Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday July 27 2015, @10:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the when-does-activism-become-terrorism dept.

I was saddened to hear that two individuals who released fur animals and vandalized fur farms across America were busted: http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/fbi-arrests-activists-accused-of-releasing-mink/article_6c169b5d-dbbc-5dd1-adb0-534ee46af88b.html

But the arrest is sort of beside the point and there are two interesting tidbits in there. First and less interesting, is the ridiculous charge of terrorism under the "Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act" -- seriously, what they did is just plain old crime. Before you know it, going 10 over on the freeway will be considered an act of terrorism.

More intriguing, despite a lack of details on how they got busted, is this tidbit:

The indictment states that they covered their tracks by avoiding phones or logging into known online accounts and email. Instead, they used public Internet computers and encrypted email and cash for purchases while traveling. They would allegedly withdraw hundreds of dollars while back home in the San Francisco Bay Area before another trip.

The FBI states that they drafted communiques and posted them online to publicize their actions on websites associated with "animal rights extremists."

I'm going to guess automatic license plate readers were involved. Pure guess.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by deimtee on Monday July 27 2015, @12:24PM

    by deimtee (3272) on Monday July 27 2015, @12:24PM (#214258) Journal

    Ok, going out and clubbing cute baby seals is bad, I can see why people don't like that. Any wildlife trapping too.

    What I can't see is any ethical difference between raising animals for meat and raising animals for their skins.
    In both cases I would hope (and the law says) that they should be killed humanely.
    Seriously, what's the difference between eating a steak and wearing leather or fur?

    Or even more basic, what's the ethical difference between leather (seems ok) and fur (not ok). ?
    Why does it matter if the skin is hairy?

    --
    If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @12:37PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @12:37PM (#214269)

    The ethical difference is that lots of people would say we need meat. We have artificial replacements for fur now; we don't need to skin animals. It's almost like killing something purely for the fun of it; that's more unethical than doing it out of necessity.

    The only thing I wouldn't see as unethical is if the animal was already dead (not killed to skin it), since then it's just a lump of meat.

    Or even more basic, what's the ethical difference between leather (seems ok) and fur (not ok). ?

    I don't think leather is okay, really. But if the animal is already being killed for meat, it doesn't make much of a difference to skin it.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by PocketSizeSUn on Monday July 27 2015, @01:22PM

      by PocketSizeSUn (5340) on Monday July 27 2015, @01:22PM (#214290)

      Non-degradable plastic is not really a reasonable replacement for fur.
      Leather and fur are natural, long lasting, renewable and bio degradable.

      If you have a moral objection to fur and leather feel free to use alternatives, but please don't enforce your opinion on others.
      Thanks.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @03:48PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @03:48PM (#214370)

        > Non-degradable plastic is not really a reasonable replacement for fur.

        It is for 90+% of the use cases. The fact that there are still corner cases where your statement is true doesn't change the general case. Don't be one of those black and white guys who thinks the extremes define the norm.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @05:19PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @05:19PM (#214420)

          Find a plastic that is a perfect replacement for leather and fur and is infinitely renewable and is nontoxic to everything everywhere. Go ahead. Don't be one of those black and white guys who thinks the extremes define the norm.

      • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by acid andy on Monday July 27 2015, @05:12PM

        by acid andy (1683) on Monday July 27 2015, @05:12PM (#214415) Homepage Journal

        If you have a moral objection to fur and leather feel free to use alternatives, but please don't enforce your opinion on others.

        I'm quite sure that having an opinion enforced upon oneself feels considerably less uncomfortable than being factory farmed and slaughtered.

        --
        If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @05:25PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @05:25PM (#214424)

          Why do animals on factory farms matter and plants do not? For the same reason why humans matter and animals on factory farms do not.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @11:59PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @11:59PM (#214601)

        You're forcing your opinion on the animals you slaughter needlessly, so it's not like you care about forcing others.

    • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by hemocyanin on Monday July 27 2015, @03:39PM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Monday July 27 2015, @03:39PM (#214365) Journal

      I don't think leather is okay, really. But if the animal is already being killed for meat, it doesn't make much of a difference to skin it.

      I feel I'm a cog in the great eons old war between mammals and dinosaurs and so I come in at a semi-ethical point on the continuum between vegan and carnivore in that I don't eat mammals. I will eat animals outside my class, but I made the personal dividing line at having a neo-cortex, which mammals have and others don't (however, I do grant octopi honorary mammal status despite being so delicious).

      Anyway, I do wear leather shoes despite not eating mammals. I figure that the amount of meat people eat produces so much surplus leather material, that I'm not contributing to mammal cruelty by using the residue. If it came to a point where people stopped eating mammals, I'd certainly switch to other non-mammal shoe material.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @02:41PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2015, @02:41PM (#214325)

    I agree. They are all wrong. Hence, I am vegan.

  • (Score: 1) by Hauke on Monday July 27 2015, @07:35PM

    by Hauke (5186) on Monday July 27 2015, @07:35PM (#214485)

    When you get right down to it, I don't believe there is an ethical difference between leather and fur.

    One subjective thought might be that leather is still mostly utilitarian while fur could be construed as an ego thing in this day and age. On the other hand, natural fur is a pretty good insulator against cold weather.
    Another thought is that it's safer for PETAheads to throw red paint on a NY socialite wearing fur than it is to throw red paint on a biker wearing leather.

    Personally, I don't use fur products. However, leather belts are great for keeping pants on and the final honing of a sharp kitchen knife.

    Cheers!

    --
    TANSTAAFL