On Firebombings at the Homes of Researchers
I didn’t want to leave the house without directing you to "Firebombings at Homes of 2 California Researchers," by Jesse McKinley in today’s New York Times. I’d love to say we now know the facts because this is The New York Times we’re talking about but, well . . .
Though I’m far more sympathetic to those who are doing the work of animal liberation than many vegans (and this was not an attempt at liberation), I cringe when I hear the word "bomb" in the same sentence as "the researcher’s home," particularly when the researcher was in said home at the time, with two children. Now, again, we don’t know what really happened from this article, as anyone who reads Will Potter has learned.
I’m eager to see how this story unfolds . . .
8 Comments
Post a comment
And here I have a break….. not only with the harmful act – but with what is being termed "antiscience violence"….. I'm anti-non-human animal science…. Hearing "antiscience" just scares me. I really think the future should hold "advancement" and "medical achievement"….. We would do quite well if researchers focused toward a better way rather than staying with archaic (and cruel) flesh studies. I want us to progress, to thrive, to continue. The "vision" of man's tommorrow could be so different (and better) if we just tossed the baggage of animal use. "go vegan" – right?
Bea, this is anti-science violence. Despite what animal rights propaganda says, animals are still needed for medical research. There have been significant advances in recent years in non-animal research methods such as computer models, cell cultures, etc.. These are all very useful and have lowered the number of animals used in research. However, they are as of yet, incapable of reproducing all the possible reactions of a real living organism. Researchers have, as their stated goal, the "Three R's" when it comes to use of animals in research. The "Three R's" are refine, replace, and reduce. They have made significant progress on those goals. I think all of us, including those of us that reject animal rights ideology, would like to see research without using animals. Indeed, scientists themselves would. After all, animal research is very expensive and labor intensive, so, if nothing else, they have a purely financial interest in minimizing it, when one really thinks about it. It simply is not possible at this time, in spite of what animal rights organizations say.
As an interested observer who parses pro-AR blogs and sites, I often see discussions about the use of words like "violence" and "terrorism". This despicable act seems to fit just about any definition of those words doesn't it? If firebombing a house with people inside doesn't classify as a form of violence, then I don't know what does. The article really drove that home when it listed among the charges the perps could be facing, "attempted homicide". Attempted homicide is a violent crime. I'd be interested to get opinions from you pro-AR folks about your feelings on one Dr. Jerry Vlasak, who has wholeheartedly endorsed this crime, showing no feelings for these families, and calling it "necessary".
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/nationalbreaking/ci_10088528
I was reading about this the other morning and I literally slammed down my spoon while I was eating my oatmeal and shouted: "NO! NO! NO!"
My theory is that though I believe that all things living deserve to do so with respect, dignity, and free from torture…I still will never agree that using more violence to create peace can be accomplished in any of these situations. What if the man's wife or children actually died? Would some idiot out there be keeping score? Will someone have thought that we somehow "evened" things out a bit? This biblical "eye for an eye" crap does not work…
-dave
"They have made significant progress on those goals. I think all of us, including those of us that reject animal rights ideology, would like to see research without using animals. Indeed, scientists themselves would."
That is bullshit. Research involving animals is easier to manipulate, and if a company wants a new drug/product out on the market, they have more of a chance getting it there with animals. Why do you think testing facilities like HLS guarantee that products get on store shelves? It's all about the money!
Also, when you speak of lowering the number of animals in research, what places are you talking about exactly? In the U.K. the has been an INCREASE in the number of animals used in labs!
GrizzlyBear….. I believe in research – just not involving the killing (harm or enslavement) of animals. Firstly because they are not "ours" to use – and secondly because in most instances the science is flawed. I think that animals are still being used for entertainment, food and science – because we're not looking hard enough for ways to replace them. As long as it is "legal" it will continue. As Joseph said: "It's all about the money!".
And speaking of "the money" – I found this: http://geari.blogspot.com/2008/08/ridiculous-and-unnecessary-live-animal.html through the Physicians for Responsible Medicine…. Animals are not being used for "testing" or "research" but for "marketing"…..
I don't agree that using animals is (as GrizzlyBear says): "very expensive and labor intensive". Most of the animals "breed like rabbits" – Test on a few thousand…. and there's a few thousand more! and more. The bulk of the animals, mice, rats and other rodents are inconsequential and of no concern to institutions (or government). Records and statistics on these animals aren't even kept. They don't even "count" – let alone have any monetary consequence.
I equate this argument with those in animal agriculture who say "of course, we treat our animals well – we could not make a profit if we didn't". Sadly, the mortality rate (and living conditions) of these animals is horrific – But, if you loose some (a few thousand for economic culling) you can always replace them with a new batch when the market recovers. Since the first bird was ever placed in a cage….. the cage has always been worth more than the bird.
Labs that test on animals do so to continue their grants and funding…. They constantly experiment on "new" products – that vary only slightly from the old. But "new and improved products" satisfy the stockholders need for more revenue and dividends….. Adding "lemon-scent" to an oven cleaner costs countless lives and to an industry intrenched in animal (ab)use – it's all very, very "cheap".
What's been missing here in this conversation and that I rarely seen brought up is the FDA. Here is the US the FDA "requires" all pharmaceutical companies to test their new "products" on animals. They don't do any testing themselves, yet they require the companies to hire 3rd parties to conduct their tests (you know…the side companies set up by the majority stock holders so they can rig their testing in their own favor and see bigger profit margins). So… when it comes to testing of many drugs, supplements, or ANY product that needs FDA approval… an outside company must furnish test results…and they (the FDA) REQUIRE that these "products" be tested on animals. Until they change that policy, animal testing will continue to be done in the USA no matter WHO or WHAT company is targeted. The sissy ALF members can terrorize all they want…it will not stop the testing. If all animal testing was made to go away in the US (as I wish it would….trust me I do) The pharmaceutical companies would STILL have to have these animal tests done. Even if that meant hiring companies (or setting up new ones) overseas. They can not push through their next…"sit on your fat ass and lose weight" MALTBALL pill until they feed it by the shovel full to mice, rats, dogs, etc. So even if the testing DID move across our oceans…or south of our border…the same amount of animals would still be murdered and tortured. As required by our own laws.
Until people stand up to our own system and get those in office to understand that we are wasting Billions of OUR own tax dollars by killing and torturing living beings…the murder, rape and torture will continue. Yet I never see a finger pointed to the very ones that set this system up in the first place…our own government….using my own money and yours. There is way too much lobbying going on for our tax dollars to continue using them to sustain this torture and murder indefinitely. That is what needs to change next. Anyone have the answer as to how? Firebombing while being a sissy hiding in the dark has not stopped any of this. It only wastes money.
OK… time to go back to spitting oatmeal at my laptop as I theorise more theories…but only in theory that is…. There's some circus clowns I'd like to watch on youtube… I need to get those guys some pamphlets next time they come to town. Last time they were here…they all walked right on by and ignored me…damn clowns! 😉
-dave
Just an update….you said you were interested to see how this story unfolded: http://www.mercurynews.com/crime/ci_10235455?nclick_check=1
But alas…. looks like it's not "un-folding" at all. And why am I all not that sad?….