DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Frank Losey-taking on the hsus

**ThomasMannfanny** · 03-30-2011, 12:25 PM

I think he should be president lol

---------- Post added at 03:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:55 AM ----------

I thought this was pretty interesting....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_..._Terrorism_Act

Basically it prohibits any person from using force, violence, or threats “for the purpose of damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise.”

I could see how this could help innocent animal farms (for meat, eggs, wool, etc.) and other such animal based companies not be forced out of their buisness if they are actually doing things correctly, humanely, and especially health wise because anything coming from a large corporation will affect people all over the world.

But I could def. see how this act would stop anything from being done to companies that, IMO, are causing harm, abuse, and neglect to animals..... which can then lead to world wide spread diseases, and quickly.

So in a way I agree with the act to save the innocent ones but I disagree with the act because it is worded in a way to save even the F-d up ones that should be shut down.
Too be even more understandable, it is worded in a way to save all large animal corporations .... whether the corporation is good or bad. But the act still allows peaceful protests as long as nothing is done about anything and activists are still allowed to voice their opinion lol.
Really, that's pretty damn funny and messed up at the same time.

My question is, why is this act not being used? If the president was somewhat smart, he'd take all of the HSUS's money and put it back into this country productively.

03-30-2011, 12:25 PM	#4
ThomasMannfanny Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 426 Senior Member	I think he should be president lol ---------- Post added at 03:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:55 AM ---------- I thought this was pretty interesting.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_..._Terrorism_Act Basically it prohibits any person from using force, violence, or threats “for the purpose of damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise.” I could see how this could help innocent animal farms (for meat, eggs, wool, etc.) and other such animal based companies not be forced out of their buisness if they are actually doing things correctly, humanely, and especially health wise because anything coming from a large corporation will affect people all over the world. But I could def. see how this act would stop anything from being done to companies that, IMO, are causing harm, abuse, and neglect to animals..... which can then lead to world wide spread diseases, and quickly. So in a way I agree with the act to save the innocent ones but I disagree with the act because it is worded in a way to save even the F-d up ones that should be shut down. Too be even more understandable, it is worded in a way to save all large animal corporations .... whether the corporation is good or bad. But the act still allows peaceful protests as long as nothing is done about anything and activists are still allowed to voice their opinion lol. Really, that's pretty damn funny and messed up at the same time. My question is, why is this act not being used? If the president was somewhat smart, he'd take all of the HSUS's money and put it back into this country productively.
	Quote