kierthos | What. The. Fuck.

Skip to Main Content

What. The. Fuck.

Supreme Court strikes down law that banned animal cruelty videos because it was a violation of free speech.

What.

I'm sorry, if you're filming videos of dog-fighting, or crush videos, yeah, that shit should be against the law, and it shouldn't fall under free speech. Fuck that.

You want to know what's even more surprising? The sole dissenter was Alito.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Do you think films that show damage or brutality to human beings should be censored?

Well, at least in theory, the humans can consent. Fight club type videos, for example.

Snuff films, not so much.

I would like to note that they did not strike down the cruelty to animal laws - just the laws that banned the videos.

If you're making crush videos you will still be prosecuted for cruelty to animals. If you're making a documentary about crush videos you are now free to do so whereas before you would have fallen under the same penalty as those performing the cruelty in the first place.

"Every other crime caught on tape: hit television series."
- Stanhope

So long as he's not actually creating the crimes sure. A guy was doing that down in Brazil and he ended up getting busted for paying people to commit the crimes he was filming.

But if they're doing it legit? Why not?

Shady double standard in society. Certain crimes, it's illegal to own the video of it. Doesn't matter if you actually MADE the tape, or just downloaded it - you watch that crime on tape, YOU are also committing a crime. Research the history of Traci Lords on that one.

COPS shows people breaking the law on video every show, over and over again, and that's a hit TV show.

If this ruling stands it may well start to effect other places that double standard exists. Sexting is the one that keeps hitting my radar as 'the law is dumb'. If the act creating the video is not a crime (a teen taking their own picture naked) then why is owning that video a crime, especially for someone where it wouldn't have been a crime for them to do far more intimate things with said teen (I.E. someone their own age receiving said video).

I have no interest in said videos personally and I do think that they shouldn't be sold for money but one teen taking a picture of themselves naked and sending it to another teen for whom it would not be a crime for them to have sex with... is a felony?

Yea... I'm hoping that this ruling injects a little rationality back into that discussion.

So films that show humans dying without their consent should be censored?

Remember Faces of Death?

Most of that was faked.

Remember the videos of 9/11?

or all the video footage coming out of Iraq/Afghanistan?

I have to admit, I don't know.... I don't trust my own judgment on what should and should not be censored. I am just not wise enough, I guess.

What he said.

Do you feel the Rodney King beating tape should be censored?

No. If the video is used to expose animal cruelty or be used as evidence then yes, it's necessary.'

But someone selling videos of dog fights for money as entertainment should be stopped.

Why?

If you don't see anything wrong with dog fighting or making money off films of dogs fighting then there's no point in continuing the argument. We'll just end up disagreeing endlessly.

If it's all make-believe, like action movies, of course not.

Documentaries, especially ones that expose dog-fighting rings, shouldn't be criminally prosecuted either. But, hell's teeth, this is the Supreme Court. They could have set a precedent by noting that it should only apply to cruel behavior towards animals/videos for profit, and it would have been fine.

That is not what I asked.

Do you think video of humans being hurt or killed without their consent should be illegal?

If the videos are being deliberately made to show the actual injury or death of others, yes.

If it's "oh shit, this happened today, and we're showing it on the news", then no.

To be clear - if the person recording has nothing to do with the act of killing should it be censored?

If the person recording is connected to the death (and it's not a military action) then that's called accessory to murder and it has nothing to do with the video tape.

I'm going to use the 9/11 thing that

flemco referenced above. After the planes struck the World Trade Center, there were people who were videotaped jumping to their deaths from the building. That footage went into heavy rotation on the news. That should not be censored as it is considered documentary footage.

If the person recording is an actual accessory to assault & battery and/or murder, then while it might get played on the news (because, you know, 24 hour news cycle and all), the person who did the recording should not be allowed to profit in any way off of the recording.

You already cannot profit from a crime you commit so again other laws cover this. I'm failing to see where what you fear has been allowed by this ruling.

That should not be censored as it is considered documentary footage.

What if I play it over and over and jack off to it?

So rather than banning a type of video, you wish to prosecute the motive?

I'm very pro-animal welfare.
I'm very much in favor of busting anyone caught abusing or encouraging abuse of animals.
But in this particular case I agree with the SCOTUS.

Thank you. I think you've summed it up far better than I could.

Cool to see like minds.
BTW, haven't seen you on DDO?

Been too busy :(

I've got all my Cam stuff squared away now but I leave tomorrow night for parts east until Monday. Then I dive into my kids birthday and then running a major Cam online event.

Well that and I got the Riddik game which ate my brain. I'll get back on DDO tonight though :)

Travel safely!
I'll likely be split between EVE and DDO.
Well, after I drag my recycling stuff over to my friend's house before she kicks my ass.
(She came out with me and laughed at PETA today, so that's cool --
Though we had nothing on the guy handing out double cheeseburgers!)

Next time tell them about PEPA - People for the Ethical Preparation of Animals. Their motto is 'Let no piece of an animal go to waste'. They like to have grills across from PETA things where they also sell leather jackets and bone handled knives.

LOL --
Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice!
I approve! ^_^

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only