Slashdot Mirror
Iowa Rejects Video Privacy Protection For Cows
Hugh Pickens writes "The Seattle Post Intelligencer reports that an effort to outlaw the undercover recording of animal abuse in livestock operations appears to have stalled in Iowa after previously failing in Minnesota, Florida and New York, with the pushback coming from citizens and activists complaining that the proposals were aimed at protecting an industry that doesn't exhibit enough concern for farm animal welfare. A bill introduced earlier this year to criminalize the actions of activists who make unauthorized hidden videos of animal abuse appeared to be headed for approval in the Iowa Legislature, with proposed penalties including fines of up to $7,500 and up to five years in prison. 'I feel it is wrong to absolutely lie to get a job to try to defame the employer,' says Iowa representative Annette Sweeney, a farmer and Republican legislator who sponsored the bill. But District Attorney James R. Horton, who filed animal cruelty charges against employees and the owner of a large-scale calf-raising farm, says he probably 'wouldn't have a case' if not for covert video provided by an animal protection group, and that 'we wouldn't have anything' in terms of evidence against the suspects in the beating deaths of dairy calves at E6 Cattle Co."
I wonder though - if they have good video evidence. Is it really defamation ?
Moo!
... do we try to enact privacy laws for cows, all the while emasculating or eliminating entirely the privacy laws for humans. U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U...
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
If the company is adhering to the rules of the law, they wouldn't have to worry about being defamed by people who lied to be hired and then made covert video tapes.
What about THAT side of the argument, Annette Sweeney, farmer and Republican legislator?
and I still don't understand it. Is the legislation stalled or about to be approved ?
Nullius in verba
Isn't that what every politician does to get elected? Lie to get the job?
I hope they vote that lying cunt out.
... are the US's sacred cows.
concerned about lying.
In my humble opinion, as humans, if we have an opportunity to raise food in a humane way, we should strive to do it.
ITT: Stupid kid who thinks being cruel to animals makes him manly.
Someone wasn't loved as a child.
why is it that always republicans are behind the gravest, dastardliest shit, and they are behind less dastardly shit with a democrat close to their aisle ?
a while ago, i heard that mccain and 30 other republican senators opposed a bill which would prevent companies from putting clauses into their contracts that would prevent female employees from suing the company if they were raped in company's employ overseas by company employees. that included john mccain, the presidential candidate. the justification was 'we think it is wrong to tell businesses how to do business'. so, its ok if a company legislates rape in its overseas operations by putting a clause in its contracts ?
what the fuck is wrong with republicans ?
Read radical news here
Iowa already has defamation laws. So if it really were defamation, they could already sue the activists. They don't need any new laws.
Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
This law would never have survived First Amendment scrutiny anyway. It not only prohibited taking the videos, but also prohibited displaying them on the news. But even if it was unconstitutional, it's great that it's dead now rather than later.
Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
Does stabbing them with pitch-forks and gouging out their eyes help the meat taste better? What about when they slaughter cows that are too sick to walk? Yummy! The crap documented on these farms isn't just slapping a few cows around. It would shock any meat-eater and these activists are doing excellent work.
Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
They don't need a lawsuit. All they need is to attach those special apple IR transmitters to the cows and there's no problem at all.
Do you butcher your own meat? You seem to have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Natural predators strive for a clean, efficient kill, so your "lions and gazelles" analogy doesn't hold water. Animal cruelty encompasses disease and feed quality, among other things; it ends up in the food we eat. It's sad that it has to be put in such practical terms for you -- being tortured to death is something no being should have to endure.
Of course Iowa representative Annette Sweeney only partially lies, being a politician. Making promises she doesn't intend to keep, is part of her job description.
That sounds like a reason to not care about the contents of the video. It doesn't sound like a good reason to make it a crime to record the video. Sure, you might say the purpose of the video is to spread propaganda that food isn't food, but propaganda shouldn't be a crime, even if you think it's bullshit.
It's batshit insane (well, no, actually just plain corrupt) that such a bill is even seriously considered.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Indeed, these are the farmers' property, being made less valuable by their actions. Do you smash your own windows? Do you key your own car?
