATIVE MAKING AUTOMOBILE PET RESTRAINTS?????
Report Post »The-Monk
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 6:39pm“As for Berkeley, California, Mayor Tom Bates is looking to strengthen the ordinance that prohibits lying on sidewalks between 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
He explained: “The problem is it’s really not enforceable, because a person comes along and says ‘you can’t lie here,’ so they sit up and now they are sitting and are not violating the law.”
Sooooo, if I get pulled over in Berkeley for not wearing a seat belt and then put it on in front of the Police Officer will I not get a ticket?
Report Post »AmerNDN10
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 9:41pmr U kidding? of COURSE it applies to Benny’s(out of towners), and shoobees(philly out of towners) lol
Report Post »Especially yous peoples……I am NOT a liberal in NJ and it is stifiling!!!!!!!!!!! according to NJ politicians we are too tarted(or stoopid) to pump our own gas. I cannot WAIT for July when we spend the week in Dallas for Restoring Love and just to get the flock out of NJ for awhile.(tho, we might not come back) lol
I hope Menendez knows if I have anything to do with it, he will be out of work this Nov. his term and time is up so ; just like the other Dim Dems here they’ll be out of work soon. Regulate but know this, politicians of NJ YOU will be FIRED!
DWilliams08
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 11:01pmThat’s what you get for passing through New Jersey. Places like this and New York and California should be shunned by the rest of the country just as business is beginning to shun them for their tax and labor policy. They can either get their **** together or devolve into third world countries just as California is well on it’s way to becoming.
Report Post »Andy Cooper
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:00pmWhere’s the Governor in all this mess, what does he have to say?
Report Post »scrudge
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:10pmthat idiot is in the donut shop
Report Post »Exrepublisheep
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 5:09pmThe Governor says *DOH*!
Report Post »face.chewer
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 6:41pmYeah what about whales in the car? any regulations about that.
Report Post »JACKTHETOAD
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 6:52pm@FACE – Only at the Love Shack. :)
Report Post »kuhl
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 8:00pmHe is chasing Romney telling him how much he doesn’t want to be his VP…….I’ve never heard someone say no so many times, especially when nobody is asking him anymore.
Report Post »Carlinpa
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:57pmRe”Ray Martinez, the head of the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, says it is part of a larger “Click It or Ticket” effort to avoid distracted driving.” You see how they incrementally move towards total tyranny using a point of reference as justification. Imagine what they will do if obamacare stands. What limit would there be?
Report Post »brother_ed
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:48pm@CARLINPA
Excellent point.
There are so many ways to do harm to yourself, so the amount of regulation required is limitless.
Only until we revert back to the idea of personal responsibility will this madness stop.
Also, many people in this country have decided not to reproduce and often refer to their pets as ‘my kids’. “Pets are people, too” seems to be the motto of many.
Report Post »tzion
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 5:43pmExactly. Outside of forbidding animals from riding in the driver’s lap, which could endanger other drivers, the only thing that changes by securing one’s pet is that the pet is slightly safer.
Report Post »supermansdad
Posted on June 6, 2012 at 8:53amForcing drivers to buckle Fido infringes upon your liberties as much as DUI/DWI laws do. Things that happen in your vehicle affect the driver in the adjacent vehicle, therfore they CAN regulate many things in your private vehicle. This is similar to why vehicle insurance is required but compulsary health insurance is improper: it’s not to protect you or your dog but because your dog is a hyper whacko and your an idiot for letting it bounce around like Tiggger causing you to wreck into the vehicle next to you, and your car insurance is there to protect the bank’s money for lending you $$$ you didn’t have and to repair the car you slam into because you think you own the road and drive like canine fecal matter.
That said, my dog’s wont be strapped in any time soon.
Report Post »Ron Staiger
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:53pmYou can‘t even walk the streets of Camden or Trenton at night and these friggin’ bozos are worried about an unrestrained dog in my car?
Report Post »Mamma Bear
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:52pmAre you kidding me? Really?!?!? Give me a break! Don’t they have anything else to worry about, people first!
