Mo. bill criminalizes undercover videos at farms

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

By DAVID A. LIEB

Associated Press

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — The Missouri House endorsed legislation Tuesday that would make it a crime for undercover activists to produce videos portraying poor conditions at livestock farms or other agricultural facilities.

The legislation given first-round approval would create the crime of “agriculture production facility interference.” It would apply to anyone who makes or distributes photos, videos or audio recordings of the activities at an agricultural facility without the consent of the owner.

The bill also would make it a crime for people to gain employment or access at agricultural facilities under false pretenses.

Supporters of the legislation pointed to Iowa, which last month became the first state to make it a crime for people to lie in order to gain access to a livestock operation to record alleged animal abuse. The Iowa law came after the Los Angeles-based group Mercy for Animals had released undercover videos depicting conditions for chickens and hogs in Iowa.

“Unfortunately, we live in a society where these activists are becoming more and more of a problem to agriculture,” said state Rep. Casey Guernsey, R-Bethany, the sponsor of the Missouri legislation. “We cannot afford to allow these groups to target our industry of agriculture in Missouri like they have in Iowa.”

The House endorsed the legislation by a 124-29 vote, with some Democrats joining majority party Republicans. A second House vote is needed to advance the bill to the Senate, where legislation can more easily be blocked by a few determined opponents.

In the House, some urban Democrats suggested that the Missouri legislation was an overreaction by agricultural groups. They said some undercover videos have helped put an end to deplorable conditions.

The bill appears to be an “attempt to silence advocates or others who might shine a light on unhealthy practices,” said Rep. Tracy McCreery, of St. Louis County, a Democrat won a special election last year as an independent.

The Missouri legislation would apply to a wide variety of agricultural entities, including livestock and poultry farms, processing facilities, markets, exhibitions or even the vehicles used to transport the animals. It also would apply to fields of crops, orchards, greenhouses, gardens, grain elevators, barns, warehouses or any other land or buildings that are part of a commercial crop enterprise.

Under the bill, people who make recordings at agricultural facilities without the owners’ permission could face misdemeanor charges punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine. Repeat violators could be charged with a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison.

People who misrepresent themselves to get into agricultural property — a new crime termed “agricultural production facility fraud” — could face misdemeanor charges punishable by up to six months in jail and a $500 fine, or up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine for subsequent offenses.

The legislation also would increase Missouri’s penalties for the existing crimes of first-degree trespassing and false impersonation, making them comparable with the punishments for the new crime of gaining entry to an agricultural facility under false pretenses.

———

Agriculture bill is HB1860

Online:

House: http://www.house.mo.gov

More like this story

Sequoia 1 year, 1 month ago

Ah, poor agribusiness. They can't stand people finding out about what they ACTUALLY DO, that they have to whine to the government to take care of them.

And of course the paid servants in the House run to do the agri-corp's bidding. In the Missouri House, welfare nanny states are only bad when they help real people. Corporate people get to boss the House around, and maybe give them a cushy job in a few years. That's freedom for you and me!

And, hilariously, real video is called "propaganda." What, then, are the corp's advertisements?

Oh yeah. Those are "free speech."

Funny how things get turned around.

evenkeel 1 year, 1 month ago

I am so sick of BIG COW and the way that they influence our lives. I think I am going to eat chicken tonite.

I think if you are over the age of 5 then you know what agriculture ACTUALLY does. They produce food. That may involve slaughter, although that is probably not the case with grains. I am not certain about that last point. I am a city boy.

I am going to join the Occupy Farm Yards movement as soon as we get done with bringing down Wall Street. Since 2% of people work in agriculture we will need to change our banners. WE ARE THE 98%!

linoge 1 year, 1 month ago

Sequoia really nailed this one. Cameras shouldn't bother people who have nothing to hide. That is what we are told in reference to retail stores that install security cameras, cities that install traffic light cameras and cameras that are mounted on the dashboards of police cars. In all these instances, we are told that we should not think of the camera as an enemy or as an invasion of privacy. Rather, we are told that the camera is our best friend, that it is there for our protection and our best interest. If agriculture production facilities have nothing to hide, these cameras should serve as clever instruments which will help defeat the agenda of animal rights activists once and for all.

evenkeel 1 year, 1 month ago

I see a market solution. If you want to buy Candid Camera Food, there should be a way to do that, just as there is for organic food.

On the other hand, if I own an agri-business, I'll be pretty rock solid certain that the only video that is allowed in or out is the one that I allow in or out, if I allow it in or out. The business gets to make the decisions. I am surprised that you cannot see that. (Well, not really. The obvious seems to elude many these days,). We do have property rights in the country, do we not?

By the way, can I come over and set up my video camera in your bedroom? Why not? What are you trying to hide? Hey, I don't need your permission! The public has the right to know what is going on in there! See my point yet?

