top
Santa Cruz IMC
Santa Cruz IMC
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Peter Young Speaks in Santa Cruz

by ~Bradley (bradley [at] riseup.net)
On February 23rd, Peter Young, an animal liberation activist and former Green Scare prisoner, spoke at the Louden Nelson Center in Santa Cruz before a screening of "Behind the Mask" at a benefit for the SHAC 7.

Peter grew up in Los Gatos and moved to the state of Washington at the age of nine. He went to college at the University of Washington where he became involved in animal rights activism. In 1997, Peter and a friend liberated over 8,000 mink and foxes from various fur farms in a two-week road trip across three midwestern states. In 1998, indictments were handed down for his arrest and accomplice Justin Samuel. After nearly 7 years on the run, Peter was captured in San Jose in 2005 and served almost two years in prison until his release in early 2007.

In early 2008, Peter got off probation and moved back to Santa Cruz where he had been living underground before being captured.

Audio: 1 hour and 15 minutes.
Listen now:
Copy the code below to embed this audio into a web page:
The following is Peter Young's statement to the court at his sentencing on November 8th, 2005. As Peter did a large amount of improvisation, the below text is not a verbatim record, but an approximate account based on his notes and the memory of supporters in the courtroom.

Peter Young's Statement to the Court on November 8th, 2005

This is the customary time when the defendant expresses regret for the crimes they committed, so let me do that because I am not without my regrets. I am here today to be sentenced for my participation in releasing mink from 6 fur farms. I regret it was only 6. I'm also here today to be sentenced for my participation in the freeing of 8,000 mink from those farms. I regret it was only 8,000. It is my understanding of those 6 farms, only 2 of them have since shut down. I regret it was only 2.

More than anything, I regret my restraint, because whatever damage we did to those businesses, if those farms were left standing, and if one animal was left behind, then it wasn't enough.

I don't wish to validate this proceeding by begging for mercy or appealing to the conscience of the court, because I know if this system had a conscience I would not be here, and in my place would be all the butchers, vivisectors, and fur farmers of the world.

Just as I will remain unbowed before this court- who would see me imprisoned for an act of conscience- I will also deny the fur farmers in the room the pleasure of seeing me bow down before them. To those people here whose sheds I may have visited in 1997, let me tell you directly for the first time, it was a please to raid your farms, and to free those animals you held captive. It is to those animals I answer to, not you or this court. I will forever mark those nights on your property as the most rewarding experience of my life.

And to those farmers or other savages who may read my words in the future and smile at my fate, just remember: We have put more of you in bankruptcy than you have put liberators in prison. Don't forget that.

Let me thank everyone in the courtroom who came to support me today. It is my last wish before prison that each of you drive to a nearby fur farm tonight, tear down its fence and open every cage.

That's all


For more information on the Green Scare, Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, and how to defend what's left of your civil liberties, please check out the following links:
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by student activist
1. Humans are animals.

2. Peter Young says that animal rights activists do what they do "out of a love for animals."

3. Peter Young implies that attacking researchers and their laboratories is an acceptable strategy.

4. Researchers are humans.

Conclusion: Peter Young is suggesting that animal rights activists should only love some animals and attack others. Contradictions anyone? There's plenty for the whole table.

I am intellectually fascinated by Peter's speech: He inverts the animal hierarchy, in his speech non-human beings are being privileged over human beings. Structurally he is doing the same thing that animal rights activists claim researchers do, privilege one species over another. Other interesting things: the use of the term "turning point", "haunted", and his references to solidarity.

Personally, I am saddened that there are people out there that are possibly the same age as me that can be so easily indoctrinated.

Oh, BTW Bradley, you were my T.A. at one point and to be honest I have to say that your journalism leaves a lot to be desired.

by tk
Listen now:
Copy the code below to embed this audio into a web page:
they say you can't please everybody
by elle
So basically, they're probably going to trail Young around now, like they did with Rod Coronado?
by (a)
THOUSANDS of animals are dissected alive every by researchers in the US, hundreds of thousands more sit in cages, awaiting torture and death. Your arguement that humans, who on a mass scale have the ability to inflict this kind of pain and suffering towards other creatures, should not be stopped - is not only ridiculous, it is dangerous. You reinforce the system of violence that is stacked heavily against non-humans. To prevent a SINGLE vivisector from doing what s/he does (cut open on LIVE animals) would save the lives of hundreds, if not thousands of living beings, and spare countless more from torture.

Your post makes me think you really ARE a student activist, like the countless other student activists who await their turn to become politician scum and fill a comfortable seat in the beauocracy that doesn't give a shit about life; human or otherwise. Good luck with your finals, activist.
by anon
vivesection is a a derogatory term for surgery. Most people that use it have a very one sided view of the subject and ignore the positive effects of animal research. I've heard animal rights activists say things like "animal research has killed countless animals but it has not been able to cure cancer". Statements like this ignore the advances in treatments, survivability and knowledge about cancer. Those positive advances require animal research.

It is through the incitement of people like Peter Young that animal rights activists feel the need to trespass, intimidate, and assault researchers.

Proposing that people violently confront or attack researchers is similar to pro life advocates bombing abortion clinics. If animal rights activists want to inform the uninformed, create awareness among the apathetic, or change the minds of those that support animal research they really need to consider their tactics. The ideas of Peter Young are very insular and closed minded. Moderate animal rights activists will not be inspired, but instead will become disillusioned. Patient rights and scientists groups will rally against the animal rights community pointing at the scare tactics of the lunatic fringe that is represented by Peter Young. When the tactic of the animal rights is to trample on the rights of other citizen, in this case researchers, common people have the common sense to protect their fellow citizen's rights.
by student activist
"your arguement that humans, who on a mass scale have the ability to inflict this kind of pain and suffering towards other creatures, should not be stopped - is not only ridiculous, it is dangerous."

I did not argue that violence should not be stopped or that hurting animals should not be stopped (even though I disagree with what you think happens in UCSC labs). I was pointing out an ideological contradiction, that's all.


"Your post makes me think you really ARE a student activist, like the countless other student activists who await their turn to become politician scum and fill a comfortable seat in the beauocracy that doesn't give a shit about life; human or otherwise. Good luck with your finals, activist."

Yes, there are many student activists who end up becoming corrupt politicians. However, I don't think you can decipher a person's future or morality from an online post. You are generalizing a group of people just like many generalize animal rights activists. Now that is dangerous. I prefer not to engage in generalizations, you can see that from other posts. Even though I don't completely agree with what happened I don't claim that every animal rights activist engages in such actions.



by Em
I think the statement "Lunatic Fringe represented by Peter Young" is absolutely hilarious. Peter Young is a thoughtful, compassionate young man who advocates NON-VIOLENT direct action, which if you had actually listened to his speech you would know. He has never targeted anyone in a violent way. He non-violently freed a bunch of animals from horrific conditions on fur farms, and now he goes around educating the public with his speeches. Calling him a lunatic is absurd.
by Pallas Cat
When somebody is harming someone else, it's our duty to intervene and prevent further harm to the third party. To just sit and write letters against it is to condemn ourselves to deserving the same fate.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network