Special Ops Paintball: Supreme Court validates animal cruelty video - Special Ops Paintball

Jump to content


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Supreme Court validates animal cruelty video Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Soyeahwatsup 

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 123
  • Joined: 05-February 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Beach Country, FL
  • Brigade Name:SGTWHITEY

Posted 10 May 2010 - 07:23 PM

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-2...urt-ruling.html

All I have to say is Who the F*** watches this Crap?!?!?
0

#2 User is offline   Mehphisto 

  • JUST A SMALL TOWN GIRL
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 454
  • Joined: 24-January 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LIVING IN A LONELY WORLD

Posted 10 May 2010 - 07:24 PM

There's no video in that article. :dodgy:
Damn it feels good to be a gangster.

ELITESPORTS OT
The only original OT team
0

#3 User is offline   Soyeahwatsup 

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 123
  • Joined: 05-February 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Beach Country, FL
  • Brigade Name:SGTWHITEY

Posted 10 May 2010 - 07:25 PM

Well you would have to download the video from some porn site or something. Read the article

They protected videos crushing small animals with feet with or without shoes for viewing pleasure.

This post has been edited by Soyeahwatsup: 10 May 2010 - 07:26 PM

0

#4 User is offline   IrishMack 

  • Better than You
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 734
  • Joined: 17-June 09
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:New York

Posted 10 May 2010 - 07:31 PM

Well I would assume there are a lot of people that would enjoy watching such a video. I mean there is a large number of kids that find animal torture to be fun. It is an easy and exciting way to release anger, now as far as it being sexually arousing, I don't know about that...I am also female, so some of the things that stimulate you, I don't necessarily understand. I would however say that this is not the worst thing that I have heard of as far as it getting people stimulated. I would assume the rising pedophiles would quite possibly begin at a lower level like this, just like one that grows up to a serial killer often times will begin with the toture and killing of small animals.
"I could be your third wheel."
"You know that's not a good thing right?"
"Of course it is, it adds more grip, greater stability"


"Gives it color he says, it'll look good he says...Filthy liar" (in regards to Puzuma)
0

#5 User is offline   Soyeahwatsup 

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 123
  • Joined: 05-February 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Beach Country, FL
  • Brigade Name:SGTWHITEY

Posted 10 May 2010 - 07:37 PM

I just don't understand how they make dogfighting illegal but crushing small animals not. There are some F'd up people in this world
0

#6 User is offline   SNIPER TY 

  • Furtim, Patientia, Veneratio
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 16-February 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Raleigh NC
  • Brigade Name:SNIPER TY

Posted 11 May 2010 - 05:51 AM

yeh ther is... thats perdy FRAGed up man... what happend to dudes bein turned on by boobs and asses? cruchn tiny animals with sum chicks foot to get your jollys??? WTF MAN!!!!!!
Don't run, you will only die tired!!!
A case of paint for you means 2,000 paintballs but for me that's the body count
"And God gave man three things with which to fix all of man's problems: WD-40, duct tape, and a hammer."
are u DO NOT DODGE THE SWEAR FILTERS Warning Issued kidding me, that's the only thing i can say
TEAM CAPTAIN OF SHADOW UNIT
COMMANDER OF CAROLINA SILENCE: MERCINARY SNIPERS
View My Special Ops Brigade Page
commander # 145 / sniper # 1 / broadsword # 119
0

#7 User is offline   deltapaintball 

  • Josh Foote
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,905
  • Joined: 10-January 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Jersey
  • Brigade Name:deltapaintball

Posted 11 May 2010 - 06:31 AM

People have always been turned on by different things, remember the video, 2 girls 1 cup? Some guys were turned on by that.
Coming soon.
0

#8 Guest_Lt.Vortex_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 11 May 2010 - 07:17 AM

View PostSoyeahwatsup, on May 10 2010, 09:37 PM, said:

I just don't understand how they make dogfighting illegal but crushing small animals not. There are some F'd up people in this world



I'm not for dog fighting but I do agree on the fact that therer are some screwed up people in this world :tdn:
0

#9 User is offline   Thalion 

  • Probably in the Shooters Thread...
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,984
  • Joined: 22-January 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Twin Cities, MN

Posted 11 May 2010 - 07:38 AM

There's a lot of screwed up people in the world. This is far from new.



At this point, as I understand the ruling, the making of the video became legal, but animal cruelty in of itself is still illegal.

So, if they really are crushing these animals on camera or really are having two dogs fight for "entertainment," then you can still get them on animal cruelty.

If they're not actually doing these things, but rather a fictional film (use of special effects or other cinematic tricks to make something appear on screen that really is not), well, what kind of other stuff is depicted in movies for the sake of entertainment? I find it difficult to argue against the legality of the film itself. I may think those who enjoy such works are sickening, but I can also say the same of other legal practices.

That said, I highly doubt this is just cinematic tricks and special effects. In which case, animal cruelty charges should apply.

Am I the only one reading this ruling as saying the film is legal, but the actions are still animal cruelty and illegal? Just want to see if I may have missed something.

This post has been edited by Thalion: 11 May 2010 - 07:45 AM

Member of Team Akkadian

0

#10 User is offline   The Stuntman 

  • I feel like I'm taking Crazy Pills!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Administrators
  • Posts: 2,722
  • Joined: 06-September 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Santa Cruz CA
  • Brigade Name:The Stuntman

Posted 11 May 2010 - 09:05 AM

Quote

Am I the only one reading this ruling as saying the film is legal, but the actions are still animal cruelty and illegal? Just want to see if I may have missed something.

