Causecast

by PHILIP ROSS, Causecast Editor

Dog fighting is illegal in all 50 states of the U.S. So why would the Supreme Court dismiss convictions against a man whose videos celebrate this barbarous practice?

In 1999, the Supreme Court passed a law prohibiting the creation, sale, or possession of depictions of animal cruelty. That same law is being debated today in a case involving a man named Robert Stevens, who has produced and sold dog fighting videos. Claiming that the law is too broad and pointing out that hunting videos could be considered illegal under such restrictions, Stevens’ legal team calls for a revision of the ten-year-old statute. It is for this reason that the Supreme Court dropped the charges against Stevens. Justice Antonin Scalia declared his ill-received belief that dog fighting may be protected under the First Amendment. As Scalia stated, “it’s not up to the government to decide what are people’s worst instincts.”

I would hope that any sensible individual would recognize the cruelty of forced animal violence and the necessity of prohibitive laws to stop it. In my book, that includes the promotion of such activity through celebratory documentations and exalted depictions. Dogs, most notably pit bulls, are conditioned to kill and trained to fight all for the pleasure of the people who find this practice entertaining. Gambling is an integral part of this practice, heightening the thrill that dog fight attendees experience. And this sort of ritualistic production of animal violence is not limited to our canine companions; cock fighting and bull fighting also have big followings.

So the question remains: should people like Stevens, who produce such brutal videos, be convicted along the same guidelines as, let’s say, a child pornographer? Also on the debate plate is the question of whether or not spectators at such events, who often pay admission and participate in the gambling, should also be charged as felons.

Organization like the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) are working to strengthen the effectiveness of animal cruelty laws, as well as the severity of the punishment for offenders of those laws.

With the Supreme Court most likely delaying decision-making on the matter until next Spring, this leaves us plenty of time to not only further the dialogue on the issue: Should free speech play a role in the discussion? How severe should the punishments be for participating in dog fights and cock fights?

If you want to take action to end animal cruelty and the people who are making money off animal suffering, you can help the HSUS by writing letters to law enforcement agencies and prosecutors and judges voicing your support of anti-dog fighting legislation. For these animals, we’re their only line of defense. We can fight, so they don’t have to.

Photo by blhphotography, flickr.