# Videos of dead or dying kitties and puppies are OK! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 20, 2010, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759 "2010-04-20T16:22:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/21 "2010-04-21T04:46:42Z")
Okay, [here](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000048----000-.html) is the law: > [@LII](#): > > § 48. Depiction of animal cruelty > (a) Creation, Sale, or Possession.— Whoever knowingly creates, sells, or possesses a depiction of animal cruelty with the intention of placing that depiction in interstate or foreign commerce for commercial gain, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. > (b) Exception.— Subsection (a) does not apply to any depiction that has serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value. > (c) Definitions.— In this section— > (1) the term “depiction of animal cruelty” means any visual or auditory depiction, including any photograph, motion-picture film, video recording, electronic image, or sound recording of conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded, or killed, if such conduct is illegal under Federal law or the law of the State in which the creation, sale, or possession takes place, regardless of whether the maiming, mutilation, torture, wounding, or killing took place in the State; and > (2) the term “State” means each of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/22 "2010-04-21T05:00:46Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > [This site](http://www.care2.com/causes/civil-rights/blog/animal-cruely-case-splits-roberts-alito/) claims that the law in question was indeed limited to depictions of acts which are crimes in themselves. You’re right - the link in the OP left out the “if such conduct is illegal” bit. Forget I said anything. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/23 "2010-04-21T05:02:03Z")
So, **Wilbo** ’s understanding is not accurate. > [@Wilbo523](#): > > As it stood, Billy Bob e-mailing a video of himself with the 12 point buck he shot, to his brother in law, would be a violation. > > Or a training video of a chicken processing plant. Provided that the hunting and processing activities depicted are in fact legal in the state(s) where the video is created and sold, the law would not have applied. > [@Napier](#): > > I think the videos are part of the problem, because they may be created for sale. The events might not have happened otherwise. In fact, the law applied _only_ to videos (or other depictions) of events staged “with the intention…of commercial gain.” The exception for “serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical, or artistic value” does not appear to be structured in such a way as to say that videos (or other depictions) _must_ have this value to be legal, but rather that _even_ depictions which _would be_ illegal under the other provisions, are _still_ excepted if the case is made that they possess this value. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 5:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/24 "2010-04-21T05:26:58Z")
> [@appleciders](#): > > Samuel Alito is the lone dissenter here. Be interesting to see how it shakes out. What are you referring to? Ain’t no shaking to be done once SCOTUS has its shake. Unless you are referring to how they may try to re-create the law? ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 9:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/25 "2010-04-21T09:24:30Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Because vigilante actions are frowned upon. It’s not vigilanteism, it’s my hobby - in the same way the female human animal likes to stamp on cuddly little creatures for the entertainment of other human animals, I’d like to kick to a pulp those providing and enjoying the entertainment, for the entertainment of other like-minded creatures as myself. Where’s the problem? I’d just be providing a service to those who like non-human animals for reasons other than to eat them, or use them. ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/26 "2010-04-21T13:59:56Z")
I stand corrected. It sounds like the gist of the SCOTUS opinion is that your kitties do not have the same standing as your children. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/27 "2010-04-21T14:11:36Z")
The way I read that law is that if the act would have been a crime in the state where the video is sold, the video violates the law, even if the act isn’t a crime in the state where the video is filmed. So for example, a hunting video showing someone shooting a deer with a .308 would violate the law if it was sold in Massachusetts, since in MA one can only hunt deer with slugs: “…if such conduct is illegal under Federal law or the law of the State in which the creation, sale, or possession takes place, regardless of whether the maiming, mutilation, torture, wounding, or killing took place in the State…” So any hunting/fishing video that violates the game laws of another state would technically be in violation of this law. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/28 "2010-04-21T14:30:23Z")
> [@muldoonthief](#): > > So any hunting/fishing video that violates the game laws of another state would technically be in violation of this law. Yes (if sold across state lines)… though the producer of such a video could probably have made the argument for the “educational value” exception, or something. ---
**Author:** ![muldoonthief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muldoonthief/32/3188_2.png) [@muldoonthief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muldoonthief)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/29 "2010-04-21T14:45:07Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > Yes (if sold across state lines)… though the producer of such a video could probably have made the argument for the “educational value” exception, or something. But still, doesn’t that strike you as unreasonably broad? Animal cruelty laws exist because, we, as a people, think that being cruel to animals is a bad thing. But game laws exist because of very specific circumstances in a state - deer slugs aren’t required in MA because of cruelty concerns, they’re required because slugs have a much shorter range than rifles and MA is densely populated. Heck, by that law the show “Deadliest Catch” was probably illegal in a bunch of coastal states - I’m guessing the pots they use violate fishing laws if used in other states. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/30 "2010-04-21T14:58:57Z")
Apparently this one guy was the only person prosecuted under this law in the ten years since it was passed. So clearly this law was an extremely important tool against animal cruelty. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/31 "2010-04-21T15:36:47Z")