It may seem like cruelty however those images of lions and hyenas ripping apart still breathing baby gazelles in Africa is probably more cruel. I say we need to outlaw lions, tigers, and other apex predators.. or in fact why don't we ban or prohibit nature completely? Let's face it, a if animals were mistreated it couldn't have been worse than have your throat ripped open, or your intestines laid open by a sharp claw only to wander in shock as night falls and your herd leaves you deserted on your own........ meh
Unlike you I have actually raised and slaughtered my own food. They may be food but you don't have to be cruel to them and make them miserable. Beating them to death? Really? Wtf is wrong with you? I waste extra shells to headshot any hunted animal after bringing it down to make sure it doesn't needlessly suffer, a lot of people do that.
Humanely killing animals is both cheap and easy, there is pretty much no excuse for the behavior you're advocating.
Trying to outlaw this kind of undercover journalism, would in my view be to undermine democracy.In my humble view, this kind of legislation heads the road to FASCISM. There is a couple of other words for it, but this one fit well enough. /T
Warning: This sig contains a small bug. ==> *
These recordings are whistle blowers that are bringing to light illegal activities of employers with hard evidence. The corporations are lining governors pockets to eliminate them. That's against human rights and the supreme court will strike it down so fast and strengthen whistle blower protection.
It seems like the people making the recordings are very close to (if not) committing cooperate espionage. If the company were to say the way they process the cattle is a trade secret, couldn’t they file a suit against the person or organization that created the recordings?
My point being, if it’s already illegal, do we need to make it more illegal?
Define humane? No pain? No suffering? No blood? No death? Even an abused beef cow was likely never hungry or thirsty, and likely recieved treatment for flies, worms, and vaccinated.... Think about it.
They are cows. We are raising them to eat them. We are not raising them as pets. Some people are slightly more rough on the food, but it is just food. What's next, Africa picking up on this and outlawing lions from playing with the gazelles? No, we are a dominate species and are going to eat these.
Until the animal is sacrificed to cut it up, the animal is not yet food.
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your POV), the US has laws that restrict what things we are allowed to use as food, and restrict how or when we can turn animals and plants into food or other supplements; and some animal cruelty laws have been lobbed in there.
Try nailing a Deer out of season or using an unauthorized bait or hunting weapon, for food, because your family is starving, and see how much "mercy" your story about how you supposedly need "food" to survive or its inferior prey gets with the game warden.
As for lions playing with gazelles; they don't really mistreat their prey, they hunt it and kill it within fairly short order, once they are hungry, and they get a little exercise in chasing it for a few minutes. More importantly, they don't have to obey human laws about how/when/where we can get food, and what we are allowed to use as food.
I'm not sure if the story's a step in the right direction or not. This country sure needs to get rid of a lot of heavyhanded, silly laws, that unnecessarily restrict freedom, based on some person's opinion or disgust at another person's supposedly cruel practices.
I mean.... what could be more cruel to a living thing than killing it(?)
but not cops? Why can we gather evidence of animal abuse by videoing farmers, but we cannot gather evidence of human abuse by law enforcement?
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
I am a huge supporter of anti-animal abuse as anyone but your facts are not really correct.
Predators often go for a quick efficient kill, but to learn how to do this they often spend time "playing" with their food while they are growing up and if an animal is down but not dead then they do not have a problem simply starting to eat as a animal is not going to get away if its entrails are hanging out.
And if we want to be complete then I could mention that many predatory bugs and fungi kill in excruciatingly gruesome fashions.
In summery animal predators do not really care one iota about their prays comfort, they simply are not ever sadistic without a really good reason.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
This sounds a lot like the push to outlaw the recording of cops in order to prevent exposure of their brutality.
Since it is currently inconvenient to create one set of laws for the privileged and another for the plebs, they are trying to deny the people access to anything that can be used to oppose them, including in the court of law.
They are generally heifers and steers. (Except for veal which is obviously calves.)
But they are not being made less valuable because no one is aware of what is happening. Free markets require transparency. If people want to eat diseased meat, go right ahead, but they should be able to know that's what they're eating. All these groups are doing is bringing a meager amount of transparency to an opaque industry. If everyone could see what is happening at many large factory farms, the industry would change overnight.
Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
He doesn't have to define humane - it's already defined into law. A law that livestock operators know well, and are responsible for obeying.
