Tell Congress to Pass the SAFE Act Banning Horse Slaughter (different petition)

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Angela Freda;7129126]
You’re right, this horses’ condition happened with the owner who brought it to the sale.

But it was ACCEPTED into the sale by the sale barn owner/manager.
He sat there at the sale ALL DAY.
And a Vet who works that sale ignored him all day, as did others who should know better than to turn a blind eye.

And they can’t ID who consigned him? Why not? Didn’t NH take the info, or do they not want to throw one of their buddies under the bus for this?

Remember what we were talking about re: horse slaughter, about enforcing legislation?
Did that happen here? Why not?

But keep making excuses for the people who let this happen on their watch, on their property who are part of the industry.

Thanks for once again proving my point, that those who are pro-slaughter say they think the laws should be enforced, but when presented with a case of abuse, they insist it’s only Pushing for animal rights extremist agendas to BAN this and that we do with animals because someone, somewhere, here look how horrible, some animal was abused, that is objectionable also, unless the ones using that abuse card are animal rights extremists and that is their agenda.
Enforce the laws, except in this case?

So what you’re saying is that when anyone interested in animal welfare or animal rights even bring the situation to light, it then is not abuse after all?
Why does it matter who brought it to light?
Talk about biased![/QUOTE]

Nothing of the sort.

What I am saying is that such story brought up here, clearly as a reason to push for the BAN horse slaughter animal rights extremist agenda, is kind of making MY point.

Animal rights extremist will use abuse out of context to keep pushing for, not looking after horse welfare, but to promote their agenda to BAN horse slaughter and eventually eliminate all uses.:no:

We know abuse happens every place, not just in a sale barn, not just in churches and schools and police departments, but everywhere.

We have laws to address that.

IF you see some abuse, to work at stopping the abuse is animal welfare.
To use the abuse as here, to push for a BAN horse slaughter animal rights extremist agenda, that is like pushing to ban churches, schools and police departments because, see, there is abuse there.

Sorry, will have to agree to disagree that pushing for BANS because of abuse makes sense.

As for the horse laying there, I have seen plenty of horses laying around in sale barns and nothing was wrong with them.
How were the ones there to know the horse was in pain just because it was laying in a pen?
Maybe the horse was given bute so he walked in there sound and looked sound for as long as that lasted?

Not defending them, I definitely don’t have any way of knowing, just adding to why maybe the scenario you want to paint may not be quite what you think, as coming from that source it is suspect as what really is going on there.

[Angela_Freda]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7129138]
Nothing of the sort.

What I am saying is that such story brought up here, clearly as a reason to push for the BAN horse slaughter animal rights extremist agenda, is kind of making MY point.

Animal rights extremist will use abuse out of context to keep pushing for, not looking after horse welfare, but to promote their agenda to BAN horse slaughter and eventually eliminate all uses.:no:

We know abuse happens every place, not just in a sale barn, not just in churches and schools and police departments, but everywhere.

We have laws to address that.

IF you see some abuse, to work at stopping the abuse is animal welfare.
To use the abuse as here, to push for a BAN horse slaughter animal rights extremist agenda, that is like pushing to ban churches, schools and police departments because, see, there is abuse there.

Sorry, will have to agree to disagree that pushing for BANS because of abuse makes sense.

As for the horse laying there, I have seen plenty of horses laying around in sale barns and nothing was wrong with them.
How were the ones there to know the horse was in pain just because it was laying in a pen?
Maybe the horse was given bute so he walked in there sound and looked sound for as long as that lasted?

Not defending them, I definitely don’t have any way of knowing, just adding to why maybe the scenario you want to paint may not be quite what you think, as coming from that source it is suspect as what really is going on there.[/QUOTE]

Horses do not lay down there, during the hubbub and bustle of the sale, as I am sure you are aware, it’s a loud, busy, hectic place.
He was sweating [shown clearly in the pictures] profusely and it wasn’t hot.
There was a Vet there who could have determined if those were NOT due to pain, but he chose to not attend to the animal until 7pm
Bute to mask a rotation that severe? I don’t think so.
And the pain wasn’t masked, people noticed.
They just chose to not do anything.

I am not using the abuse to push for the ban.
It, along with your excuses, is proof that proclamations that ‘the laws will be enforced’ is lip service.

[D_BaldStockings]

If you do not believe laws will be enforced, why change them?

Why ban slaughter if the ban will not be enforced?

