"a felony to knowingly sponsor or exhibit an animal fight, or to buy, sell or transport knives, gaffs and other weapons used in cockfighting"

How exactly does the chicken hold a knife or a gaff? Any what other weapons? Beak dusters?

please don't get me all hot and flustered for nothing.

bastards.

In cockfighting, knives and blades are attached to their claws/spurs.

Sorry I just HAD to use that title :D

your cock's out of here!

It's da Cops!

"Neither child pornographers nor dogfighters or cockfighters may use the First Amendment to protect their schemes to advertise and sell product that further these criminal and demonstrably harmful practices."

These days, anyone that people don't like are either associated with terrorists or paedoes. Give it a rest already!

After seeing this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/20/cock_copter_shocker/

and this: http://www.firebox.com/product/1736/PicoZ-Sky-Challenger-Battle-Pack

I was convinced that there was a throbbing, laser armed, aeronautical todgerfest brewing in here somewhere. I am disappointed.

The knifes, etc are tied to the spurs. As a result instead of surrendering and escaping (or being just beaten up) the losing animal is slaughtered in front of the audience with blood flying on top of the spectators seated in the front row.

So these nasty little people will start their own little locked up websites and publish their interests in underground channels. Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

Terrorists.. Pedophiles.. It used to be Nazis and Single Mothers you compared stuff against if you wanted to paint it in a bad light... Back in the crazy days of Oscar Wilde there was a general consensus that manlove was a bad thing as well...

I wish we could all just go back to a simpler time when if you didn't agree with someone you could just compare them to Hitler.

Sigh.

There needs to be a variation of Godwin's Law which states that with rising press coverage of legal action, the likelihood of a comparison of the opposing party to paedophiles or terrorists approaches 1... the comparing party should then instantly have their case thrown out.

great description from a desperate lawyer...

cockfighting - do people have nothing better to do? christ, get a proper hobby you stupid fucks.

and amazon selling dog fighting videos....very poor amazon, very poor

If someone (in this case Amazon) is too stupid to understand why something is illegal, what is so wrong in providing them with an example that they may better understand?? Is child pornography off limits as an example because it's too... what? repulsive? Are they required to think of more esoteric examples?? They're just illustrating their point from another perspective. sheesh

"chicken aficionados" - Funniest term i've seen in a while.

Amazon themselves still sell some *very* questionable stuff. Things that would certainly get you a knock on the door from the pedo-police if you were foolish enough to order it.

That whole First Amendment thing is getting quite outdated now.

Back when "The God Delusion" was contraversial it was impossible to buy it in certain states in the US, says something about the Amazon US mentality.

http://www.tvgohome.com/300499.html

Paris cos - you have to ask?!

el pollo diablo will get em....

Dang, there goes the out-of-print resellers of Werewolf: The Apocolypse.

(Research purposes--they have a better background than today's gack from White Wolf.)

The difference between cockfighting and pedophilia in this instance is that the magazines are *about* a thing which is illegal, while child porn ITSELF is illegal. A magazine about cockfighting isn't illegal. A photo of a cockfight isn't illegal. *Cockfighting* is illegal.

You can have a photograph of someone doing 90 in a 55 without being thrown in jail.

If you accept this argument, then magazines describing any kind of illegal activity, or any photos of illegal activity, would be deemed illegal.

If your argument is that it's the fact that the magazines are *pro* cockfighting, then you've just made it a crime to think favorably about an illegal activity - and that's a dangerous road in deed, and very, very far from kiddie porn.

Promoting cockfighting is very close to encouraging people to commit a crime. If there are ads or notifications about upcoming events, you've got conspiracy charges.

Actually you are mostly correct. Blood doesn't fly onto the spectators. Cock fights, while cruel, are rather clean events with a surprisingly small amount of blood. Those who have ever actually attended one of the events can attest to this.

It's not like a monkey knife fight or a bear fight where the animals are difficult to kill and many blows are given, cock fights are generally over in just a few seconds after the cocks make contact - generally one cock dies from a single killing stroke delivered by the biggest cock.

While cock fighting may be illegal in many places, it's perfectly legal in other places (like the Philippines) where they have trading cards of the most sought after cocks and the cock breeders are revered as stars. They also publish an annual guide to locating U.S. farms to raise your cock and have several companies there that help with the transport of the cocks to their new homes in the warm wet jungle.

For those who don't know knives and gaffs only vary in their lengths - basically an incredibly sharp implement with a slight curve that cups over the stump of the spur at the base of the cocks foot. These natural spurs are what cocks use to fight in "the wild" but are shortened to make attaching a knife/gaff easier.

Also cocks are nasty cannibals who eat each other. It's one of the biggest source of loss in commercial cock farming.

...give a flying cock?

They almost always complain about speeding laws, so quite clearly need to be banned for encouraging illegal activity.

Celebrity magazines often talk sympathetically about the poor celebs and their problematic drug/alcohol habits. More illegal activity, ban them.

Newspapers talk about illegal wars in middle eastern countries in a favourable light, ban 'em.

Oh, you say the Government tried that last one?

Let's get back to comparing to Hitler as requested from others in this column - these guys are like Hitler in that they want to silence any opposition.

Not that I think Cock Fighting is big or clever, but quite frankly anyone who eats factory farmed chicken or eggs is being a fucking hypocrite to object to these barbaric activities or their description.

>Re: "Didn't TVGoHome do this in 1999? - http://www.tvgohome.com/300499.html)" - James Dore

That Late Review bit is a bit of a nasty coincidence, considering those poor sods in the news at the mo.

And isn't Mick Hucknall making a comeback, too?

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Or something.

>Re: "...anyone who eats factory farmed chicken or eggs is being a fucking hypocrite to object to these barbaric activities or their description." - John Stirling

I see your point. But steady on old chap. I'd reckon there's a difference between revelling in, or glorifying the animal cruelty, as opposed to blithely accepting what's happening as part of a set of fcuked up farming practices. If battery (is that the tech angle?) farms were used as entertainment and there was a magazine promoting them, then your point would stand.

Personally, as a veggie, I prefer to mock the divs that sign up to the anti-animal testing stalls in the street, whilst wearing their leather shoes, belts, etc. Everyone has their own set of morals I guess.

And as ever, it's not a simple case of black and white. We have to draw a line somewhere in the grey area. Do these dead cocks get eaten? Do we have a link from a respected source backing up Solomon Grundy's 'swift death' claims? If so, would it change our minds in any way?

Some of Amazon's listings are absolutely mind-boggling & words really do fail me with respect to these two:

-http://www.amazon.com/Prostitute-Luxurious-Crushed-Leopard-Costume/dp/B000VYKDKW/ref=pd_sbs_a_title_2

-http://www.amazon.com/Kids-Pimp-Suit-Costume-Size/dp/B000QDXZZ8/ref=pd_sbs_t_title_1/104-9842424-3827948

Don't know whether to laugh or cry at the utter, indefensible, wrongness of 'em.