Log in

No account? Create an account
Red Lipstick & Green Ink [userpic]

*Head in Hands*

December 1st, 2006 (11:52 am)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention rin_o.

Federal: Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act Signed Into Law!

H.R. 4239, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), is a bill that could make it a crime punishable by imprisonment to cause any business classified as an "animal enterprise" to suffer a loss of profit—even if the company's financial decline is the result of legal activities, such as peaceful protests, consumer boycotts or media campaigns. The term “animal enterprise” would include manufacturers, distributors and sellers of animals or animal products, research facilities, pet stores, breeders, zoos, rodeos, circuses, and animal shelters and the like.


Posted by: just john (justjohn)
Posted at: December 1st, 2006 07:17 pm (UTC)
Lock them ALL up!

Well then, any "animal enterprise"'s competitors are guilty as hell!

Posted by: Red Lipstick & Green Ink (ginger931)
Posted at: December 1st, 2006 07:26 pm (UTC)
Re: Lock them ALL up!


EXCELLENT point!!!

Posted by: Gregory Parks (tokenpants)
Posted at: December 1st, 2006 09:23 pm (UTC)

I'm sure this makes my employer quite happy, providing more ammo against PETA. While it's a weird law, maybe it'll slow down their badgering. Maybe they'll get their crap together and maybe check their facts before spewing them.

Posted by: Orin (rin_o)
Posted at: December 2nd, 2006 01:28 am (UTC)

the problem is it doesn't matter if their facts are in order. you cause a loss of money=you break the law. i suspect it's mostly because of PETA (who never learned the concept of manners because they belive good intentions fogive all failings) but the long term ends up protecting places that abuse animals wholoesale from any form of awareness, since it covers everything from protests (witch are a constitutional right, even if they are overused to the point of being a nusance) to newspaper articles to anything else really. the problem is that fact it's effectively elbowing free speech without making anyone prove it's unwarranted. if it were reworked (a lot) i wouldn't mind it so much.

Posted by: Gregory Parks (tokenpants)
Posted at: December 2nd, 2006 08:54 pm (UTC)

Yeah. MAJOR blanket action going on there. There are undoubtedly some institutions that unlawfully keep, sell, or display animals and/or mistreat them. But of course, PETA goes after the big institution (which, coincidentally has a huge elephant sanctuary in Florida.)

For all of their animal rhetoric, they don't even know the difference between an African elephant and an Asian elephant.

It seems like any laws passed nowadays are dangerously bypassing the regular rights of regular citizenry. A lot has to be reworked about our government and our country.

Posted by: Orin (rin_o)
Posted at: December 2nd, 2006 09:03 pm (UTC)
PETA stopped caring about the bad places when they found out the media likes pointless fights more.

PETA's the asshole that pisses you off so much you almost start to feel bad for the child molester he's yelling at. i'm tired of them acting like being right is all you need to do something.

but yeah, the last few years have been rather....creepy in the slant they put on the legal system. unfortunatly it's a lot easier to give people unwarranted power than it is to have them give it up. lots of work ahead, and all fo it's gonna be grimy.

6 Read Comments