Just a little idea.
- Thread starter ma-vie-en-vert
- Start date
Whoa!!! I sparked quite the discussion, lol.
I hope none of you are getting pissy at me though. To let you know, I also don't agree with it for a lot of the same reasons that you all stated. Someone at our local SPCA was talking about it (while bitching about people who don't get their animals fixed when they should) so I decided to bring it here to see what you guys all thought.
I hope none of you are getting pissy at me though. To let you know, I also don't agree with it for a lot of the same reasons that you all stated. Someone at our local SPCA was talking about it (while bitching about people who don't get their animals fixed when they should) so I decided to bring it here to see what you guys all thought.
I personally did not see you as agreeing with it, and I was disagreeing with the idea--not with you. I thought you just wanted to see what other people thought about something you heard 
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2008
- Messages
- 1,299
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
^^^ Very true, no matter how unpalatable that may sound. In the U.S. at least, you are consitutionally protected against unreasonable search, seizure, or invasion of your domicile, person, papers, effects or properties. This is but ONE reason why the extreme practices of BSL in places like Denver was so shocking ... some people's dogs, which are defined as property, were confiscated and destroyed. Renee's also quite correct that all the whining about "dangerous dog breeds" and mandatory spay/neuter is just distracting people from other pretty shocking things.
Just a while back there was that startling Supreme Court decision that grossly violated the 5th Amendment part that says "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Private commercial developers can now successfully sue to take private property, like your house and land, without just compensation (like fair market value!) and without the purpose even being for public use!! Instead the commercial developer can put you and your neighbors out of your homes to build a strip mall or condo complex.
You'd think there would have been mass demonstrations in the streets ... you would think. But noooo, it went by with barely a peep from the Oprah-and-Dr.Phil-lovin-American-Idol-votin'-general-public.
Just a while back there was that startling Supreme Court decision that grossly violated the 5th Amendment part that says "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Private commercial developers can now successfully sue to take private property, like your house and land, without just compensation (like fair market value!) and without the purpose even being for public use!! Instead the commercial developer can put you and your neighbors out of your homes to build a strip mall or condo complex.
You'd think there would have been mass demonstrations in the streets ... you would think. But noooo, it went by with barely a peep from the Oprah-and-Dr.Phil-lovin-American-Idol-votin'-general-public.
Nah, you already said you did not agree with it ... saw that.
Was just hoping to get you fired up on educating that person who had suggested it to you.
Was just hoping to get you fired up on educating that person who had suggested it to you.
why do petaphiles campaign against humane horse slaughter in the USA when horse owner/breeder associations tell them it'll lead to abandonment, neglect and increased inhumane slaughter in Mexico. why do they complain about the "unethical" raising of animals for food & dairying and turn around and euthanize over 85% of the animals dropped off at their shelter in VA Beach, animals th owners thought they were going to find a new home for. it's because these people are simply psychotic scum who want to force everyone to live the way they want them to and don't care about the damage they do in the process.
S
Not that I know a whole lot about registries and breeding, but I just think its ridiculous. The majority of dogs produced by bybs ARE AKC registered. Thats how bybs get their dogs sold. Their dogs are registered so they MUST be quality puppies, right? . A lot of people believe that and thats whats scary. If you look at pet store pups, they are all registered, but it doesn't mean a **** thing.... people fail to realize that...
. A lot of people believe that and thats whats scary. If you look at pet store pups, they are all registered, but it doesn't mean a **** thing.... people fail to realize that...
"Humane slaughter" means the animal is not allowed to suffer during slaughter. It is ended quickly, they are treated respectfully and carefully during the time before slaughter while being transported and all.
"Inhumane slaughter" would be abusive treatment before slaughter, or slaughtering methods that caused prolonged suffering of the animal.
It's not as if the slaughtered horses are thrown into garbage dumps and wasted. The meat is sold to people in other countries that eat horse. Horse leather is much more durable than cow leather too.
Honestly, if an animal is going to be put down, it is much better that it's done in a manner where suffering is minimalized rather than shipped to a foreign country where there is little to no regulation, and who knows what happens to those horses before they die.
