Thank you.

I think there's a clear difference between censorship and classification. I have no issue with what the BBFC do these days, because they simply apply the appropriate certificate. They don't ban films unless they contravene the law, and they never cut anything unless the company wants to snip a bit out to get a lower rating (in which case, if I'm that bothered, I order a DVD of the uncut version from whatever market it is available in once it is released).

The killing of animals on film? Well, it depends on context. In Apocalypse Now, the killing of the water buffalo isn't something staged for the film. It was happening anyway, and Coppola simply filmed it and used it in the film. It works very well in the context of that scene, though obviously it is horrifying, and I fully understand why someone would choose not to watch it. But should it be banned or cut? No. People can simply choose not to watch.

These days, cruelty to animals is strictly prohibited, and use of animals in film is subject to strict regulations, so I don't really think this is an issue today. Historically? Well, yes, horses were tripped up in certain westerns and whatnot. Not good. But I don't see the point in posthumously cutting these. It's shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted (quite literally).

So in short, I am anti-censorship, but pro protection of children (though I've been quite cavalier in ignoring BBFC certificates with my own children if I think they have the maturity to see something that will challenge them and make them think - again, context is everything).