BigGameHunt.net Hunting Forums

[moderator]

Full Story:

Legislation to Penalize Animal Rights Terrorists Introduced in New York

Please use this area to post comments or questions about this news item.

[bitmasher]

It would be interesting if such legislation were applied retroactively. PETA might really be in some hot water then over their donations to ELF.

Two elks lodge in Vail was burned in 1998. The donation discussed in the St. Petersburg Times occured in 2001, after ELF claimed responsibility for the burning. So it isn't like they didn't know they were donating to a group that actively engages in terrorism.

[moderator]

Update

Looks like some states are starting to introduce the legislation.

Legislation to Penalize Animal Rights Terrorists Introduced in New York

[moderator]

We received this email over the weekend regarding the anti-terror legislation from "Heather".

----------------------
Hi, the animal rights and ecological terrorism act (TX HB 433 and NY HB 4884) is written not to simply fight terrorism it seems.

Instead the bill begins by defining two political groups as terrorist groups: the animal rights groups and the environmental/ecology groups. To qualify as such a group, there only has to be 2 people, holding political views, trying to sway public opinion toward their viewpoints with animal rights or ecology. No violence, no sabotage, no "terrorism" need be involved. That seems pretty hard to believe, but that is the way the legislation is apparently written.

Here is the part that sportsmen may not realize, and that freedom loving US citizens should think carefully about. Now that the Act, or law, has defined a group as "terrorists" if any of those people (and it includes anyone who subscribes to a magazine from that group - gives any support or money) happens to videotape or photograph a chemical dumping or a violation of the humane slaughter act -- those companies can sue for libel and NOT NEED TO PROVE MALICE (intent to defame). Malice may be automatically assumed because the person is a member of a terrorist group. Those people, however law abiding, no longer have the Bill of Rights freedom of speech libel law protection anymore; and, effectively the news/press/broadcast stations are gagged.

Right now, the legislation just addresses animal rights and ecological groups. But, what about sportsmen? Aren't they a politically motivated group? What happens in the future when the corporations who are pushing this legislation via ALEC decide that sportsmen are a liability, for wanting access to land, game, and resources that in the future will be increasingly held by businesses and the very rich? (In the next 45 years our total population is slated to double and food needs, triple. Access to hunting, private lands, game is going to get exceedingly tough.) Sportsmen, in supporting this legislation that eats away at our basic Bill of Rights freedom of speech and press, might discover that when they need their OWN civil liberties that they have already given them away.

If I were a hunter, fisherman, outdoorsman I would want to think about this.

[ This Message was edited by: moderator on 2003-03-10 13:05 ]