Gotta go with the majority on this one. When it comes to restricting speech, I want the law very finely narrowed. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2010, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/32 "2010-04-21T15:37:02Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > It’s not vigilanteism, it’s my hobby Internet tough-guy-ism? It’s not much of a hobby - anyone can do it. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/33 "2010-04-23T00:46:13Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > It’s not vigilanteism, it’s my hobby - in the same way the female human animal likes to stamp on cuddly little creatures for the entertainment of other human animals, I’d like to kick to a pulp those providing and enjoying the entertainment, for the entertainment of other like-minded creatures as myself. > > Where’s the problem? I’d just be providing a service to those who like non-human animals for reasons other than to eat them, or use them. Given that assaults against humans “for enjoyment” are illegal pretty much everywhere, and that you are claiming that you have a desire to engage in illegal activity for your own enjoyment, your post is little more than an attempt to rile up other posters. We define that activity as trolling, hereabouts, and I encourage you to stop it, immediately. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/34 "2010-04-23T08:17:29Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Internet tough-guy-ism? It’s not much of a hobby - anyone can do it. > [@tomndebb](#): > > Given that assaults against humans “for enjoyment” are illegal pretty much everywhere,\*\*\*\*\* and that you are claiming that you have a desire to engage in illegal activity for your own enjoyment, your post is little more than an attempt to rile up other posters. We define that activity as trolling, hereabouts, and I encourage you to stop it, immediately. > > [/Moderating] So, that’s 2 of you who seem to think I was making a literal confession, and not just being hyperbolic to make a point. Interesting. Should I open an ATMB thread and see what other members make of it, or do you want to reconsider your hasty conclusion? \*\*\*\*\* Boxing and MMA, anyone? But at least the participants in those events choose to get involved. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/35 "2010-04-23T08:37:33Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > So, that’s 2 of you who seem to think I was making a literal confession, and not just being hyperbolic to make a point. Internet tough-guy-ism is hyperbolic by definition. I was never under the slightest impression you were threatening actual violence; I was ridiculing the empty strutting gesture, especially after you repeated it. If I may speculate, though, tomndebb is tasked to protect the legal interests of the board and its sponsor. I seriously doubt he believes you were engaged in anything other than empty posturing, but he has a responsibility to cut short anything that might (however remotely) create problems. I can’t speak for tom, of course; I can only suggest you assume by default that I’m not impressed by boastful claims of righteous anger. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/36 "2010-04-23T10:19:07Z")
And again you miss the point and focus instead on your impression of what sort of person you think I am. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/37 "2010-04-23T16:02:11Z")
> [@appleciders](#): > > Samuel Alito is the lone dissenter here. Be interesting to see how it shakes out. I found that really interesting. I have more confidence in the court when they don’t always vote in blocs. So, conservatives: was this ruling an example of judicial activism since the SC struck down a law passed by Congress? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/38 "2010-04-23T16:49:41Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > And again you miss the point and focus instead on your impression of what sort of person you think I am. Ummmm, if you say so. I was just correcting your assumption that I (and, I’m confident, tom) thought you were making a literal confession. If there’s some kind of meta-subtle-multilayer-symbolic-ironic meaning that I’m missing, so be it. Meantime, my personal impression of you is actually pretty consistent, and has been for a few months now. But since this thread isn’t about you, I’ll leave it at that. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/39 "2010-04-23T17:24:06Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Apparently this one guy was the only person prosecuted under this law in the ten years since it was passed. So clearly this law was an extremely important tool against animal cruelty. I cannot remember where I read it (so sorry, no cite) but the article mentioned that the squish videos (or whatever they are called where someone stomps on a kitten to provide some sexual gratification of the viewer) dried up almost overnight after the law was passed. So, in that respect, it had a good effect. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2010, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759/40 "2010-04-23T17:53:09Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > I found that really interesting. I have more confidence in the court when they don’t always vote in blocs. > > So, conservatives: was this ruling an example of judicial activism since the SC struck down a law passed by Congress? No conservatives, not even Justice Thomas (by far the most conservative justice) doubt the Supreme Court’s right to strike down unconstitutional laws. Conservatives who decry “judicial activism” will usually contend that the court has improperly struck down a law on constitutional grounds when it could have resolved the issues involved without reaching the constitutional question. Or they might say that the court is flat-out creating constitutional rights out of whole cloth. But no one since _Marbury_ has seriously doubted the principle of judicial review of Congressional action. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/videos-of-dead-or-dying-kitties-and-puppies-are-ok/536759.md?page=3)