And in this case it wasn't healthy, pampered cows being slaughtered for food, it was a bunch of sick, frostbitten, starved calves that had been so poorly cared for, they were bludgeoned to death and dumped. I think only a psychopath would not agree that behavior is inhumane and unacceptable.
a law was proposed which would make it illegal to film or photograph a farm as well.
The problem is customers have grown to appreciate the warm wool pulled over their eyes that depicts farms as wholesome, good, and kindhearted.
A place where animals die of natural causes and everyone attends church on sundays.
The average consumer doesnt understand high density/high intensity farming and agriculture and when prompted, generally does not care to learn about it.
the educated consumer understands high density/high intensity farming and agriculture, but still readily retreats to his Pepperidge farm fantasy.
The facts stand and yet we ignore them in the pursuit of ever larger quarter pounders and ever more delicious ribs.
A factory farm is a hell mouth, strewn with feces six-inches deep and animals literally one foot in the grave.
chickens are too bloated from hormones to stand, cows too drugged to care about the gaping abscess that was once an eye,
pigs boiled alive in pursuit of shaving seconds from a cycle time on a machine
and immigrant labor too illegal to question a single action or decision for fear of losing their american dream.
once in a while, just every so often, an undercover PETA investigation might bring light to these torture engines.
workers may find comfort in this as a means to perhaps ending the suffering they witness daily but even with this bills defeat, the fact remains:
consumers blissfully ignorant will fill in the blanks and avoid the truth;
effectively marching lockstep in the corporate machine of factory farming.
and if you dont care to know where your brisket or tenderloin or chicken nugget comes from, you have no right to contest your cancer, low sperm count, obesity and heart disease.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Natural predators strive for a clean, efficient kill,
Uh, I've seen enough nature videos with big cats munching on the guts of an ungulate that's STILL BREATHING ON THE GROUND BENEATH THEM to know that they really don't give much of a rat's ass about anything other than what's for lunch.
No it's not.
I live in Iowa, and wrote my legislators about this, very angry, when I first heard about it. It's ridiculous.
The legal line of reasoning goes like this:
1. A farm is private property. You should have to have permission to film on private property (at least inside the property), and activists generally don't have that permission.
2. Activists lie on their job applications to get a job. So it's fraud too.
3. Therefore, there should be a separate law against applying for a job to film video on farms without permission. Filming farms without permission itself should also be against the law regardless of whether you have a job.
As far as I'm concerned, if the video is true, it is legal and protected free speech. Lying on a job application or not is a separate issue.
In either case, you don't need a separate law.
Defamation would be if you were presenting a falsehood about the farm as true, and it caused harm to the farm.
Message to the GOP: I want my #^$(** party back. Also, just because you don't agree with something, or it hurts your feelings, doesn't mean it should be against the law. Grow a pair and have some fucking courage to deal with diversity of opinion.
Moooo cares?
Whether it is some demented jerk causing needless suffering to animals or a cop who abuses his position everyone seems to really hate decency and fair play. It is time we encourage every individual to film and voice record as much as they can, everywhere. Today we saw a congressman resign over sending pics on the net. I for one make him look like a lily white virgin. Probably half the people in America get funky in some "non- approved way". How about all the tender heads get used to their own actions and words being available for all the world to see? If you do it or say it why not own up to it? Maybe you'll find out you are just like everyone else.
Soon IR devices in barns will be able to shut off video recording equipment.
outlawing lions from playing with the gazelles
Other animals torture their prey. Therefore, it's "okay" (whatever that means, since morality is subjective anyway) if we do it!
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Elzar: We've got a wonderful grizzly bear that's been dipped in cornmeal and lightly tormented. Questions?
Amy: What was the bear's name?
Elzar: Jojo.
Amy: Ooh, I'll have him.
Defamation only works if the evidence isn't true, just like libel. If they dead beat animals to death, it's the truth, not a de-faming of the accused.
Litigation to sue the activists would certainly fail, unless it was contrived or staged. If it wasn't, then animal cruelty charges apply and I hope they stick.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Does stabbing them with pitch-forks and gouging out their eyes help the meat taste better?
I don't know, do you? Maybe a "lightly tortured" entree really would be more delicious.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Does a cow have a Buddha nature?
