[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 10542-10543]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                               BUMFIGHTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 23, 2002, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, one of the most troubling problems for 
our communities facing the struggle for liability deals with our 
homeless population. The problem of homelessness, if not worse today, 
is certainly more complex. As a result of deinstitutionalization, many 
of these people now live on the streets; and one of the most serious 
consequences is violence against the homeless.
  Stories of the abuse of homeless and the mentally ill are appearing 
with stark and frightening regularity, setting a homeless woman on 
fire, random beatings, even murders. We know last year there were 18 
murders and dozens of assaults on the homeless.
  These are the stories that were reported to the authorities and found 
their way into the media. Because of the hidden, often forgotten, world 
these people inhabit, we know that incidents are underreported and that 
the known violence is just the tip of the iceberg.
  I have been appalled at the people who would not just avoid helping 
but actually are seeking to exploit the homeless, and the worst example 
I have seen is a recent video entitled ``Bumfights'' that films the 
abuse and violence against the homeless. ``Bumfights,'' the brain child 
of two recent graduates of the University of California and USC film 
schools, sets a new standard for the cruel exploitation of damaged 
human beings. In less than a month, these people have sold 10,000 
copies of a video depicting homeless men assaulting each other on the 
streets of Las Vegas.
  A vagrant struggles to escape the punishing punches, kicks and body 
slams of his attacker. Another scene with a man standing in a dark 
alley, hitting himself on the head as he realized that his hair is on 
fire. A purported crack addict smoking the drug and defecating on the 
sidewalk, and then there are films of a homeless man extracting his own 
teeth with a pair of pliers.
  A segment entitled ``Bumhunter'' parodies television's Crocodile 
Hunter, with a man in safari clothing binding, gagging and measuring 
and marking various homeless men on the streets of Las Vegas before 
releasing them to their national habitat. These sad, pathetic images 
are described as hilariously shocking. I call it criminal.
  They say it is voluntary, since they reward the men with food, 
clothing, shelter and small change. I charge them of preying on the 
despair of those without the basic necessities to sustain life or the 
facilities to cope. Who among us would willingly be filmed extracting 
our teeth with a pair of pliers? Of course, the film makers are already 
planning a sequel.
  When I read about this video, I was appalled. Not surprisingly, it 
was promoted on Howard Stern's television

[[Page 10543]]

show and soon being shipped to people nationally and internationally.
  This is not about committee jurisdiction or the geography of the 
people we represent. It is about our basic humanity. If we cannot act 
to protect our most vulnerable, what does this say about us all? We 
need to fix this problem.
  I have started with inquiries to the heads of the Las Vegas Federal 
investigative offices of the FBI, Customs and the U.S. Postal Service. 
I have asked them specifically to explain what steps they intend to 
take, and if they decline to open a case, whether it is because they 
lack resources, they have other priorities, or whether there simply is 
not a legal action.
  I believe that this is already criminal conduct. First of all, in 
their own press releases, the film makers admit that they are paying 
homeless actors to commit crimes such as assault and kidnap. They are, 
therefore, accessories or aiders and abettors. This activity is not 
protected by the first amendment anymore than the so-called ``snuff 
flick'' might be protected pornography. All three of the Federal 
agencies investigate pornography, and they know the difference.
  The FBI should have jurisdiction because of the interstate nature of 
the business and the possible conspiracy to violate State laws. Customs 
should have jurisdiction because the material is being distributed 
internationally, and the postal service should have jurisdiction 
because the mails are being used to further the distribution.
  If these agencies claim they do not have the resources, then perhaps 
Congress should act to earmark funds, because this is a serious public 
safety issue. If these agencies claim they have other priorities, then 
perhaps we should examine the setting of their priorities; and if they 
claim that there is no specific law that authorizes them to investigate 
this activity, then perhaps we should enact one.
  A Congress that will push the constitutional limits on fighting 
pornography and that will appropriately outlaw crush videos that depict 
the torture of animals should do no less for our fellow human beings. 
This violence against the homeless is not just a crime against them. It 
is an assault against us all. We should do all we can to stop this 
outrage and punish those who would torture, degrade and exploit some of 
our most vulnerable citizens.

                          ____________________