ACLU defends Animal Crush Videos, Says It's "Free Speech"

Foxrac said:
Also I'm pro-hunting as well.

Some people see hunting as animal cruelty and shouldn't allow to make hunting video, how is amazing. :roll:
Click to expand...

The passage refers to CRUSHING, where you get the idea that "HUNTING" is the same as CRUSHING?

Get a dictionary please.

Thanks

Yiz
 
yizuman said:
The passage refers to CRUSHING, where you get the idea that "HUNTING" is the same as CRUSHING?

Get a dictionary please.

Thanks

Yiz
Click to expand...

No, some pro-animal rights see hunting as crushing. :roll:
 
yizuman said:
No it shouldn't include horror. Have you Googled it to read the passage of the bill?

Yiz
Click to expand...

If animal cruelty is already illegal in real life so there is no point to ban on making video of animal cruelty.
 
Foxrac said:
If animal cruelty is already illegal in real life so there is no point to ban on making video of animal cruelty.
Click to expand...

So you want them available for viewing online? You watch them?

They're adding a provision of the existing law since viewing animal crush videos online is hardly enforced like child pornography is against the law to be online being available for the sick MFers to watch.

Yiz
 
yizuman said:
So you want them available for viewing online? You watch them?

They're adding a provision of the existing law since viewing animal crush videos online is hardly enforced like child pornography is against the law to be online being available for the sick MFers to watch.

Yiz
Click to expand...

Animal cruelty is already existed on youtube, especially Chinese slaughter the dogs for meats. (WARNING: It isn't for everyone with weak stomach.)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=animal+cruelty&aq=f
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slaughter+dog&aq=f

Also, it was year ago before Supreme Court strike down the 1999 ban on making of animal cruelty video.
 
Foxrac said:
Animal cruelty is already existed on youtube, especially Chinese slaughter the dogs for meats. (WARNING: It isn't for everyone with weak stomach.)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=animal+cruelty&aq=f
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slaughter+dog&aq=f

Also, it was year ago before Supreme Court strike down the 1999 ban on making of animal cruelty video.
Click to expand...

Since you failed to mention the source on the Supreme Court, I will provide it..

firstamendmentcenter.org: news

Factual error is not in 1999, but rather earlier this year. The law was enacted in 1999, but struck down 11 years later.

That doesn't mean this stops them from trying again.

I fail to see how crushing an animal is considered "free speech" as they like to call it. That's a very lame usage of the law to try and protect the sick MFer's right to film a cat/kitten and or dog/puppy being crushed and call it entertainment value.

Next they'll claim that abusing a child while on video is "free speech".

I'm for Free Speech, but where do we draw the line in that exercise?

Sometimes I wonder how much freedom is considered TOO MUCH FREEDOM in this respect?

I do believe however that free speech can't be free without laws to protect that right.

Therefore, there has to be some guidelines within free speech.

Crushing, torturing an animal for pleasure is hardly free speech, it's plain cruel and stupid.

However, I do eat meat, if I want my cow meat, the slaughter has to be quick and painless, without any pleasure being involved.

Yiz
 
yizuman said:
Since you failed to mention the source on the Supreme Court, I will provide it..

firstamendmentcenter.org: news

Factual error is not in 1999, but rather earlier this year. The law was enacted in 1999, but struck down 11 years later.

That doesn't mean this stops them from trying again.

I fail to see how crushing an animal is considered "free speech" as they like to call it. That's a very lame usage of the law to try and protect the sick MFer's right to film a cat/kitten and or dog/puppy being crushed and call it entertainment value.

Next they'll claim that abusing a child while on video is "free speech".

I'm for Free Speech, but where do we draw the line in that exercise?

Sometimes I wonder how much freedom is considered TOO MUCH FREEDOM in this respect?

I do believe however that free speech can't be free without laws to protect that right.

Therefore, there has to be some guidelines within free speech.

Crushing, torturing an animal for pleasure is hardly free speech, it's plain cruel and stupid.

However, I do eat meat, if I want my cow meat, the slaughter has to be quick and painless, without any pleasure being involved.

Yiz
Click to expand...

Well, like I said, animal cruelty is still illegal so I don't need bother to add more laws and law enforcement can uses animal cruelty video as evidence to charge whoever commit cruelty against animal.
 
yizuman said:
Is there evidence that PETA is involved with the creation of the bill rather than basing the idea on paranoia and suspicion?

Yiz
Click to expand...

Your question is just irrelevant.

Wow, other whine about police brutality. :roll:
 
yizuman said:
How is PETA and police brutality relevant?

Yiz
Click to expand...

You are just whining about police brutality in other thread.

Now, you are whining about issues with law on animal cruelty.

We already have law against on animal cruelty so it is over now.
 
Foxrac said:
Well, like I said, animal cruelty is still illegal so I don't need bother to add more laws and law enforcement can uses animal cruelty video as evidence to charge whoever commit cruelty against animal.
Click to expand...

They're not adding a law, they're UPDATING a provision to the existing law.

Yiz
 
Foxrac said:
Also I'm pro-hunting as well.

Some people see hunting as animal cruelty and shouldn't allow to make hunting video, how is amazing. :roll:
Click to expand...

Wow that's actually a decent point.
 
yizuman said:
They're not adding a law, they're UPDATING a provision to the existing law.

Yiz
Click to expand...

What so?

You know what guess? I don't care at all, unless it doesn't interfere with hunting and horror filming of animal abuses.
 
Foxrac said:
You are just whining about police brutality in other thread.

Now, you are whining about issues with law on animal cruelty.

We already have law against on animal cruelty so it is over now.
Click to expand...

How am I whining about animal cruelty?

See my previous answer.

Again, how is police brutality the same as animal cruelty?

Yiz
 
Foxrac said:
What so?

You know what guess? I don't care at all, unless it doesn't interfere with hunting and horror filming of animal abuses.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't interfere with hunting at all. You're basing this on assumption and paranoia.

Yiz
 
Back
Top