Dartblog

About a month ago, reported the LA Times: “Firebombs that struck the home and car of two UC Santa Cruz scientists this weekend were part of an increasingly aggressive campaign by animal rights activists against animal researchers at University of California campuses…” (I’m a little late in posting about this story here, but I thought that it was so interesting and relevant to academia, it was still worth the while).

Coverage of what the university has called “criminal acts of antiscience violence” and domestic terrorism at US News and the LA Times.

Nationwide, incidents of violence by self-described animal rights activists have been on the rise, according to the Foundation for Biomedical Research, which has tracked such attacks since 1981, when there was one.

In 2000 there were 10 such episodes against biomedical research facilities alone, and in 2006 that figure had grown to 77, according to the group’s website. In addition, the type of attacks has changed in recent years.

“Prior to that, the vast majority of actions taken were against institutions — break into the lab, steal the animals, trash the facility,” said foundation President Frankie Trull. “More recently, however … they’ve become much more personal, attacking the researchers at their homes. California seems to be the focus of this activity right now, but not the only focus.”

I’ve always been kind of sympathetic to the cause of animal rights, there is certainly no cause to be unnecessarily cruel, but obviously these activists? terrorists? should be hunted down and put in prison. The same could be said about other left-wing extremist groups who have become increasingly violent in recent years, namely eco-terrorists and anti-trade/ anti-globalization protesters. (Not the whole movements, of course, but the people who hold their cause to be more important than other peoples’ lives). It is nice to see that the university has taken a strong stance in favor of science and academic freedom in the face of this intimidation.

In any event, the subject of testing on animals is an issue much more effectively addressed by looking at the demand rather than supply side. E.g. much fewer people wear fur these days because of changing norms, not because fur factories were firebombed.

Addendum: Another good article on the topic here.