Peta and Animal Rights

Remove all ads!

I guess the Supreme Court decided they were. The taping was not illegal -- however, the tape could be used as evidence in court against those actually participating in illegal activities.

 

Sure, the taping wasn't illegal, but he was selling the tapes. I'm not at all concerned about the fact that he taped it. My concern is for the fact that he (apparently) is entirely within his rights to sell the ****ing thing without fear of reprisal.

 

If you look at the actual ruling, it seems that the main beef the Justices had with the law as written was that it was too wide in scope, which is why they felt the law violated free speech. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts actually said that a similar law that was more limited - like specifically for crush videos and dog fighting - may well be considered Constitutional. That's practically asking for a new law to be passed, more limited in scope, that would make these type of things illegal.

IMO, it seemed like the Justices agreed with the spirit of the law, but disagreed with the way it was worded, and the possible application of the law based on that wording. My guess is you'll see a new law passed.

 

I sure hope so. In the meantime, the measure that dried up the Crush video industry no longer exists, which isn't exactly good news.

 

Umm, 1.) the kitten isn't dead and 2.) that's how mother cats regularly carry their young around. That one looked a little large for it, but if the animal wasn't complaining, neither should PETA. Actually, being grabbed that way apparently triggers a release of endorphines or something to relax the animal, so it won't struggle while it's mother carries it that way. This response continues in adult cats and, while actually lifting them that way can be painful, just grabbing them that way will cause them to relax a bit. It's one of the first thing cat handlers go for when grabbing an angry cat.