I see--that is why people call all A.R. people extremists I would think--but one can feel extreme in their hearts, such as I do as my feelings are deep for A.R. and it is the one thing that moves me the deepest in this world--it is hard for me to see that destruction of property is a bad thing when destruction of an animal by these people is ok--do you know what I mean?
The law is geared to protect human's rights--therefore they are written that way--those laws do not contain an equal (none in fact at all) footing for the animal in the matter--so therefore, it will always be deemed unlawful by the humans because it's a human's property, land, etc.
However, the human does not have the right to take, abuse, maim, experiment, exploit the animal soul that lives, resides or is dwelling on that property.
It is not a level playing field--humans have all the rights--humans own the land, the buildings, the animals, etc. so on and so on--therefore, what rights do those animals have that are being killed, maimed, etc. in those said buildings, or... on that said property?
I understand the laws and what is right and wrong--but it seems that animals were never put in the "right and wrong" of the word in the beginning of time to make things even. Therefore, ALF will always be deemed wrong, or extremists because of what they do---but then again, with laws the way they are where animals have no voice or rights, what is the alternative?
Wait for the laws to include animals as having rights ---they will all die before that happens. I don't know what to think about this. Destruction of property/a building of cement where horrors happen to the innocent/or the destruction of the innocents themselves?