Report Post »SREGN
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:51pmNJ is rapidly turning into a totalitarian police state. Only if you’re not an actual criminal though. There’s a guy in my county (Monmouth) named Buddy Amato who is a one man crazy animal law nazi type. One poor guy got a thousand dollar fine for putting out rat poison on his own property, another for drowning a nuisance squirrel. The guy’s a nut. But a powerful nut……….
Report Post »Bryan B
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:51pmSoon the government will be fining people for not seat-belting their imaginary friend…..
Report Post »Timothy_Reid
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:21pmBut it will only apply if they can’t actually see said friend…….
Report Post »jakartaman
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:50pmIf you still do not think that Government is too big -
Report Post »This should clearly answer that question!
ENOUGH – go away and leave me the h-ll alone!
deeberj
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:49pmIf the gov‘t is allowed to force us to wear seatbelts then there’s nothing wrong with making every occupant be properly restrained.
What’s the diff between this and making me wear one? I don’t hang out the window with my head in the wind. I‘m not up on the driver’s lap. I’m way safer than a dog.
I personally don‘t think the gov’t should require seatbelting. If I die from it, my bad. It doesn’t hurt anyone else.
Report Post »ltbdb
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:34pmI don’t mind you not waering a seat belt as long as you sign a waiver stating you decline all disability payments if you just break your neck instead of getting killed. It‘s your right to be stupid as long as I don’t have to pay for it.
Report Post »tzion
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 5:38pmHonestly I can’t help but agree with this sentiment. When comes to what government can and can’t do you can only have it one way. If they can force people to wear seat-belts then the same can be said for pets. The best compromise I can think of is to pass a law saying that failure to secure one’s person, passengers, or pets shall in all civil suits be considered reckless and all injuries suffered shall be the fault of the one responsible for not securing him or herself and any pets or small children.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on June 5, 2012 at 3:34pmSo you are saying when you get your gov’t required car insurance, you should sign a form saying if I‘m hurt by not wearing a belt I can’t get any compensation. What if the accident is some idiot’s fault and I did nothing wrong? Who is going to prove that if I wore my belt I’d not be hurt?
Why not take that a step further? Should we also sign waivers that if we are ever ever doing anything that can distract us, and we end up in an accident because of it, we can’t get compensation? That would mean the gov’t would not allow any media in the vehicle including no hands phone and no GPS because it is well known they distract people. They would not allow any children or animals because we know they can carry on and cause distraction. In fact, no one with ADHD should be able to drive because they ARE distracted.
I think whose fault the accident is and who should be compensated needs to be fought in the courts. We don’t need to sign away our lives to promise we will do nothing in our vehicle that could possibly be unsafe and therefore cause us harm. That is just inviting more gov’t intrusion.
Report Post »supermansdad
Posted on June 10, 2012 at 6:27am@ DEEBRJ
You don’t have a driving RIGHT, it is a PRIVLEDGE. No state has driving rights, when your license is suspended the actual statement is that your driving privledges have been suspended/canceled/revoked (take your pick).
Report Post »supermansdad
Posted on June 10, 2012 at 6:31amAnd besides, that is a right to the State under the 10th, therefore they get to say yes-no-or we dont care.
Report Post »Obama Snake Oil Co
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:48pmI can tell you, my golden will not allow being restrained like in the picture. Sounds like a company is wanting to sell harnesses.
Report Post »Stark Industries
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 7:09pmGolden’s are always x-zempt. :)
Report Post »2012hey
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:48pmAnd how many dogs or cats have died in traffic accidents? Anyone keeping track? I personally am not aware of a single one…
Report Post »SovereignSoul
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:00pmHow many accidents have been caused by cats or dogs climbing on the driver’s lap?
Report Post »Lee_in_PA
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 6:20pmI don’t know the answer to your question, but I have one of my own. How many people have been involved in an accident or killed because someone was on the cell while they were driving? Restrain the pet, remove the cell at the ear.
Report Post »2012hey
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:47pmMy dogs LOVE to be able to sniff out the window so for them, it would be animal cruelty to harness them to the seat! Furthermore, in an accident, if the dog is harnessed in he would not be able to escape and if you can‘t reach the dog to release the harness you’d end up watching your beloved pet burn to death in the resulting fire or explosion of the vehicle. How many times have you heard of a dog or cat in a car accident being killed? That’s right – hardly EVER. Just more nanny state BS to protect us from NON-THREATENING THINGS!
