Good for the United States Senate (which, unfortunately, is not something one can say very often). It has passed the Animal Enterprises Terrorism Act, 100-0. (To view the entire bill, type S. 3880 in the appropriate box and hit the search function.)
If it becomes law, which seems likely, it provides: "Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce, or uses or causes to be used the mail...(1) for the purpose of damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise; and (2) in connection with such purpose, (A) intentionally damages, or causes the loss of any property (including animals or records) used by an animal enterprise, or any property of a person or entity having a connection to, relationship with, or transactions with an animal enterprise; (B) intentionally places a person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to that person, a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115) of that person, or a spouse or intimate partner of that person by a course of conduct involving threats, acts of vandalism, property damage, criminal trespass, harassment, or intimidation; or C) conspires or attempts to do so; shall be punished as provided for in subsection (b)."
This is a good law, although I would prefer that it provide a bit more explicit protection against "tertiary targeting" in which these soon-to-be banned tactics are applied against an animal enterprise's insurance company, bank, or other provider of goods or services.
As you would expect, the liberationists who get a kick out of terrorizing law abiding citizens merely because they work for or do business with animal industries are whining that their constitutional rights are being infringed. One such concern was posted on this blog site, worrying that "People who participate in national boycotts against any animal enterprise are now subject to being charged with terrorism." Pure cow manure, of course. The bill explicitly states that "the term `economic damage'...(B) does not include any lawful economic disruption (including a lawful boycott) that results from lawful public, governmental, or business reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal enterprise."
Here is the bottom line: These faceless radicals can dish it out. They can laugh at terrorizing children and families. But when the law finally responds, they can't take it.