On a personal note, I really like horses but I don't not see their lives as having any more intrinsic value than a cow. Having worked with both, I like cows much more than horses. This doesn't mean I don't eat beef, or that I don't think cows should be slaughtered...because they are livestock, and that is what they are made for. I have had pet cows, and we didn't eat them..but at the same time we kept beef cows that we did eat. The same thing with our chickens, rabbits, etc. From my point of view, the government stepping in and saying I can't slaughter a horse is like the government making a law that I may feed mice to my snakes, but not gerbils because gerbils have more intrinsic value to the general public than mice..and that to me is complete meddling and invasion of privacy.
Please note that I never have or never intend to slaughter a horse. It's just that these laws do not make any sense to me at all.
"Inhumane slaughter" would be abusive treatment before slaughter, or slaughtering methods that caused prolonged suffering of the animal.
It's not as if the slaughtered horses are thrown into garbage dumps and wasted. The meat is sold to people in other countries that eat horse. Horse leather is much more durable than cow leather too.
Honestly, if an animal is going to be put down, it is much better that it's done in a manner where suffering is minimalized rather than shipped to a foreign country where there is little to no regulation, and who knows what happens to those horses before they die.
On a personal note, I really like horses but I don't not see their lives as having any more intrinsic value than a cow. Having worked with both, I like cows much more than horses. This doesn't mean I don't eat beef, or that I don't think cows should be slaughtered...because they are livestock, and that is what they are made for. I have had pet cows, and we didn't eat them..but at the same time we kept beef cows that we did eat. The same thing with our chickens, rabbits, etc. From my point of view, the government stepping in and saying I can't slaughter a horse is like the government making a law that I may feed mice to my snakes, but not gerbils because gerbils have more intrinsic value to the general public than mice..and that to me is complete meddling and invasion of privacy.
Please note that I never have or never intend to slaughter a horse. It's just that these laws do not make any sense to me at all.
This is a very valid and good point IMO. And we ALL know why there are laws like this............SQUEAKY WHEELS GET THE GREASE. PERIOD.
This is why we cannot ever stop voicing our opinions on such matters. Whenever the occasion to vote, sign, speak out presents itself, we must do what we can.
If we let the squeaky wheels do all the talking, BSL will happen to ALL of us.............bet on it
This is why we cannot ever stop voicing our opinions on such matters. Whenever the occasion to vote, sign, speak out presents itself, we must do what we can.
If we let the squeaky wheels do all the talking, BSL will happen to ALL of us.............bet on it
Would you consider the slaughter of dogs for meat acceptable? Horses are not considered food in the US any more than dogs are. The conditions experienced by horses going to slaughter make the former euthanasia practices at the shelter Meg came from (throw all the dogs in a hole, shoot down into it until there is no more moving) seem humane.
The means of transporting the horses to slaughter are appalling. The housing situation at the slaughter houses is appalling. The percentage of horses still alive when slaughtered (far, far higher than with cattle) is appalling. The laws don't say you can't own a horse. They don't say you can't euthanize it, or shoot it, or breed it, or show it, or feed it to your snake. The laws were intended to stop the inhumane killing (and trust me, as I said, US slaughter houses were NOT any more humane for horses than the Canadian ones) of what is essentially a pet animal. I see it as far more of an animal welfare issue than an animal rights one.
And so ends my off-topic rant. Please go ahead and resume your own ranting about the breeding of AKC dogs.
The means of transporting the horses to slaughter are appalling. The housing situation at the slaughter houses is appalling. The percentage of horses still alive when slaughtered (far, far higher than with cattle) is appalling. The laws don't say you can't own a horse. They don't say you can't euthanize it, or shoot it, or breed it, or show it, or feed it to your snake. The laws were intended to stop the inhumane killing (and trust me, as I said, US slaughter houses were NOT any more humane for horses than the Canadian ones) of what is essentially a pet animal. I see it as far more of an animal welfare issue than an animal rights one.
And so ends my off-topic rant. Please go ahead and resume your own ranting about the breeding of AKC dogs.
I wouldn't consider dogs to be a safe food source in this country, with them being carnivores and commonly eating a highly processed diet I can't imagine that the levels of chemicals that builds up in their bodies over time would be remotely ok for people to eat.