Report Post »rfycom
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:46pmDamn government next thing you know they will pass a law forcing people to wear seat belts drumming up crap about “it saves lives”.
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:53pmIt is not the government’s job to make sure everyone lives the healthiest safest life possible.
Report Post »Timothy_Reid
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:57pmtruth be told that is a lie. the seat belt only saves live in a percentage of the accidents in which they are used. the trick is in which statistics you pull. if you only pull stats on the type of accidents (which is what was done) then your numbers will make a convincing argument. of course when you condisder all accidents and that those conditions are in the minority for automotive acidents, you find a different story. and it goes like this: once upon a time there was a government, and they wanted more money… truth be told it’s a sad story. of course the real problem is in protecting people that have not asked for the protection. where was the outcry from the general public exactly? that’s right, it is still yet to come as those who oppose the law already in place start to protest. funny how laws get passed, and THEN there is a reason for it. ever notice that? as it is the only applicable laws are those which prevent a person from removing from another person either life, liberty, or property, and should something go to court there had better be an injured party. so tell me when you get a ticket for not strapping in your pet, who is the injured party? and who, at that point, is depriving whom of life, liberty, or property?
Report Post »deerfawn
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:58pmyea so lets outlaw everything that’s dangerous. It’s all about the money. All you got to do is look at the fine to know that.
Report Post »pavnvet
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:05pmAs far as seat belts, I kind of like New Hampshire’s law. Under 18 buckle up, a good idea for everyone. You know, Live free or Die. As far as dogs hanging their head out a window, that is a different story. It is dangerous for the dog. It dries their eyes and dust, dirt and insects can cause serious damage. Allowing a pet on your lap while driving is also stupid. For those things, yep, I think there should be a penalty. My dog, sits like a gentleman in the front passenger seat and either has his head resting on the console or is upright looking out the window (not hanging out the window). Restraining him would be difficult and time consuming as many of my trips are short. Unfortunately, I have to drive over to NJ quite often. First, I can‘t carry my gun when I go there and now I won’t be able to take my dog. The government needs to get out of our lives.
Report Post »Timothy_Reid
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:18pm@pavnet I’m sorry sir, but thus far you have made a statement and contradicted yourself all within the space of a paragraph. Sticking with the animals. You have stated you believe there should be a penalty, and then go on to say that the gov needs to stay out of our lives. But you just said you agree with them being there. Either your being incredibly sarcastic to the point where it eludes me, or you are being contradictory in nature. Either way I ask, when the cop pulls you over and gives you the ticket, who is the injured party? When you go to traffic court and face the judge, do you ask them to present the injured party, and in what way were they injured? Where is this serious damage you speak of? Is it only in potential, has it not actually happened, have you taken someones ability to do something to prevent something that hasn’t happened? Where does that train stop I wonder……
Report Post »thegreatcarnac
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:44pmLaws, laws and more laws! They make new laws to get new revenue. We cannot keep putting up with this much longer. It is your dog and your car. We rebelled against England for far less than what we put up with now. Enough!
Report Post »Timothy_Reid
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:23pmI say we make a law saying laws are unlawful, then everytime cops see someone following one they can fine them for breaking it.
Report Post »4GODUSAANDISRAEL
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:42pmOh fer Pete’s sake! Give us a break already! Who’s the dolt that got bought off by PETA for this one? Criminy sake people, our governments are just getting plain d@mn ridiculously STUPID anymore.
Report Post »rx4nv
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:41pmFinally something from government that makes sense: It’s cheaper to leave your children unrestrained than it is your dog. Go figure!!!
Report Post »chips1
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:39pmAre 32 illegal aliens in an Econoline van considered “pet hauling”?
Report Post »progressiveslayer
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:44pmSounds like a buffet for Barry.
