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

Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

america.aljazeera.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 138 posts

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#41

Post by boomlinde »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #27
boomlinde wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way to miss my point, which is that this law concerns farms specifically and not homes or workplaces in general. I assume that you deliberately misinterpreted me, so what point are you trying to make?

That 'your house' sounded like belittling the parent post. Just sticking up for farm residents. Clearer?

I didn't mean to belittle the parent. "My house" was his example. His argument obviously wasn't that he is living at a farm specifically, but that private property should be protected in general, which i whole-heartedly agree with, but doesn't really support his stance on privacy laws that concern farms only.

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#44

Post by valleyer »

cscurmudgeon wrote: post #3
cdoxsey wrote: post #2

Makes sense. A farm is private property. You don't have the right to come into my house or my place of work and film me. (Even if you suspect I'm doing something wrong) Also makes sense that falsifying a resume in order to do so would be illegal.

There are already trespassing laws which prevent that. This is just plain thuggery.

I don't understand what you mean by "thuggery" here. Can you explain?

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#45

Post by bobjordan »

ama729 wrote: post #6

Of all things, you would think that the first amendment would protect such a thing, can any lawyer weight on that? > The measure passed Idaho’s Senate earlier in February to the applause of agricultural representatives who said it would help ensure farmers’ right to privacy. There is a certain irony in the US that everyone can get privacy, except private citizen.

I consider myself a far left liberal and I certainly don't condone abusing farm animals. However, taking a paying job under falsified pretenses with a made up resume and then spending your working hours secretly filming internal operations for future public release with the sole goal of harming your employer, that is just sketchy. If you believe in the cause so much that you call it war - well understood. But protected behavior? Bullshit. This behavior should have risk of consequences.

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#46

Post by wmeredith »

bobjordan wrote: post #45
ama729 wrote: post #6

Of all things, you would think that the first amendment would protect such a thing, can any lawyer weight on that? > The measure passed Idaho’s Senate earlier in February to the applause of agricultural representatives who said it would help ensure farmers’ right to privacy. There is a certain irony in the US that everyone can get privacy, except private citizen.

I consider myself a far left liberal and I certainly don't condone abusing farm animals. However, taking a paying job under falsified pretenses with a made up resume and then spending your working hours secretly filming internal operations for future public release with the sole goal of harming your employer, that is just sketchy. If you believe in the cause so much that you call it war - well understood. But protect…

It is not protected behavior. Laws like this bother me because there are already ways to go after these people (fraud, falsifying documents, etc...)

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#47

Post by lprubin »

geekam wrote: post #42

It may sound like a rhetoric question but it is not. Why is the gov. banning filming? What's in it for the gov.?

One side will say that what's in it for the gov is millions of dollars in campaign contributions from big agriculture.

The other side will say that bad publicity for their dairy industry will hurt the state's economy and cost jobs and tax revenue.

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#48

Post by rmc »

bobjordan wrote: post #45
ama729 wrote: post #6

Of all things, you would think that the first amendment would protect such a thing, can any lawyer weight on that? > The measure passed Idaho’s Senate earlier in February to the applause of agricultural representatives who said it would help ensure farmers’ right to privacy. There is a certain irony in the US that everyone can get privacy, except private citizen.

I consider myself a far left liberal and I certainly don't condone abusing farm animals. However, taking a paying job under falsified pretenses with a made up resume and then spending your working hours secretly filming internal operations for future public release with the sole goal of harming your employer, that is just sketchy. If you believe in the cause so much that you call it war - well understood. But protect…

If it's in the public interest and exposes crimes and fraud then it's not as bad.

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#49

Post by Dylan16807 »

Jach wrote: post #37
Dylan16807 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Annoyingly, that description is too vague to tell if it's actual abuse or just 'look at me touch a taboo spot'. And I'd rather not watch the video to find out. The fact that he went to jail doesn't clarify, because he did many other things such as jumping on a cow for an extended period.

If you don't watch the video yourself, how can you trust a description to be accurate, and then form your own opinion on whether such acts (and undercover filming of such acts) should be illegal? I watched it, my own take is that it's nothing special in terms of disturbing material. The other video from PETA linked on this page shows more perverse acts but is also not very disturbing overall. The video on meat.org is…

> If you don't watch the video yourself, how can you trust a description to be accurate, and then form your own opinion on whether such acts (and undercover filming of such acts) should be illegal?

What are you talking about? I explicitly said the description is too vague to make meaningful conclusions about.

Re: Idaho law criminalizes secretly filming on farms

#50

Post by barik »

bobjordan wrote: post #45
ama729 wrote: post #6

Of all things, you would think that the first amendment would protect such a thing, can any lawyer weight on that? > The measure passed Idaho’s Senate earlier in February to the applause of agricultural representatives who said it would help ensure farmers’ right to privacy. There is a certain irony in the US that everyone can get privacy, except private citizen.

I consider myself a far left liberal and I certainly don't condone abusing farm animals. However, taking a paying job under falsified pretenses with a made up resume and then spending your working hours secretly filming internal operations for future public release with the sole goal of harming your employer, that is just sketchy. If you believe in the cause so much that you call it war - well understood. But protect…

I think what's alarming to me is that these actions by private citizens are necessary in the first place.

If the problem is as widespread as the article seems to imply, then I think the industry should be more proactive and formally implement measures (such as allowing third-party but sanctioned "undercover" inspectors) to identify and address these abuses.

But the cynic in me already suspects why the industry would never go for something like this voluntarily.

Post reply on HN