Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

ksl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#81

Post by caminante »

averagewall wrote: post #7

How is it ever legal to break into a business's property and secretly video the operations? You surely can't sneak into a factory and record their processes to sell to China. Is it only allowed when it's being used for protesting, not for stealing IP? Or only on farms but not in factories? What about trespass law? Non-disclosure agreements for employees? Are those invalid?

BTW, I found your question objective and productive for discussion as evidenced by the responses.

It's unfortunate that you got downvoted.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#82

Post by mikeyouse »

riffraff wrote: post #71
cageface wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people aren’t comfortable watching animals being slaughtered maybe they shouldn’t eat them.

People should know how the meat industry works but this reasoning seems extreme. I am not comfortable watching women give birth, that doesn't mean I shouldn't have children.

I think this is confusing the availability of video with the forced viewing of video.

If you're not comfortable watching a woman give birth, you can choose to avoid the many thousands of available videos. You don't have that option with factory farming methods.

Nobody wants to watch animals being slaughtered on an assembly line, but they should absolutely have the option to see what happens with their food. I don't think there's any moral room for "It would be disgusting and probably harm their business, so we shouldn't film it."

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#83

Post by [deleted] »

riffraff wrote: post #71
cageface wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people aren’t comfortable watching animals being slaughtered maybe they shouldn’t eat them.

People should know how the meat industry works but this reasoning seems extreme. I am not comfortable watching women give birth, that doesn't mean I shouldn't have children.

[deleted]

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#84

Post by [deleted] »

code_duck wrote: post #53
downandout wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but what I was referring to was this: The Utah Legislature approved a bill in 2012 that made it a class B misdemeanor to trespass on private livestock or poultry operations and record sound or images without the owner's permission. So this particular law seems like a solution without a problem, given that trespassing for any reason is already illegal.

In the statute, actually they specifically list reasons that make your presence a trespass. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter6/76-6-S206.html?v=... Entering property for just any reason doesn't count as trespass... you need to have some sort of malicious intent, and stay despite being reasonably warned (including by signs or a fence) that your presence is not welcome.

[deleted]

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#85

Post by undersuit »

briandear wrote: post #64

Yet it is interesting that the undercover Planned Parenthood video guys where prosecuted. I am curious if the same sort of activists that applaud this decision also support anti-Planned Parenthood filmers. The cynic in me would offer that very few activists actually care about free speech – only that their speech is free. It might seem that we are all hypocrites to some degree.

>“The public knows the real criminals are Planned Parenthood and their business partners,” Daleiden said.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/03/29/felony...

Abortions are not illegal in the US, nor is receiving a medical consultation on an abortion. The Planned Parenthood video guys weren't exposing a crime.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#86

Post by undersuit »

mondoshawan wrote: post #57
bitJericho wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't count on anybody in the us coming to your rescue when you need them. People working in the us government only work for themselves.

Except your fellow humans. We're not all bad.

Huamns, of which Cops and all law enforcement are part of.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#87

Post by SwellJoe »

tomjen3 wrote: post #68
colanderman wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, application of law must be blind to speech. Yes, trespassing with intent to burgle could lawfully have a greater penalty. Trespassing while shouting "Trump has tiny hands" cannot. This is what "free speech and equal protection" means, and the courts have decided that this applies here.

Wouldn't the limit be that you said something? Eg. if I come into your home and yell something loudly enough to wake you up and destroy your nights sleep, then that should have a higher penalty than just coming into your home?

What? That's among the weirdest approaches to justifying restrictions on speech I've heard, and it'd be used to ridiculous end if any court took that position.

I mean, I could claim anything upset me enough to cause me to lose sleep, couldn't I? I'm feeling pretty upset right now that someone could say something like what you've said, in fact. I might not be able to sleep knowing there are folks who feel that way.

And, that is effectively what these laws are about; the industrial agriculture industry wants to be completely free from criticism and free from being seen committing crimes. They already have the protection of the law when it comes to breaking and entering, trespassing, etc. They want law that goes beyond that and shields them from any criticism. Which is not a right we in the US have; we can sue for libel, but we cannot demand that people not say true things about us that are unflattering or upsetting to us.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#88

Post by bitJericho »

mondoshawan wrote: post #57
bitJericho wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't count on anybody in the us coming to your rescue when you need them. People working in the us government only work for themselves.

Except your fellow humans. We're not all bad.

It takes a special kind of asshole that wants to be a cop.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#89

Post by RodericDay »

sctb wrote: post #79
RodericDay wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're a Trump supporter, and defend decisions such as his travel ban, and call people proposing a higher minimum wage "unhinged". I'm surprised that you're appalled by someone making a crass generalization. Maybe you only notice these kinds of vulgar pronunciations when they target things that are popular with right wingers?

This kind of incendiary personal attack is just about the last thing we need here. Please don't do this again.

So his shallow tonal dismissal is fair game, but an identificarion of a pattern which undermines it is unlawful ad-hominem?

Seems like cargo cult moderation to me.

Re: Judge rules Utah law banning undercover farm filming is unconstitutional

#90

Post by wildmusings »

RodericDay wrote: post #89
sctb wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of incendiary personal attack is just about the last thing we need here. Please don't do this again.

So his shallow tonal dismissal is fair game, but an identificarion of a pattern which undermines it is unlawful ad-hominem? Seems like cargo cult moderation to me.

I was very bothered that you totally misrepresented my comment about the minimum wage. I never called anyone unhinged. I called the proposal unhinged from reality, because it doesn't take into account the economic reality of rural and small town America. There's a big difference between attacking an idea and attacking the people proposing it. Not to mention that that the word "unhinged" itself has a very different meaning when calling a proposal "unhinged from reality" than when calling a person "unhinged".
Post reply on HN