I have added a line to the petition stating that there is NO need whatsoever to make any donation in order to sign.
If the OP wishes to make a statement about the matter and publish it undisturbed by discussion, I kindly ask they may take it to their personal websites as this is a public bb so I guess you’ll have to live with people adding their opinion.
Kareen, the OP made no request of asking people not to share opinions. Her comprehension of the phrase “discussion board” would have her - and everyone else except for a narrow few - knowing that “discussion” means just that, and that everyone will give opinions, no matter how varied.
I would not sign a petition. I think the death threats against riders are civil and criminal acts, and I think the same of various attempts to slander individuals because they use a widely adopted training technique, but I also don’t see any justification for signing a petition in favor of an individual rider when I am sure the petition will develop a context of its own that i surely would not intend to support. I would prefer to communicate any positive sentiments about the rider both to the rider and directly to the fei, where I can be sure it won’t, like a petition, gain an unwanted context based on who else signs or how they word their interpretation of the petition.
Perhaps it would be a HUGE help to the entire horse community if those of you who feel Rollkur training is fine to create a website and sign on there with your real names. Then it makes it much easier for people who find this to be an unacceptable form of horse dominance to NOT market horses to the Rollkur Riders!
We’ve had a horse subjected to this without our knowledge or consent while he was in training and while we have spent 2 years working him back physically - he is still working through getting over the fear of being put into an frame behind the vertical. I am sick everytime I see his fear.
So Canyon Oak and others who obviously stand behind this Rollkur training - set up something and sign your names to help those of us who completely reject Rollkur to be able to sell our horses to owners who are non-Rollkur. Thanks in advance.
And I did write to the rider in this instance and told him I was so sad about this situation. I don’t agree there was nothing wrong. A blue tongue is serious. AND MY BIGGEST PROBLEM was the fact that he failed to DISMOUNT and examine this horse’s mouth completely before continuing. This gives me pause that his leaning over and sticking the tongue back in may have happened before. Threats of any kind are unacceptable.
Perhaps it would be a HUGE help to the entire horse community if those of you who feel Rollkur training is fine to create a website and sign on there with your real names.
Perhaps we should first start by the CotH requiring people to post with their real names. One would be able to review all posts for the day within 30 seconds if that was done. Less work for the moderators too so they could go ride. 
Bravo Mike - Good Idea
I think the death threats against riders are civil and criminal acts, and I think the same of various attempts to slander individuals because they use a widely adopted training technique
Yes , indeed, it’s good that you now recognize this slc because your post on the ‘blue tongue thread" might well be considered “slander” (correct term would be ’ libel’):
I could not continue to watch it. It made me physically ill. It’s not unusual to see a horse put his tongue out, but it really appeared that the color of the tongue was dusky, and I’m sure it was being trapped or pinched somehow.
It isn’t unusual for horses of that type to be worked for long periods of time, that in and of itself isn’t odd, though two hours seems like a bit much even for horses like that…what is absolutely insane is that the guy just left the tongue like that. It doesn’t just bother the horse, it makes the rider look like a first class oblivious bad trainer.
It looks like the horse got his tongue over or between the bits. He no doubt can tell or feel, or something, that that’s going on, at least I would think he could given how curled up he’s got the horse.
Without the tongue to cushion the bars of the mouth, the effect of that going on that long is just horrific, the mouth isn’t built to carry the bits without the tongue cushioning it.
The fallout from this is going to be vile. People do not appreciate such garbage
emphasis added
[QUOTE=egontoast;4473396]
Yes , indeed, it’s good that you now recognize this slc because your post on the 'blue tongue thread" might well be considered slander:
emphasis added[/QUOTE]
Give her a break - she signed the petition…
Nope. She accuses people of slander for doing the same thing she has done.
Likely signed both petitions depending on which way the wind was bloewing.
Egon, you are making things up now, and so are you, shanky. Didn’t your mommies and daddies tell you not to fib when you were little girls?
As I said, I signed neither petition. And will not sign either petition in the future. In general, I don’t sign petitions. In general, if I have strong enough feelings about something, I contact whoever it is directly. I make exceptions, but not in this case.
For example, in the pro-Kittel petition, a number of people made up names and comments that trivialize the petition - some even pretended to be other people, evidently. I think that’s very childish and I don’t want to be involved with that. The anti rollkur petition has problems too from my point of view.
The bottom line is that neither petition satisfies my position. I am uncomfortable with the positions of both sides, for various reasons.
prev comments:
Well, actually, there have been comments made by the riders that they would take some legal action, but it’s never specified exactly what. THe term ‘slanderous’ usually means ‘negative’, ‘mean’, ‘unkind’ though it doesn’t necessarily mean actionable.
I think accusations that horses were killed by the method, death threats against the riders, accusations of abuse, are, in some cases, actionable and that some of what’s going on is in fact slanderous, at least according to the definition of the word.
I don’t think anyone should stop speaking their minds about it if they feel strongly enough about it or are unhappy with the situation, though.