Sequoia 1 year, 1 month ago

I'm not selling anything that comes out of my bedroom. See my point?

spelchek 1 year, 1 month ago

How do we know you're not selling something out of your bedroom? Only a camera could clear this up. You have nothing to hide, right? See my point?

asb 1 year, 1 month ago

Nobody said video of animal abuse has to be allowed by company policy, just that the company can only fire the photographer or keep his camera if found on the job. Making it a punishable offense needlessly brings in law enforcement in what should only be a personnel issue. On the bedroom topic, the company can certainly require a strip search of all employees . . . good luck filling those jobs . . . or the company could always import illegal workers to . . . oh wait

asb 1 year, 1 month ago

Another example of an overbearing government intrusion in the private lives of citizens while on the job. This is just one more step toward the day when we go to work, take a mandatory memory control drug, and forget everything we did or saw at work. Not entirely unlike drinking on the job. I saw where an amendment will be added making it illegal to be a vegatarian. Where will it end?!

evenkeel 1 year, 1 month ago

It is private property. See my point?

The owner is the decider. If you want to become the decider then become an owner. Take on BIG COW and beat them at their own game (Which is, gasp!, providing a product (food) for customers to purchase. Oh my. Very nefarious isn't it?).

Why not run with my idea of creating a Candid Camera Food Company? You could become a tycoon. The Steve Jobs of video-food. Sound like too much work for you? Yes, it is much easier to just trample on property rights.

If you don't want to buy agricultural products then don't. It is your choice. Another name for that is starvation. You may change your mind about that after awhile, though I encourage you to stick to your guns.

Whether you choose to starve or not the fact remains that you do not have the right to make an unauthorized video of a business. The property owner has rights. When you demand unfettered access to anyplace then you are saying there is no such thing as property rights. What do you have against liberty anyway? Maybe you just didn't think it through.

Sequoia 1 year, 1 month ago

It is actually NOT that easy to "trample" on property rights, as this article shows. They've got a big government nanny.

It's much easier for property to trample on personal rights, as this article shows.

I'm trolling a little, because I can see the business' point. I'm not oblivious. Just interesting the way big government nanny-ism is okay when it is doing things for people you like and doing things to people you don't like.

Lots of businesses have rules about confidentiality and privacy in the workplace. They don't need their friends in the legislature to create special crimes just for them.

evenkeel 1 year, 1 month ago

About the Candid Camera Food Company? I see some pitfalls and some opportunities with the marketing of Candid Camera Food Company products.

If with every steak purchased you offer a free DVD showing the slaughter and butchering of the cow, that could, perhaps, maybe, have a deleterious effect on sales. Some people just don't embrace such openness. Weenies! (Oh my, another idea is blooming unbidden- CCFC weenies. Understand, I am just spit-balling here. Some of this may not work.)

On the other hand, if you are willing to pay royalties to use the music "I like big butts and I cannot lie" that might be THE PERFECT music to sell your product and also brag-up the fact that you have nothing to hide. Oh wait, ...hide? Cow hide? Yes, yes, there is some more opporunity there! Let's go do some brainstorming and meet again tomorrow. And by the way, no bedroom activity tonite, OK? My camera is not yet set-up.

gofish 1 year, 1 month ago

Prepare for users of google earth to go to jail for illegal videotaping of crop circles!

nunyabidness 1 year, 1 month ago

Oh, my. What a world we live in. Deplorable, torturous conditions for animals. The Republicans' solution? Not to improve conditions, no no no. There's no money in that. Just make it illegal to SHOW the deplorable conditions. That'll fix those nasty terrorist....I mean activists...

I find it humorous that the same people that grouse over and over about big government when it comes to helping the poor or the sick are always the first in line to cheer when a law is passed that takes away actual rights of a free people and rewards big corporations for it. Stop the ride now please God, I want to get off. People here are too stupid to live with.

JCsleeper 1 year, 1 month ago

What animals do on the farm is their business. Leave 'em alone.

viktorkowski 1 year, 1 month ago

in the spirit of capitalism we let the consumers decide? it should be mandated that on all food packages, wherever food is consumed that source of food is posted with name of producer.

JCLifer 1 year, 1 month ago

Interesting that only 2% of the workers have jobs in agriculture, but yet the USDA is the largest state agency with more employees and more sqarefootage than any other agency, military included.

Big Cow, Big Pig, Big Chicken, and Big Seed are all way too big...

online_editor 1 year, 1 month ago

Just to clarify. USDA is a federal agency.

tonto_goldberg 1 year, 1 month ago

It's not all farming. There's the big Food Stamp program, the big WIC voucher program, the big Surplus/Commodity Food program, the big School Lunch program, the big genetic research program, the big University Extension program... I could go on and on but you already knew that.

Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting

Or login with:

OpenID

News Tribune