[fieryone]

From the article: "Last year, however, a federal appeals court declared the law unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. The judges said the protection for free speech includes depictions of even illegal activity."

Simply possessing child porn, whether you personally took the photos or video or not is also illegal and they wouldn't even dream of using the "free speech" angle on that, so why do they do it here? It's the same thing. Both things are abhorrent and both things lead to even more dangerous behavior down the road. I don't get it. Except that animal lives will never be as important as human lives in the eyes of the law. Even if studies do show that animal cruelty very often does lead to human cruelty.