If the conditions you are describing are really how horse slaughter has been handled in this country, then that is appalling. However, I do believe that all of those atrocities would have been completely covered by enforcing existing animal cruelty law. I do not see the need to draft additional laws that strip away more and more rights. I do not see a ban as being a solution, because there are still an excess of horses with no one to feed them, and they will be slaughtered somewhere, somehow...either that or starve to death in someone's back field. I guess it is a little like the euthanasia issue at the pound, except that the bodies of the horses have commercial value and can be utilized instead of incinerated/ground into fertilizer/etc.
Where are the sources for your info? I am just curious, because I assumed that being in America I figured it would be subject to the same/similar regulation for cattle. Especially since much of the meat is intended for human consumption, even though it isn't eaten here. To my understanding, those laws banning horse slaughter were solidly backed by the HSUS and PETA who are notorious for doctored/misleading photos and accounts of what actually occurred. Please correct me if I am wrong, because I am not totally informed and I'd like to know more about the situation.
If the conditions you are describing are really how horse slaughter has been handled in this country, then that is appalling. However, I do believe that all of those atrocities would have been completely covered by enforcing existing animal cruelty law. I do not see the need to draft additional laws that strip away more and more rights. I do not see a ban as being a solution, because there are still an excess of horses with no one to feed them, and they will be slaughtered somewhere, somehow...either that or starve to death in someone's back field. I guess it is a little like the euthanasia issue at the pound, except that the bodies of the horses have commercial value and can be utilized instead of incinerated/ground into fertilizer/etc.
Where are the sources for your info? I am just curious, because I assumed that being in America I figured it would be subject to the same/similar regulation for cattle. Especially since much of the meat is intended for human consumption, even though it isn't eaten here. To my understanding, those laws banning horse slaughter were solidly backed by the HSUS and PETA who are notorious for doctored/misleading photos and accounts of what actually occurred. Please correct me if I am wrong, because I am not totally informed and I'd like to know more about the situation.
They are, Romy... BB is completely correct. I don't have any sources, but I figure a quick google will help you.
Right now horses are being trucked to Mexico - illegally, as far as I know - to be slaughtered, and their slaughtering methods are worse. Far worse. I'd prefer a bullet to the head. Or anywhere, really, to that.
Right now horses are being trucked to Mexico - illegally, as far as I know - to be slaughtered, and their slaughtering methods are worse. Far worse. I'd prefer a bullet to the head. Or anywhere, really, to that.
the only thing BB is right on is the transport, most are trucked in the same trailers used for cattle & hogs.
other than that
1. an animal must be alive at the time of slaughter for human consumption and pass inspection by a USDA inspector. if an inspector is shady stuff happens. animals that cannot be lead under their own power or have an obvious illness are NOT legally sopposed to be slaughtered for human consumption but can be for animal consumption. animals that die in pens & feedlots can only legally be rendered for animal consumption.
2. the slaughter of all large animals is as quick and humane as possible because a sufferring and concious 900#< animal is a serious hazzard and liability for the business. it also reduces profit lost to damaged meat.
3. the current law only prohibits the COMMERCIAL slaughter for HUMAN consumption. new laws being proposed would make it illegal to knowingly sell horses for slaughter in canada & mexico and end the slaughter of horses for animal consumption (which is still going on).
4. US & canadian facilities are both equally human for the same reasons of profit & liability. mexican facilities however are lightly regulated and can maintain a high profit margin despite the horrible methods due to less concern over wages & liability. the law boosted production especially in Mexico but w/ no change in the facilities, so more animals are going to an inhumane slaughter. (on a side note the videos produce by the AR whackos are generally the result of MONTHS of video made at MULTIPLE facilities including the couple that slaughter for animal consumption where various equipment like forklifts are used to move down & dead animals for processing. the videos are then edited to look like a short time in a single facility.)
5. horses didn't really become pets until the 70s, prior to that they were still primarily livestock that serve a working purpose. horse meat was a common commodity until after WWII. since it was generally regarded as a poor mans meat (although the some of the very wealthy also had acquired a taste for it from time in europe) the post war affluence was the primary cause of the decline in domestic consumption.
