[at bay]

The problem with your analogy is that there is no evidence that Sea Shepherd has UNLAWFULLY assaulted anyone. Nor has their harrassment been deemed unlawful, probably because the weight of the law is against the poachers.

Let’s say Roe v Wade is amended. The States may only perform abortions for scientific research. A clinic in Kansas starts doing 3rd trimester abortions in the name of scientific research. The rest of the country abides by the spirit of the law and ceases allowing abortions.

Think some of us might harrass the phony science research abortion mill in Kansas? You betcha.

[GonzoGOP]

The problem with your analogy is that there is no evidence that Sea Shepherd has UNLAWFULLY assaulted anyone.

You throw a Snapple bottle of rancid butter at me that is an assault and UNLAWFUL.

Fowling a ships propeller and rendering it helpless on the high seas in and attack and UNLAWFUL

Boarding a ship on the high seas with out the permission of the ships master that is UNLAWFUL


All of the earlier actions were shown to have occurred on the Sea Hippies own video.

[mad_as_he$$]

Man you are a slow learner or just like abuse.

One cannot be “UNLAWFULLY assaulted”. The Sea Hippies admit committing assault in every show and would be convicted in any proper court of assault,

Assault:

“At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.

An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and Tort Law. There is, however, an additional Criminal Law category of assault consisting of an attempted but unsuccessful Battery.

Statutory definitions of assault in the various jurisdictions throughout the United States are not substantially different from the common-law definition.

Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.

The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.”

What the sea hippies do is assault in any country.

Piracy:

“An illegal act of violence, depredation (e.g., plundering, robbing, or pillaging), or detention in or over international waters committed for private ends by the crew or passengers of a private ship or aircraft against another ship or aircraft or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft.”

Yea and they are pirates. No you do not get to claim that the assault is justified because they are defending the whales. Neat little lawless world you have constructed in your head. Thousands of years of human civilization and law(s) do not matter to you.

[super7man]

Thanks for the thoughts.

It seems to me that proving bogus science in either case would be pretty easy to do. Why do the Sea Shepherd people not just sue, get an injunction, and settle it in court. If as you say the weight of the law is against the “poachers” (poachers are those that trespass on private land to take game.) the suit should be a slam dunk.

They appear to have plenty of money to make it happen.