An American animal rights group has launched legal action seeking to grant chimpanzees “legal personhood” , in order to overhaul treatment of the animals in captivity.I wonder who their attorney is..?
“Our goal is, very simply, to breach the legal wall that separates all humans from all nonhuman animals,” the Nonhuman Rights Project said.
“Once this wall is breached, the first nonhuman animals on earth will gain legal “personhood” and finally get their day in court — a day they so clearly deserve.”But wait! If they succeed...
Why, that means they'd be subject to our laws? That's going to be fun!
"Somebody call 911!"
The group said New York state was chosen to launch the preceding because of its generally flexible view of requests for a writ of habeas corpus, a centuries-old right in English law used to challenge unlawful detention, by determining that a legal person cannot be the property of another.And this won't get thrown straight out of court because animals aren't people?
Wow! What do they put in the water in that state?
“These are the first cases in an open-ended, strategic litigation campaign. We're just going to keep filing suits.”I wonder how they can afford to do this?
16 comments:
But wait! If they succeed.. the killing of animals for the fun of it or sport or culture or whatever those cruel bastards with rifles call it maybe be ended.
It's not as crazy as it seems
I tell you Rickie, you get a fucking polar bear, or a walrus in your back garden, you may think about that rifle again!
(And YES, we DID have exactly that stiuation in Svalbard.)
" whatever those cruel bastards with rifles call it maybe be ended."
Actually anyone hunting with a rifle is almost certainly not cruel. That's the point of using a rifle and not a handgun nor bows and arrows. Without wanting to get technical and discuss calibres and velocities, and put very very simply; by the time bambi hears the shot he's dead or losing consciousness so fast he might as well be.
Sounds like any episode of Boston Legal spotlighting James Spader in court.
If this is a show you haven't seen Julia I recommend it. Legal arguments are utterly chaotic - yet perfectly rational - and the court scenes are hilarious.
But wait, there's more...
Giving animals "Personhood" status, means that Stabby McChav and his pitbull Fang, is no longer young Stabbys possession.
So if Fang is roaming the streets and gets involved in an altercation with another of "Personhood" status, he would have the right to a fair trial, and could not be "Put down" as we no longer have the death penalty on the statute books, and what's more Young Stabby could not be held accountable as he wasn't there.
This also brings up Fangs right to benefits, and his right to free healthcare. Not to mention the tax status of sheep dogs/guide dogs/police dogs, and scales of pay under the minimum wage legislation. Would doggy years be in effect, or human years?
These bozos have not really thought this through have they?
Good idea not wanting to discuss calibres and velocities or even polar bears cos if you kill animals for the fun of it then its cruel no matter how you dress it up.
@Budvar...it don't mean that, although its obvious morons with rifles will mock protection of animals because they think the end is in sight for their Neanderthal fun.
I wouldn't worry to much, hunting is still the hobby of the rich and powerful and is unlikely to be ended, infact that tosser El rey de Espana was president of WWF and still wanted to shoot bloody elephants
Well I hunt, and I live on a sink estate in a northern mill town...
"... hunting is still the hobby of the rich and powerful ..."
I don't know what world you live in but in the one I live hunting is overwhelmingly a working class hobby. I'm speaking of the U.S., but also Canada and Australia.
Over here in the UK its the hobby of the upper classes to go hunting or those who aspire to be a couple of notches higher in their social status, the working class generally go and find the killed prey with the help of dogs if it is birds they are killing.
The working class also used to help out by carrying trays of finest sherry to the upper class hunters on horseback who were hunting foxes, and also made themselves useful by providing sandwiches and nice cakes back at the big house after the hunt.
Hunting deer would be on private land owned by rich landowners who aint going to have any old chav on his land, the working class get involved again by chasing the chav poachers off the lord of the manors land.
Infact working classes who are usually involved in hunting are like modern day slaves of rich landowners they rent houses from them and work for them too, and will defend hunting and bow and scrape infront of their masters.
The working class don't hunt here.
@Budvar, you may dress like a hunter and drive huntsmen around and clean their leather boots and fetch them drinks...that aint hunting
XX
Rickie said...
I wouldn't worry to much, hunting is still the hobby of the rich and powerful XX
Bloody rubbish!
I am neither, and have been hunting since I was 8 or 9 years old, in Britain, Sweden, Norway, and now Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Poland, czech republik, Slovakia, France, and Belgium.
Ah that explains it, Student Grant (Rickie) believes that the only definition of "Hunting" here in UK is a load of pretentious social climbers on horseback, chasing a fox over the landscape.
I have no interest in horses whatsoever.
I don't really have a problem with it, and I'm against the ban.
The reason I'm against it is, that it's a thin end of the wedge thing, and eventually it'll end up banning some bloke who dangles a line in the canal on a weekend.
I hunt with guns, and ferrets, but I'm no longer allowed to hunt with the lurchers. See the hunting with dogs ban above.
I'm of the belief that you kill it you eat it. there are exceptions mind, I draw the line at foxes, mink and rats. Vermin has to be culled, and shooting is much more humane than indiscriminate poisoning.
Student Grant (Rickie) believes that the only definition of "Hunting" here in UK is a load of pretentious social climbers on horseback, chasing a fox over the landscape.
Even that is nonsense. My sisters used to go 'hunting' with the local fox hunt, and we came from a decidedly working class family.
Of course, in all the years they went 'hunting', they never actually caught a fox. Got a lot of exercise and a good excuse for a booze-up, though.
Back on the original topic, I suspect this is just another example of the left trying to destroy the rule of law so we'll all rise up and demand they take over the world and tell us what to do.
Oh btw Rickie, I hunt with a bow and all my fellows in the field in France, Portugal, Spain etc. are decidedly working class; the 'toffs' are the pretentious wankers who poo poo us but dont have the jam to say much to our faces, bit like you really.
Tell you what, why dont you come with us next time we go after boar, you might enjoy yourself and if you decided the boar (two hundred pounds of pissed off pig) is being opressed or whatever, you can take its place; I do hear that 'long pig' is the sweetest meat of all.
To all the PETA types who think animals will be so much better treated when they gain "personhood", I have three little words for you: "Court of Protection".
"... sport or culture or whatever those cruel bastards with rifles call it ..."
I call it sport. Otherwise, it's poaching. Or, occasionally, self-defence.
"Actually anyone hunting with a rifle is almost certainly not cruel. That's the point of using a rifle and not a handgun nor bows and arrows."
Done properly, bow hunting kills as quickly & cleanly as any rifle.
"Sounds like any episode of Boston Legal spotlighting James Spader in court."
Ha ha! Yes! :) I loved that show.
"These bozos have not really thought this through have they?"
Do they ever?
"I wouldn't worry to much, hunting is still the hobby of the rich and powerful ..."
Not so. As you can see..
"The working class don't hunt here."
Clearly, they do.
"... I suspect this is just another example of the left trying to destroy the rule of law..."
Spot on! They care about animals as much as they know about them. Which is very little.
"To all the PETA types who think animals will be so much better treated when they gain "personhood", I have three little words for you: "Court of Protection"."
Good point!
Post a Comment