Report Post »progressiveslayer
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:38pmCommon sense is outlawed in this country,if you put a dog on your lap while trying to drive you’re an idiot and deserve a one car crash.One of the reasons our nanny state was created is because some people are stupid and have no common sense also we’ve allowed government to have too much power in regulating every detail of our lives.
A no smoking sign at a gas pump is one example and there‘s many more because government is always thinking of new laws and regulations to ’protect‘ us and common sense isn’t necessary because government has all the answers.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:50pmI agree … my dog is always restrained .. she has a carseat in the convertible with a belt that hooks to a halter (don’t want her flying out of the vehicle) .. and a car crate specially made for transporting animals in the SUV .. she weighs only 4.5 lbs and would go flying in any kind of quick stop … not to mention she could get thrown under the brake pedal or in my face … common sense .. I don’t need the nanny state to run my life or my business. Less laws more liberty. $1,000 fine sound like less about the animals and more about making money.
Report Post »NOBALONEY
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:37pmNext: Outlaw hand signals. Helmets for all on Turnpike and Parkway. ‘We the people’ must put an end to this encroachment into our personal lives.
Report Post »railroader
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:37pmBoy‘s and girl’s, you can’t fix STUPID. I do have one question, is that find in DOGGY MONEY or HUMAN????????
Report Post »Realist4U
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:34pmNanny Statism.
Report Post »PATTY HENRY
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:34pmREALLY? ???? Get out of here !! You dopes. Caring Owners take care that their pets don’t get hurt, but that doesn’t mean strapping them into a car seat. GOOD GRIEF!!! Don’t you have pot holes that need fixing, or CORRUPTION going on in your GOV. that needs investigating?
GET THE HELL OUT OF OUR LIVES you dumkophfs erchhhhhhhhhhhh !! Does this mean
Report Post »in Motor Homes? Does this mean cats too? What is wrong with you?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Watcher1952
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:32pmWonder who the brain was behind this one… Christie….. One more control measure being placed on AMERICANS……vote these people out of office at the earliest possible moment…..
Report Post »Zuitsuit
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:31pmEver notice how new jersey is shaped like a turd?
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:50pmShut up. I live in NJ and there are plenty of really nice places left that aren’t all urbanized. Lots of farmland and open country for a state with such a high population. Come to southern NJ (not Camden, please) and check it out.
Report Post »AmerNDN10
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 9:55pmLOL well if anything is shaped like that ; hanging, it’s fla and Ca. doesn’t mean the ppl there are crap.
Report Post »Your analogy of NJ looking like that is all off. So you must mean it in a cruel and you might have the devil in ya. mom used to say God’ll getcha for that. We’ll soon see huh?
salvawhoray
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:27pmI can go with that; animal roaming in a moving car is hazardous.
Report Post »New York Conservative
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:34pmSo is driving in general. Should we outlaw that as well?
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:38pmYeah, but a thousand dollar fine is well over the top. Rush brought this up toward the end of today’s show. He pointed out that it is another way for a cash strapped state to garner more funds on the backs of their citizens.
Report Post »My Two Cents
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 3:46pmIs it more hazardous than smoking pot?
Report Post »Timothy_Reid
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 4:08pmSo because YOU don’t like it, you’re ok with the government passing this law that prohibits anothers freedom? How long I wonder till they hit a nerve you do care about? You should be outraged at the regulation being put into place, because it won’t be long before they do take something (else) away from you that you actually want.
Report Post »amerbur
Posted on June 4, 2012 at 6:02pmIdiot, if you pass a law, it has to be written, inforced, and the bureaucracy grows, becomes more expensive and leads to a freekin police state!! Wake up fool. We do not have to pass laws to demonstrate responsible behavior!!!!
Report Post »supermansdad
Posted on June 10, 2012 at 6:45am@amerbur
IDIOT! You DONT HAVE A RIGHT TO DRIVE. Driving is a PRIVLEDGE granted by the state because it is a 10th amendment right to the State! Don’t like the State of (fill in the blank) telling you that you can’t drive on the left side of the road, not wear a seat belt, drink and drive (one state still allows it), etc. then you have the RIGHT to not drive through that STATE! If you live there MOVE! It’s a privledge not a right. Get over it!
Report Post »