That would be correct. The actions shown in videos - whether "crush" videos or dog fighting - are in themselves illegal. In some cases making such films may be considered participation, which would also be illegal. However, the court has determined that merely selling/distributing such videos is protected under certain circumstances.
Although the headlines sounded shocking when this issure made the news a few weeks ago, the actual legal reasoning of the particular court case is fairly complicated. Im not sure if I agree with the court on this one, but there are some legitimate 1st Amendment issues involved. For example: Lets say the Humane Society/SCPA wanted to distribute clips from these films as part of an anti-cruelty campaign to raise awareness. Under old case law, they could technically be prosocuted for distribution...which wouldn't make much sense.
0

#11 User is offline   Mehphisto 

  • JUST A SMALL TOWN GIRL
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 454
  • Joined: 24-January 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LIVING IN A LONELY WORLD

Posted 11 May 2010 - 09:52 AM

View PostSoyeahwatsup, on May 10 2010, 09:25 PM, said:

Well you would have to download the video from some porn site or something. Read the article

They protected videos crushing small animals with feet with or without shoes for viewing pleasure.

The FRAG....
Damn it feels good to be a gangster.

ELITESPORTS OT
The only original OT team
0

#12 User is offline   Warpaint 

  • "Well...Shall We?"
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,005
  • Joined: 05-August 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bucks County, PA
  • Brigade Name:Warpaint537

Posted 11 May 2010 - 12:52 PM

Small correction...it's not the Supreme Court protecting the recordings of these activities or behaviors by these disgusting examples of human kind...it's the Constitution and First Amendment Rights, and/or interpretations of same. In addition to protecting good, law-abiding citizens, the Constitution also protects the freaks among us who defy the laws of nature...unfortunately, the Supreme Court doesn't enforce those laws.

It's a lousy situation, but while the depicted animal cruelty is against the law (at least in the U.S.), documenting the abuse (either for or against it), is interpreted as being protected under the First Amendment.


There is some argument as to the intentions of the person presenting the videos...he says he provides the videos to document the cruelty and alert people to it, but investigators believe that's just a cover for him to profit off the sick perversions he presents.

This post has been edited by Warpaint: 11 May 2010 - 01:19 PM

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." ~ Edmund Burke ~ "Well...shall we?" ~ Hoot, Black Hawk Down
Posted Image
0

#13 User is offline   Soyeahwatsup 

  • Forum Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 123
  • Joined: 05-February 10
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Beach Country, FL
  • Brigade Name:SGTWHITEY

Posted 11 May 2010 - 03:08 PM

Should have the sickos crushed for viewing pleasure. LOL
0

#14 User is offline   IrishMack 

  • Better than You
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 734
  • Joined: 17-June 09
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:New York

Posted 11 May 2010 - 03:15 PM

Quote

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a federal criminal law aimed at depictions of animal cruelty, saying the measure was so broad it would have outlawed hunting videos and magazines in violation of free-speech rights.



It seems possible that if the people presenting the case had been more focused on their topic instead of the rights of animals as a whole they would have had more luck. I mean, I love watching hunting videos, and it appears that this law would have made that illegal as well...but that's not the same as these crush videos.
"I could be your third wheel."
"You know that's not a good thing right?"
"Of course it is, it adds more grip, greater stability"


"Gives it color he says, it'll look good he says...Filthy liar" (in regards to Puzuma)
0

#15 User is offline   Ashrak 

  • Precipice
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 336
  • Joined: 01-December 07
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 May 2010 - 05:00 PM

View PostThalion, on May 11 2010, 10:38 AM, said:

Am I the only one reading this ruling as saying the film is legal, but the actions are still animal cruelty and illegal? Just want to see if I may have missed something.


Not a thing.

Additionally, the original law passed by Congress strictly applied to the "crush" videos, and the law was fine until the government tried to use the same law (again, explicitly reserved for prosecution in "crush" video cases) against dog fighting videos.

So legally speaking, the prosecution went beyond its power, hence the ruling against the government.

View PostIrishMack, on May 11 2010, 06:15 PM, said:

Quote

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a federal criminal law aimed at depictions of animal cruelty, saying the measure was so broad it would have outlawed hunting videos and magazines in violation of free-speech rights.



It seems possible that if the people presenting the case had been more focused on their topic instead of the rights of animals as a whole they would have had more luck. I mean, I love watching hunting videos, and it appears that this law would have made that illegal as well...but that's not the same as these crush videos.


No, they aren't the same, but it matters no to those who try and stretch the law to their own advantage.

If the law against the crush videos, was then extended to dogfighting, and then to something else, the law becomes this elastic rubber band that has virtually no limits. I think that is the real reason the SCOTUS ruled the way it did, and I can agree with that reasoning.
Alea iacta est ~ The board is set, the pieces are moving.
~ Like the leaves of the forest when Summer is green, That host with their banners at sunset were seen:
Like the leaves of the forest when Autumn hath blown, That host on the morrow lay withered and strown. ~ Destruction of Sennacherib

~ Believe me, dear Sir: there is not in the American states a man who more cordially loves a union with his country than I do. But, by the God that made me, I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as the United States Congress proposes; and in this, I think I speak the sentiments of America. ~ Thomas Jefferson (modernized)
Summertime Blues
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users