The Omaha World-Herald ran an excellent anti-Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty editorial in early June. Citing the revulsion that many Americans had at the extremist turn that the anti-abortion movement began to take, the Omaha World-Herald points out that animal right activists have gone way beyond the tactics used by the anti-abortion extremists.
Huntingdon Life Sciences, a New Jersey lab that tests pharmaceuticals on animals, is one target of such tactics. But the animal-rights activists in this case (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty or SHAC) are not targeting Huntingdon directly. They’ve gone after the employees of companies that simply do business with Huntingdon.
An executive of a computer software company that sold software to the lab, for instance: His neighborhood was plastered with photos of a mutilated dog. His home and work telephone numbers were posted on a Web site that exhorted activists to call him day and night.
. . .
SHAC and other activists say they oppose violence against any animal, including humans. But SHAC organizer Kevin Jonas said he wouldn’t condemn others who turn to property damage or violence: “I think there’s a time and a place for every action.” The group’s Web site posts home addresses of the targets and urgers protesters to try to embarrass them.
The Omaha World-Herald compares the activities of groups like SHAC to those of the anti-abortion Justice Files, except a major difference is that SHAC goes to much greater lengths to facilitate terrorism and reprisals against those it targets than the Justice Files ever did. The Justice Files ultimately won its case at the Supreme Court precisely because it never engaged in the sort of incitement activities that SHAC does on a regular basis. It is not likely to find courts as friendly to a First Amendment defense as the Justice Files folks ultimately did.
Source:
Scare tactics: Environmental activists’ new ploys are terrorism, not free speech. Omaha World-Herald, June 4, 2003.