The Animal Enterprise Protection Act gives courts latitude in sentencing animal rights terrorists, but remains largely unused by prosecutors. The author, himself a victim of animal rights terrorism, comments on the Act’s strengths and weaknesses, and challenges the lab animal community to unify in its response.
The intent of the Animal Enterprise Protection Act (the “Act”) of 1992 was to discourage the unlawful disruption of commerce involving animals. As a legal instrument, it is neutral on the issue of animal rights or animal welfare. Instead, it is designed to protect individual owners of animals-particularly businessmen and women, as well as scientists-from domestic and international terrorism at the hands of those individuals and organizations that are radically opposed to the use of nonhuman animals in business and industry.
Today, the protection that was intended to flow from enactment of this legislation is threatened by the proposition of redefining the relationship, legal or otherwise, between humans and nonhuman animals. When considering the future of this legislative tool, it is clear that its utility-the value of which has been questioned since its inception-would be fundamentally eroded if those advocating for extended animal rights or, more drastically, an expansion of the articles of human rights to encompass nonhuman animals, succeed.
– See more at: http://www.naiaonline.org/articles/article/the-animal-enterprise-protection-act-a-scientists-perspective-brings-the-la#sthash.5ImeL07N.dpuf