submitted 2017-01-15 09:27:55 by The-Forested-Garden
The-Forested-Garden 1 point on 2017-01-15 09:29:20
Apparently, the German bestiality laws that were recently passed got a repeal to include that if the animal wasn't forced, it's not illegal. Therefore, the law mirrors Denmark's laws before they banned sex with animals. I found this on Wikipedia in reference to Germany's laws. I was surprised to see they had partially repealed it after they instated it.
[deleted] 2 points on 2017-01-15 09:35:53
It's the german supreme court ruling you are looking for. It's pretty debatable if you'd be able to get away with using it though if caught, you'd need a very good attorney. Zeta-verein took credit.
zoo_away 3 points on 2017-01-18 06:48:41
I don't know any, but I can confirm what basically happened is that both sides understood the ruling as they wanted to.
The Zetaverein people said it clarified that the law is only applicable when the animal is forced
Everyone else (newspapers etc) was like "YEAH, see, dipshits? Sex with animals stays illegal"
The court cleverly didn't bother to clarify further.
30-30amator equae 1 point on 2017-01-19 00:54:11
ZETA is in desperate need of success to justify its existence. Founded in 2009, ZETA´s actions always turned out to be failures, they really need something that can be sold as a win, even if it isn´t at all.
Recalling all the past events that included this dubious "zoo organisation", I wouldn´t rely on ZETA´s judgement at all. Although they feature the "ZETA rules" (not to be mistaken for the zeta rules) on their homepage and don´t hesitate to mention them everytime one of them got interviewed, their actions speak otherwise. ZETA has no problems backing up a convicted animal porn distributor who ran his own German "zoo forum" and was raided by the police when he had "a birthday party" with lots of "guests" , some even driving distances of several hundered kilometers. ZETA also is totally cool with guys like that one from Verl, Germany. This guy was one of those mixoscopia bestialis fellas who gets off from watching his dog fucking women, he also made and distributed porn, he even openly advertised his little hobby on non beasty, normal sites in search for "new" actresses.
One of ZETA´s members and the one ZETA brags about as their first non "zoo" named Roman Czyborra, who´s a former member of the Pirate party and advocates pedophilia as well as "zoophilia" was arrested for undressing in a church, disturbing the ongoing mass dancing "nekkid" on the altar. Do you trust a "zoo organisation" that has such a bad judgement when it comes to members?
Do you trust an organisation that published a picture of a David´s star with a zeta edited in, comparing our admittedly dire situation to the Holocaust that cost 6 million jews, communists, socialists, homosexuals, mentally ill people , etc. their lives?
My advice: don´t give a flying fuck what ZETA says. I´ve tried to step on the brake, commenting the article about this BVerfG ruling on their homepage. I strongly advised to keep sceptical and offered to buy them a few beers when one of them reports himself to the authorities for "plain" and proven zoophilia (no other offense involved), gets his trial and walks out of it unpunished and still allowed to keep animals, thus proving ZETA´s interpretation right. Until today, my offer hasn´t been accepted by them...maybe they´re not as convinced of their own interpretation as they display in public.
I also heard about dwindling numbers of paying ZETA members. You see, the side effect of some positive publicity/ media presence for this "zoo club" may just be the main reason for appealing to the constitutional court.
Not a single German zoo should rely on ZETA´s interpretations. I doubt that "You have to acquit me because ZETA said so..." will impress anyone in court...
Jedoch greift der Tatbestand des § 3 Satz 1 Nr. 13 TierSchG nur, wenn das Tier zu einem artwidrigen Verhalten gezwungen wird.
i.e. "the law only comes into effect when the animal was forced to do something species inappropriate", and they clarify that they mean forced as in physical force or something comparable.
This sounds very different to the reasoning that the lawmakers provided when they made the that law.
It will be interesting to see what happens in front of a court, if it ever comes to a court case with no abuse involved.
/r/zoophilia archive
Apparently, the German bestiality laws that were recently passed got a repeal to include that if the animal wasn't forced, it's not illegal. Therefore, the law mirrors Denmark's laws before they banned sex with animals. I found this on Wikipedia in reference to Germany's laws. I was surprised to see they had partially repealed it after they instated it.
It's the german supreme court ruling you are looking for. It's pretty debatable if you'd be able to get away with using it though if caught, you'd need a very good attorney. Zeta-verein took credit.
I don't know any, but I can confirm what basically happened is that both sides understood the ruling as they wanted to.
The Zetaverein people said it clarified that the law is only applicable when the animal is forced
Everyone else (newspapers etc) was like "YEAH, see, dipshits? Sex with animals stays illegal"
The court cleverly didn't bother to clarify further.
ZETA is in desperate need of success to justify its existence. Founded in 2009, ZETA´s actions always turned out to be failures, they really need something that can be sold as a win, even if it isn´t at all.
Recalling all the past events that included this dubious "zoo organisation", I wouldn´t rely on ZETA´s judgement at all. Although they feature the "ZETA rules" (not to be mistaken for the zeta rules) on their homepage and don´t hesitate to mention them everytime one of them got interviewed, their actions speak otherwise. ZETA has no problems backing up a convicted animal porn distributor who ran his own German "zoo forum" and was raided by the police when he had "a birthday party" with lots of "guests" , some even driving distances of several hundered kilometers. ZETA also is totally cool with guys like that one from Verl, Germany. This guy was one of those mixoscopia bestialis fellas who gets off from watching his dog fucking women, he also made and distributed porn, he even openly advertised his little hobby on non beasty, normal sites in search for "new" actresses.
One of ZETA´s members and the one ZETA brags about as their first non "zoo" named Roman Czyborra, who´s a former member of the Pirate party and advocates pedophilia as well as "zoophilia" was arrested for undressing in a church, disturbing the ongoing mass dancing "nekkid" on the altar. Do you trust a "zoo organisation" that has such a bad judgement when it comes to members?
Do you trust an organisation that published a picture of a David´s star with a zeta edited in, comparing our admittedly dire situation to the Holocaust that cost 6 million jews, communists, socialists, homosexuals, mentally ill people , etc. their lives?
My advice: don´t give a flying fuck what ZETA says. I´ve tried to step on the brake, commenting the article about this BVerfG ruling on their homepage. I strongly advised to keep sceptical and offered to buy them a few beers when one of them reports himself to the authorities for "plain" and proven zoophilia (no other offense involved), gets his trial and walks out of it unpunished and still allowed to keep animals, thus proving ZETA´s interpretation right. Until today, my offer hasn´t been accepted by them...maybe they´re not as convinced of their own interpretation as they display in public.
I also heard about dwindling numbers of paying ZETA members. You see, the side effect of some positive publicity/ media presence for this "zoo club" may just be the main reason for appealing to the constitutional court.
Not a single German zoo should rely on ZETA´s interpretations. I doubt that "You have to acquit me because ZETA said so..." will impress anyone in court...
See this discussion: https://np.reddit.com/r/zoophilia/comments/46g7yi/german_constitutional_court_upholds_ban_on_sex/
The Bundesverfassungsgericht said:
i.e. "the law only comes into effect when the animal was forced to do something species inappropriate", and they clarify that they mean forced as in physical force or something comparable.
This sounds very different to the reasoning that the lawmakers provided when they made the that law.
It will be interesting to see what happens in front of a court, if it ever comes to a court case with no abuse involved.