With the Supreme Court’s decision Tuesday to nix a law criminalizing the production and sale of dog-fighting and crush videos, Hair Balls is nervously waiting to see if there’s going to be a big local boom in the Houston market. After all, Harris County prosecutors are remarkably soft on dog-fighting, so we wonder what — from a degenerate scum-sucking psychopath’s perspective — the harm would be for a budding cellphone-Spielberg to film some hot pit-on-pit action to download and sell after the match. (Well, after cleaning the blood off his clothes and then downloading it).
Being one of them media types, Hair Balls has a special place in our heart for freedom of speech. Of all the amendments, the first is one of our faves, so we’re especially sensitive to anything that could threaten it. And while we’re truly glad The Men and Women in Black are ever-vigilant when it comes to freedom of speech, we’re scratching our heads a bit over the logic used in their decision to void the law in question. Specifically, the part explaining why the distribution and sale of child porn, unlike dog-killin’, is not protected: Mainly that kiddie porn vids are “intrinsically related to the sexual abuse of children” and are therefore “a proximate link to the crime from which [they] came.”
We understand the Court’s argument about the law being overbroad, but how on earth is the sale of a dog-fighting video not “intrinsically related” to the dog fight itself? Understandably, the Bureau of Animal Regulation and Care animals featured in this week’s edition are nervous about the decision as well. We asked them to share their thoughts.
CHAUNCEY A1016344
“To the ladies and gentlemen of the court, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks. As a stray three-year-old pitbull, I was especially interested in how you would address United States v. Stevens. As you may or may not know, my brothers and sisters are often made to rip each other’s throats out for sport, while a bunch of thugs and inbred mutant rednecks gamble on the outcome. But we understand your concern that some prosecutor somewhere, at some point in time, might confuse a dog fight with pheasant hunting and therefore incarcerate some poor hunter. So my hat’s off to you. In closing, I’d just like to say that while I would never bite you, I invite each and every one of you to bite me.”
JOEY A1015736
“Yo, Antonin, how’s it hangin’? Joey here. Eighteen-month old stray
rottie. I, too, would like to say thanks for your wise counsel. In
2003, you dissented in Lawrence v. Texas, showing that you would not be
a stooge for the Homosexual Agenda. As far as you were concerned, it
Texas, it should have remained illegal for two consenting dudes to get
it on in the privacy of their home. So, just so we have this clear: two
dudes can’t bone behind closed doors, because that’s an illegal act;
but they can record a separate illegal act and then sell it?
So as long as they aren’t jerking each other off while a coupla dogs
tear each other to bits, everything’s kosher? OK. Cool. Just checkin’.
Dick.”
BISCUIT A1015966 (2-year-old female pit)
“I concur with Joey.”
LILY A1015252 (1-year-old stray lab mix)
“Dear Justice Alito: We don’t usually agree, but I am grateful for
your prescience in this matter. I don’t mean to be forward, but can I
lick your face?”
BOBBY A1016175
“Hello, wise Latina, et. al; just wanted to say I enjoyed this
decision almost as much as having my testicles removed. As a stray
three-year-old lab, I thought I’d sit in here forever because no one
would want to break the law by recording me getting my face eaten off
by another dog. But you’ve given me hope, and for that I’m eternally in
your debt. Oh, by the way, I’m being facetious.”
BOSLEY A1015524 (1-year-old stray)
“I really don’t see what’s wrong with watching dog-fight videos. The guys and I do it all the time.”
TUCKER A1016123 (3-year-old stray)
“WHEW! Let me just say how much of a relief it is to not have to
hide my crush-stash anymore! Hey, just ’cause I’m neutered doesn’t mean
I don’t like to watch a fine woman in stilettos step all over a puppy.
Thank you all for protecting my liberties.”
JONAH A1016007 (3-year-old stray)
“Hey Justices — y’all know what a crush video is, right? You do? Word. Just wanted to make sure.”
RUDY A1015758
“Great. Now I’m gonna freak out every time some lady with high heels
comes in. I hope all eight of you come back as stray cats in the next
life.”
PEPPA A1021146 (stray kitten)
“Dear SCOTUS, I’m but a wee lass, but I’m just so fortunate to have
been born at a time when both conservatives and liberals can agree on
one thing. I just wish that one thing kinda hadn’t been the right to
own a video where a woman in spiked heels steps on a defenseless animal
over and over. And over. And over. And over. And over.”
Thanks as always to crack photographer Robyn Arouty, whose new website rules. And there are still PetSmart gift cards available!
This article appears in Apr 15-21, 2010.
