▲ 872 ▼ You’re more likely to go to prison for exposing animal cruelty than for committing it (www.vox.com) submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world 207 comments fedilink hide all child comments Not really sure what to put here...I usually put relevant excerpts, but that got this post deleted for doing that
[+] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml -7 points 2 years ago (2 children) They were stealing sick livestock that had no commercial value. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] rbhfd@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (1 child) Still, that's a few steps further than just "exposing animal cruelty". Not saying what they did was wrong at all, but the headline is definitely clickbait. (Note: I haven't read past the headline or some of the comments, so I might be way off) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 years ago Juries didn’t view it as wrong in past court cases. This was the first one to land a conviction, and they did it by putting a gag order on all the footage the activists took, which in previous cases was instrumental in swaying juries. permalink fedilink source parent [+] Yawnder@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago houses and cars are inanimate objects. Juries acquited these activists of theft in previous cases, because they were shown footage of the awful condition the stolen animals were in. Which was why, in this case, the prosecutors dropped the theft charges, put a gag order on the footage, and instead threw a “felony conspiracy to commit trespassing” charge at the leader of the group, who didn’t even participate directly in stealing the animals. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Emerald@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Sentient beings are not houses or cars. If parents abuse their babies, they will get them taken from them. Same should apply to animals. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) If parents abuse their babies, they will get them taken from them. By the state after a detailed legal process, not some rando off the street after a beer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Emerald@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* But with animals, the state won't help them. If a baby was being tortured and the state wouldn't save them, how could you blame someone for taking it into their own hands? permalink fedilink source parent [+] Yawnder@lemmy.zip 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rbhfd@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (1 child) Still, that's a few steps further than just "exposing animal cruelty". Not saying what they did was wrong at all, but the headline is definitely clickbait. (Note: I haven't read past the headline or some of the comments, so I might be way off) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 years ago Juries didn’t view it as wrong in past court cases. This was the first one to land a conviction, and they did it by putting a gag order on all the footage the activists took, which in previous cases was instrumental in swaying juries. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 years ago Juries didn’t view it as wrong in past court cases. This was the first one to land a conviction, and they did it by putting a gag order on all the footage the activists took, which in previous cases was instrumental in swaying juries. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Yawnder@lemmy.zip -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago houses and cars are inanimate objects. Juries acquited these activists of theft in previous cases, because they were shown footage of the awful condition the stolen animals were in. Which was why, in this case, the prosecutors dropped the theft charges, put a gag order on the footage, and instead threw a “felony conspiracy to commit trespassing” charge at the leader of the group, who didn’t even participate directly in stealing the animals. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Emerald@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Sentient beings are not houses or cars. If parents abuse their babies, they will get them taken from them. Same should apply to animals. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) If parents abuse their babies, they will get them taken from them. By the state after a detailed legal process, not some rando off the street after a beer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Emerald@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* But with animals, the state won't help them. If a baby was being tortured and the state wouldn't save them, how could you blame someone for taking it into their own hands? permalink fedilink source parent [+] Yawnder@lemmy.zip 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mycorrhiza@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago houses and cars are inanimate objects. Juries acquited these activists of theft in previous cases, because they were shown footage of the awful condition the stolen animals were in. Which was why, in this case, the prosecutors dropped the theft charges, put a gag order on the footage, and instead threw a “felony conspiracy to commit trespassing” charge at the leader of the group, who didn’t even participate directly in stealing the animals. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) Sentient beings are not houses or cars. If parents abuse their babies, they will get them taken from them. Same should apply to animals. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) If parents abuse their babies, they will get them taken from them. By the state after a detailed legal process, not some rando off the street after a beer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Emerald@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* But with animals, the state won't help them. If a baby was being tortured and the state wouldn't save them, how could you blame someone for taking it into their own hands? permalink fedilink source parent [+] Yawnder@lemmy.zip 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) If parents abuse their babies, they will get them taken from them. By the state after a detailed legal process, not some rando off the street after a beer. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Emerald@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* But with animals, the state won't help them. If a baby was being tortured and the state wouldn't save them, how could you blame someone for taking it into their own hands? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* But with animals, the state won't help them. If a baby was being tortured and the state wouldn't save them, how could you blame someone for taking it into their own hands? permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Yawnder@lemmy.zip 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent