A government can make any activity illegal it wants to, but does that mean it will prevent it? Obviously not, as Prohibition taught us. It may prevent some people from participation, but those who are not willing to obey the law, will ignore it. We see this time and again in many issues involving moral judgements.
SHW would do better to recommend that AR organizations would be better served it they focused their efforts upon winning the hearts and minds of the people who participate in these so called "blood sports", rather than enouraging more laws that would probably be ignored by most participants anyway.
I personally am apalled by dog fighting, and cock fighting, but neither do I think it is my mission in life to make these activities illegal based upon my ideas of morality. People who seek to force their ideas of morality upon others generally do not respect the rights of others. Once again, we saw this in Prohibition. It is perhaps a better strategy to seek to limit the activity by making it socially unacceptable. It is far more successful to have people give up this activity by their own free will, rather than have the government attempt to force a ban upon their activity because as we have seen in the past, government bans don't work well at all.
AR groups miss the mark when they pressure lawmakers to restrict this type of activity. They are travelling the wrong road. When will they realize that lawmakers merely act out of their own self interest and could care less about what may or may not be best for society? If AR groups sincerely wish to put an end to this type of activity, they should work with those who are involved in it. Ahhh, but there is the rub because that may take some real work, something I am suspect, they have neither the will nor the fortitude to do.