I was reading an article about the US Supreme Court hearing a case brought by a man convicted of the crime of selling videos "depicting animal cruelty", specifically videos of dog fights filmed in Japan (where such fights are legal) and of pit bulls being trained on pigs and used for hog hunting.
The part that really surprised me was that the statement that all hunting is illegal in Washington. Can this be true? Here's a link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19scotus.html
"Free Speech Battle Arises From Dog Fighting Videos"
"...The law applies to audio and video recordings of “conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded or killed.” It does not matter whether the conduct was legal when and where it occurred so long as it would have been illegal where the recording was sold.
That means it may be a crime for an American to sell a video of a bullfight that took place in Spain, where bullfighting is legal. And because all hunting is illegal in Washington, a literal reading of the statute would make the sale of hunting videos illegal here..."
The part that really surprised me was that the statement that all hunting is illegal in Washington. Can this be true? Here's a link to the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/us/19scotus.html
"Free Speech Battle Arises From Dog Fighting Videos"
"...The law applies to audio and video recordings of “conduct in which a living animal is intentionally maimed, mutilated, tortured, wounded or killed.” It does not matter whether the conduct was legal when and where it occurred so long as it would have been illegal where the recording was sold.
That means it may be a crime for an American to sell a video of a bullfight that took place in Spain, where bullfighting is legal. And because all hunting is illegal in Washington, a literal reading of the statute would make the sale of hunting videos illegal here..."