Unfortunately, since hyperflexion has gone on for so long without being stopped, it’s now has the problem of to some degree, being legally acceptable because it has ‘been around for a while’ and is a ‘common practice’. Not saying that’s right, but saying after 20-30 yrs, people can argue that.
[quote=slc2;4473744]
Well, actually, there have been comments made by the riders that they would take some legal action, but it’s never specified exactly what. THe term ‘slanderous’ usually means ‘negative’, ‘mean’, ‘unkind’ though it doesn’t necessarily mean actionable.
[quote]
The term ‘Slanderous’ is any false statement that impacts someone’s livelihood or reputation. It is not similar to ‘negative’, ‘mean’ ‘unkind’. It implies legal action because it is a legal term.
Rollkur is not ‘common practice’ and has not been widely used for a long time. I am speaking in terms of dressage as a whole, not European A team competitors. It has not been directly studied in a quality scientific study. The question as to whether or not it is harmful to horses in the long run is open because it has not been directly studied. This issue has come to a head now and so it is being dealt with now.
[QUOTE=J-Lu;4473764]
[quote=slc2;4473744]Well, actually, there have been comments made by the riders that they would take some legal action, but it’s never specified exactly what. THe term ‘slanderous’ usually means ‘negative’, ‘mean’, ‘unkind’ though it doesn’t necessarily mean actionable.
The term ‘Slanderous’ is any false statement that impacts someone’s livelihood or reputation. It is not similar to ‘negative’, ‘mean’ ‘unkind’. It implies legal action because it is a legal term.
Rollkur is not ‘common practice’ and has not been widely used for a long time. I am speaking in terms of dressage as a whole, not European A team competitors. It has not been directly studied in a quality scientific study. The question as to whether or not it is harmful to horses in the long run is open because it has not been directly studied. This issue has come to a head now and so it is being dealt with now.
What do you define a long time? I watched trainers in MI use it 20 years ago.
I understand what ‘slander’ means in a legal sense, but I also understand that people commonly use the term these days in a more general way without being aware of the legal fine points. ‘Slanderous’ is used as a general adjective these days.
When it is in writing it is called “libel” but many people confuse ‘libel’ and ‘slander’.
Depends on who you ask, and it hardly matters. Slander covers any temporary form of communication, so whether bb’s and blogs can be slanderous or libelous is something currently being debated(based on sequence, lack of editor-type editing, etc), twitters, phone texts might wind up being slander and blogs and bb’s libel, and as technology changes the law changes.
Either is defamation, and cases have been undertaken regardless of the debate about what term applies to which technology. There are many cases in which negative statements about people can’t be ruled libelous or slanderous, too. The law allows for fair discussion of public issues, opinions and ‘truth’ in many cases(the ‘truth’ of a statement doesn’t always prevent it from being defamatory, despite frequent statements here to the contrary), and slander and libel cases don’t always succeed, and how the court decides whether something is a fair and allowable discussion vs actionable, looks rather complex. I’m sure that internet rollkur discussions could become part of a lawsuit, they certainly have for other subjects. So far, has rollkur stayed out of court? I’m not sure.
We aren’t talking about twitter here (twits maybe).
I’m not going to debate the law with a google trained faux lawyer.
Hey - you gals who are lawyers can debate the slander definitions but it would be pretty hard to litigate - when the video shows a horse with a blue tongue - i.e. either no blood or oxygen supply. Also this person is in the public venue and he obviously did NOT dismount to examine the horse’s mouth - which IMHO would have shown concern.
But if someone wants to litigate it maybe that would be a good thing - then the whole training method would be challenged in court and perhaps those who HAVE presented scientific evidence against it could get a larger public forum.
“It would be pretty hard to litigate”
How do you know? Amazing things happen in court. Lawyers are creative, and the laws are open to interpretation, basically from the point in time that the two lawyers walk in the door, or even from the point where they start getting their ducks in a row.
“dismounting would have shown concern”
Maybe there was no reason for concern.
Maybe, since the horse has done this for a long time, Kittel, like most other riders, can put the tongue in perfectly well without dismounting. Maybe he looked at the tongue, and once it was untangled from whatever it got caught on, if it did, it looked fine, one can see perfectly well from the saddle, with the horse’s head turned to that side like he did. He did spend quite a bit of time straightening it out, he was probably looking to make sure it was ok.
Seems afterward, the horse didn’t have any trouble keeping that ‘limp’, ‘destroyed’ tongue in his mouth. I don’t think fi the tongue was injured, that would have been possible.
ah slc2 you are once again contradicting yourself. Have you been on jury duty? I would love to see how this man can litigate people all over the world commenting on what they feel is on the one hand wrong and others think it’s just nothing. If there’s a case there - then there must be about 2 million that would bring in more money for damages.
Everyone sitting on a jury brings their own feelings, experiences and emotions to a case. Even though they are directed by a judge - it doesn’t change their individual opinion. YOu don’t feel checking a horse’s tongue that’s hanging out and blue is o.k. - I don’t. That’s the way it is.
