Exposing Animal Abuse: Stop The Cameras!

DEBORAH CHEN
Copy Editor

Undercover videos have long been used as a form of gaining insight into what otherwise would have remained hidden information. Animal rights activists sneak hidden cameras into farms and slaughterhouses to publicly reveal how workers mistreat animals. Recently, a legislation to halt these undercover videos was proposed in at least five states and is expected to be introduced in three other states.
Animal rights activists have every right to be concerned for the safety and treatment of animals. It does, however, become a problem when they resort to illegal methods to expose the abuse animals endure. Using hidden cameras is definitely not the appropriate way to disclose animal cruelty to the rest of the community.
Last year, a video was taken at a California slaughterhouse that showed the workers using electric prods on cattle that could barely walk.
In 2011, an undercover video at a turkey farm revealed that workers were kicking and stomping on birds—some of them with exposed flesh and open wounds.
Using electric prods and abusing birds is morally wrong and should not be tolerated, but hiding cameras to expose their cruel actions is not ethical either. Though it may be argued that the use of undercover videos is considerably more efficient in the exposure of what occurs at some slaughterhouses and farms, it is against the law and a violation of privacy.
How would you feel if someone planted cameras in your home without your consent or knowledge? You’d probably leap into a fit of rage. Infringing on any person’s privacy is a very serious offense and should not be condoned by anyone, no matter the intent.
Though animal rights activists may argue that it is their best option to uncover the animal abusers’ atrocious behavior, I argue otherwise. There are other steps that can be taken that do not break the law. For instance, there are numerous organizations that deal with animal cruelty of various kinds, such as the Department of Justice, the American Animal Hospital Association and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
While investigators will acknowledge reports of any kind of animal abuse, they are more likely to follow up if there are credible witnesses present that are willing to verify the report and testify, if necessary. Therefore, it is crucial for activists to gather as much evidence as possible prior to submitting a report.
People are entitled to their own privacy; therefore, the workers have the right to prosecute the animal activists for infringing on their privacy. Yes, the animal welfare groups do need indisputable proof of animals being afflicted with abuse; however, the legal ramifications of such actions should have crossed their minds. Think before acting upon conscience. Is that really so hard to do?