![]() |
cruelty videos Just got this article notice from The Washington Post: Court voids law aimed at animal cruelty videos The Associated Press Tuesday, April 20, 2010; 10:13 AM WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court struck down a federal law Tuesday aimed at banning videos that show graphic violence against animals, saying it violates the right to free speech. The justices, voting 8-1, threw out the criminal conviction of Robert Stevens of Pittsville, Va., who was sentenced to three years in prison for videos he made about pit bull fights. The law was enacted in 1999 to limit Internet sales of so-called crush videos, which appeal to a certain sexual fetish by showing women crushing to death small animals with their bare feet or high-heeled shoes. The videos virtually disappeared once the measure became law, the government argued. But Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, said the law goes too far, suggesting that a measure limited to crush videos might be valid. In dissent, Justice Samuel Alito said the harm animals suffer in dogfights is enough to sustain the law. |
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: As awful as they are to look at we cannot bury the truth..It is the only way America will wake up to what is going on in this country. Thank goodness the Supreme Court believes in free speech.. |
Quote:
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: |
Quote:
|
In this case, the defendant was selling videos of dog fights. He was not out trying to create awareness of animal cruelty. Here's a quote from an older story about this: "Stevens was convicted in January of three counts of selling depictions of animal cruelty. He never denied selling tapes like "Pick-A-Winna," on which he described dogfighting like a sportscaster calling a televised boxing match". Here's the link.... Pet-Abuse.Com - Animal Abuse Case Details: Selling dog-fighting videos - Pittsville, VA (US) |
Oh Crap...I must not have been awake this morning ...:mad: Thanks for posting the link..:( |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
So, the way I'm reading the Supreme Court decision, we can look forward to more 'crush' videos? Geez, I'd never even heard of these before. |
I agree...we can't just :thumbup: or :thumbdown many of these laws because you never know who is benefiting from them...but in many cases it is not the animals. It is interesting as a few states have lawyers for animals and they can practice in those states...I can't find the website I was looking for but I did stumble across these...but I have not studied them... Lawyers For Animals Animal Law Attorney, Lawyer, Attorneys, Lawyers and Legal Research Information - Lawyers.com LIDA - Lawyers in Defense of Animals Lawyers for Animal Welfare - Home Animal Protection Law : About ALAW |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
So he was making dog fight videos to sell...not making videos telling about the abuse of dog fights :mad: Goodness! He should have been convicted for promoting animal cruelty. This is where the laws need to be more detailed so people can't just water down issues and get away with horrible things under free speech rights. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Thanks for the links, Cindy. I'll dive into them later. I always figured that animals are considered 'property' and property laws would govern them in the absence of specific legislation. Federal law does supercede state law, however, and laws such as the one being discussed here would be considered 'law of the land'. Just another example of why animal welfare doesn't need to be dumped on Washington. If they mess it up (as in this case), it gets messed up for everyone and is harder to undo. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:26 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2018 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use