The fear and pain seeps into the meat making it that much more delicious.
Maybe a "lightly tortured" entree really would be more delicious.
It's called "veal."
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
If you are not doing anything wrong you don't have anything to fear.
Its all about the almighty dollar - go read up on HR254 Sludge Labeling bill - u're tonites dinner was probably grown in sewage.
Yum.
And we wonder why we have MRSA in meat and EColi in our sprouts.
"At present, RKI says the possibility of human introduction of the E. coli pathogen into the sprouts at the farm can't be ruled out" is just a nice way of saying human turds were probably to blame.
Bon appetit.
why is it that always republicans are behind the gravest, dastardliest shit, and they are behind less dastardly shit with a democrat close to their aisle ?
a while ago, i heard that mccain and 30 other republican senators opposed a bill which would prevent companies from putting clauses into their contracts that would prevent female employees from suing the company if they were raped in company's employ overseas by company employees. that included john mccain, the presidential candidate. the justification was 'we think it is wrong to tell businesses how to do business'. so, its ok if a company legislates rape in its overseas operations by putting a clause in its contracts ?
what the fuck is wrong with republicans ?
Simple. They like gang rape. They are opposed to abortions.
You work it out.
Are they trying to breed more republicans?
The right to privacy is a basic human ri.....oh. Right.
This isn't really about defamation though, their argument is that the activists are seeking employment under false premises, and that this should be considered a form of fraud.
...if it's true? Pretty sure it isn't. Seems kind of like trying to manipulate and say that a tree falling in the woods *doesn't* make a sound, just because nobody heard it. We all know that's not the case.
The farms don't want the cruelty investigations to stop.
They just want it restricted to bona fide undercover police agents whose political bosses are easier to bribe.
Think about why kobe beef is renowned for its flavor. In japan, they treat their cattle like royalty.
My guess is that stressing the animals is bad simply because it makes the meat taste worse.
Farmers should be humane to the livestock out of simple self interest.
Fraud is already illegal. If it was really fraud, they could use that law too. All these people are doing is video-taping a farm. If the activists destroyed property, exposed trade-secrets, or were causing a national security concern, then it's fine to criminalize it. But here, the conceptually no different than a farm worker who goes home and tells his wife and a few friends about the horrible things he saw. The only difference is that these activists can tell many more people.
Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
The naturalistic fallacy once more in the GPs post. Seems to be quite popular lately. You can't derive an ethical rule from the fact that something happens in a certain way in "nature":
Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
Mu.
(It's a Buddhist joke Mods.)
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
"Natural predators strive for a clean, efficient kill."
My domestic cats disagree.
This is hardly *protection* for the cows, now is it? It's protection for the people who mistreat them. Could we have a headline that doesn't try to editorialize an issue about citizen journalism and animal rights into one about privacy?
It may be useful to read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. It is a book about the horrors of the meatpacking industry back in the beginning of the 20th C.
Things have changed quite a lot, but believing that change is comprehensive requires an expectation that actual conditions are frequently reported without feat of reprisal, and that appropriate action is then taken.
I have a suspicion that corporate interests have conspired to make opaque the ingredients and methods used in fast food and even supermarket meats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair
Your are correct.
We humans have to manipulate cows to be easier on the mind. Or grief
We breed them to eat them. There ancestors are extinct because they where massive and could kill us.
It is a bit like dogs. There no longer wolfs and suited to the wild.
All that seems to matter now is sustainability. Not the cows. If we need cows to survive we breed em on mass. If not they go extinct or become pets.
Cows are property. All human rights are rooted in property rights. Property rights are not the rights of the property itself, but an extension of the rights of the owner of the property. The State of Iowa has not "rejected privacy rights for cows"; it has rejected the property rights of the cows' owners.
Part of the Second American Revolution!
A psychopath just DID argue on those specific points. You don't have to think anything.
so, its ok if 2 people make a slave contract ? is that how it works ? or, if 2 people reestablish feudalism in between themselves ?
Read radical news here
In many cases the "Animal Cruelty" being documented is staged by the activist doing the filming. That is where defamation comes into play. What most non-farm people don't seem to realize is that the livestock on a farm are the farmer's livelihood. If you rely on your truck to make a living, do you abuse your truck? The same thing goes for livestock. Once in awhile something bad will occur and a mercy killing or emergency medical responses can look like abuse if you don't know what actually happened.