6. the main effects of banning commercial slaughter were: loss of jobs & revenue, increased production in canada & mexico and the inhumane slaughter in mexico, higher rates of abandonment and cruelty incidents in the USA (because horses as pets are just as likely to have improper owners as cats & dogs). ALL of which was predicted by the various horse breed organizations the majority of whom OPPOSED legislation ending humane slaughter at US facilities.
whether horses are "essentially a pet" is a matter of opinion directly related to personal background. I do not consider them a pet. i consider them livestock to be used as necessary and dealt with humanely & in a useful fashion. the real issue is that the personal property rights of the few (to dispose of THEIR LIVESTOCK as they see fit) are being trampled by the opinions of the many (including many who are completely ignorant of the issue and do not own any horses).
ALL of which brings us back to the dog issue in the OP. it is morally repugnant for any group no matter how large or small to forcibly abrogate the property rights of any segment of our society. it is an insult to to the founders of our nation and the blood they shed to give us the level of freedom that they did.
other than that
1. an animal must be alive at the time of slaughter for human consumption and pass inspection by a USDA inspector. if an inspector is shady stuff happens. animals that cannot be lead under their own power or have an obvious illness are NOT legally sopposed to be slaughtered for human consumption but can be for animal consumption. animals that die in pens & feedlots can only legally be rendered for animal consumption.
2. the slaughter of all large animals is as quick and humane as possible because a sufferring and concious 900#< animal is a serious hazzard and liability for the business. it also reduces profit lost to damaged meat.
3. the current law only prohibits the COMMERCIAL slaughter for HUMAN consumption. new laws being proposed would make it illegal to knowingly sell horses for slaughter in canada & mexico and end the slaughter of horses for animal consumption (which is still going on).
4. US & canadian facilities are both equally human for the same reasons of profit & liability. mexican facilities however are lightly regulated and can maintain a high profit margin despite the horrible methods due to less concern over wages & liability. the law boosted production especially in Mexico but w/ no change in the facilities, so more animals are going to an inhumane slaughter. (on a side note the videos produce by the AR whackos are generally the result of MONTHS of video made at MULTIPLE facilities including the couple that slaughter for animal consumption where various equipment like forklifts are used to move down & dead animals for processing. the videos are then edited to look like a short time in a single facility.)
5. horses didn't really become pets until the 70s, prior to that they were still primarily livestock that serve a working purpose. horse meat was a common commodity until after WWII. since it was generally regarded as a poor mans meat (although the some of the very wealthy also had acquired a taste for it from time in europe) the post war affluence was the primary cause of the decline in domestic consumption.
6. the main effects of banning commercial slaughter were: loss of jobs & revenue, increased production in canada & mexico and the inhumane slaughter in mexico, higher rates of abandonment and cruelty incidents in the USA (because horses as pets are just as likely to have improper owners as cats & dogs). ALL of which was predicted by the various horse breed organizations the majority of whom OPPOSED legislation ending humane slaughter at US facilities.
whether horses are "essentially a pet" is a matter of opinion directly related to personal background. I do not consider them a pet. i consider them livestock to be used as necessary and dealt with humanely & in a useful fashion. the real issue is that the personal property rights of the few (to dispose of THEIR LIVESTOCK as they see fit) are being trampled by the opinions of the many (including many who are completely ignorant of the issue and do not own any horses).
ALL of which brings us back to the dog issue in the OP. it is morally repugnant for any group no matter how large or small to forcibly abrogate the property rights of any segment of our society. it is an insult to to the founders of our nation and the blood they shed to give us the level of freedom that they did.
I own a horse, I love her to death and view her as a pet, but I am not against humane horse slaughter and I have also tried the meat (didn't like it, but I do eat it occasionally when I steal a bite of kroketten from a friend, I am told by a snack shop owner here that horse meat is used A LOT.. which I already knew though). My BO eats it as well. Sorry, but I don't view them any differently then I do a cow, sheep, or pig. I would love a pet cow, but it doesn't mean I would stop eating beef.
As far as forced sterilization..... RIDICULOUS. I am not in the states, but go back frequently and possibly might move back one day, really don't want to come back to some of the crap that is being proposed and some that has already been put into place.
As far as forced sterilization.....
RIDICULOUS. I am not in the states, but go back frequently and possibly might move back one day, really don't want to come back to some of the crap that is being proposed and some that has already been put into place.