I grew up on a livestock/grain farm and it makes no sense to me that so many people believe farmers could consider animals to have no value. The animals are the value of a farm. You take care of them or you go out of business. Sure, there is always some dumb dick who beats an animal. As stated before, these people learn or they go bankrupt.
of what ?
two additional dicks ? two additional assholes ?
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/06/201161664828302638.html
ironic that how much of radiation goes towards usa, the country which built the power plants.
Read radical news here
I think I understand that there are occasional problems, and putting down an animal might look like cruelty when it's not.
There is some weight given, however, to animals that are kept in truly inhuman conditions, mutilated, confined, and unable to live any kind of life associated with its species. This sort of problem lays between what you describe and the other end of zealotry.
Staging evidence, however, is as evil as what it portrays, if not more so. That said, there is no legal pass that's needed to be given to farmers, as they're protected. If they didn't do what's described, then they're defamed. If they did-- they're not. There are mitigating circumstances as you describe. That has to be understood within the context of the litigation at hand. With luck, real evidence is understood within the confines of circumstances.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
animal protection laws?! how about fraud, libel, contempt of court...
And what are we going to do? Charge farmers who beat cows to death with violent murder, and put them on death row?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Seems like a rather extreme solution, doesn't it? In the US, we have random inspections in many places. Farms with >50 in a herd sound like good candidates.
Charge farmers with murder? Are you kidding?
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
They're being raised for meat. I don't see how this is a crime.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
They're animals, and deserve to be treated humanely. Beating a dog produces pain; so does beating a cow. Cows are used for meat, it's true, but they don't deserve torture or mistreatment.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
> Farmers should be humane to the livestock out of simple self interest.
Most farmers are. When cattle are your livelihood, you have to treat them as well as possible. Any injuries, sickness, etc. as a result of abuse only lead to lesser profits and ultimately a farm that goes out of business. You simply cannot afford to abuse your animals, even if you wanted to.
The one exception seems to be massive corporate farms where it is impossible to ensure every last employee cares for the animals and any abuse is not noticeable to the bottom line because of the scale. While I certainly do not condone the abuse, I do feel consumers also need to do their part in choosing their vendors carefully.
That's a bit of a stoopid response. The vast majority of farm workers aren't also the owners. They're people being paid shit, and being treated like shit, and then passing the shit downhill on to the livestock they work with. They couldn't give a hairy fuck about the profitability of the giant corporations they work for, in just the same way that employees who drive for a living tend not to take anywhere near as good care of the coach / van etc they're driving as they do of their personal vehicle.
By the way, do you have any actual evidence to back up your statement that "in many cases the "Animal Cruelty" being documented is staged by the activist doing the filming"? You know, like court cases or well-documented media reports?
"Legal" and "Right" are two different things, and the separation is important. You can't be arrested for cheating on your wife.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I love my red meat very much, thank you, but I prefer to see it tenderized after death. What kind of sick fucks will beat cows to deqth, and what would prompt them to do it in the first place?
I used neither word. "Moral" might be a good word to use. In the context of the original post, however, mistreatment of animals is a punishable offense. And for good reason: it's both illegal, and immoral.
If you can't agree that abusing animals isn't right, then we have no further possibility of civil discussion.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Yet our Constitution gives us protection from unwarranted search and that means this sort of case in addition to police breaking down your door.
So... is it time for burgers yet?
^ this - i wish i had mod points, but all i can do is "^ this"
I dunno. Let's slap you around a bit and see if you're tender yet.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
It's a moo point. Yeah, it's like a cow's opinion. It just doesn't matter. It's moo.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Why does the the submission mention Seattle PI?
Did an editor remove a Seattle PI link?
If it's staged by the activist, won't they been on film doing the deed? And if they've become what they most hate, hmmmm... sounds like a cheap sci-fi or fantasy film plot.
why is there a law for this ? oh wait - i know. because when the forefathers of republican mindset (although they were named different then - were going to be democrats) caused a civil war which they have lost, when someone attempted to put out a law banning slavery.
so, your logic is, we should start a war this time too ?
Read radical news here