That is a very odd position.

If most pedophiles are male, obviously banning male contact with children should seriously reduce child molestation.

Most males are not pedophiles, however. Banning contact would be an irrational excessive position.

Bans are only valid in ‘ALLl or NONE’, clear-cut situations.

Is All slaughter abusively done?
All auctions abusive?
All veterinarians?
All commercial transport?

[up-at-5]

[QUOTE=Fairfax;7128785]
You are correct.

I have been accused of bragging when I mention what the horses have done or what is owned.

Lets just say a home and 12 acres freehold is considered to be a residence.[/QUOTE]

Just saying, when a braggart boasts, they are usually full of crap:lol:

I like how you have likened me to a hoarder, but you state you have many more horses than I, yet you are a “breeder”, as if breeding one foal makes you better than me? S’up with that, big guy?

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;7129176]
If you do not believe laws will be enforced, why change them?

Why ban slaughter if the ban will not be enforced?

That is a very odd position.

If most pedophiles are male, obviously banning male contact with children should seriously reduce child molestation.

Most males are not pedophiles, however. Banning contact would be an irrational excessive position.

Bans are only valid in ‘ALLl or NONE’, clear-cut situations.

Is All slaughter abusively done?
All auctions abusive?
All veterinarians?
All commercial transport?[/QUOTE]

About the BAN:

http://equinelaw.alisonrowe.com/articles/horse-slaughter-1/

—Conclusion

If the European Union no longer wants our horsemeat, and the Asian or South American demand is not enough to sustain the industry, the free market economy will bring an end to horse slaughter.
The anti-slaughter advocates agree”"indeed, this is the only real economic issue they have latched onto. But if this is something that will go away on its own, why do we need a ban?
Your guess is as good as mine. I would think that given the amount of money and time the anti-slaughter camp has spent to bring about anti-slaughter legislation, they can’t stop now.
It would be unthinkable to them that they threw away millions trying to force their will upon us, instead of using their time and money to save the adoptable horses that either died of neglect or were inhumanely butchered in Mexico as a result of their efforts.

It is a myth that horse suffering has decreased now that slaughter is no longer an option. I applaud organizations such as the self-sustaining equine sanctuaries and rescues, veterinary associations, and the Unwanted Horse Coalition for doing what they can to reduce the amount of unwanted horses.
If we want to improve horse welfare, we should be spending our time and money helping these organizations help horses”"not on political agendas.
And if we must regulate the industry, let’s keep regulating horse transportation and institute methods of humane slaughter such as those proposed by Temple Grandin for the cattle industry. But we can only control how horses are treated as long as we allow them to be slaughtered within our borders.

Jane Smiley, contributor to the New York Times Horse Racing Blog, may have put it best when she said:

We must recognize that there is a market for horse meat (not only for human consumption, but also for zoo and circus-animal consumption) and that in a starving world, a source of protein should not go to waste for sentimental reasons. It is sentimentality that has resulted in profounder cruelty to our horses - because we don’t accept that they are animals and have a utilitarian purpose, we hide from what happens to them, and so what happens to them happens in secret."—

[Abercrombie]

[QUOTE=Fairfax;7128052]
Would you prefer the quote came from me?

Having been involved with PETA and having watched HSUS I thought I saw a kinder face on HSUS

Until I watched them seize horses for a training exercise for their staff and I watched them encourage their rescue groupies to falsify pictures and I watched the documented lies they had a witness who they were secretly funneling money to through a legal firm and they now employ those two lawyers etc.

I realized they are liars with an agenda. When they tell us they have staff who love their horseys…they are not lying…they know the image they must project but they must also protect it.

That is why they encourage Shedrow and her groupies to stand firm…and post post post…but they also help susidize DEFHR and others to spread the word…make contacts both local and international and try and sneak horse care conditions into law using UDavis…Parisio versus UDavis

Wayne is very strong with his Vegan core especially in Hollywood where his wife hangs out and runs the LA office.

We have posted the pension he is going to receive…by why bother now because he is a very young man and ALL expenses are paid for by HSUS including his mortgage.

I find it ironic he has his minions condemn Humanwatch for soliciting funds from corporations and yet…ye…Wayne…milks the America public dry each and every day.

We understand the concept of good cop bad cop and that is the pETA versus HSUS involvement. They are wary of each other however BOTH want to restrict animal use

Peta wants to remove animals from human interaction but HSUS because it is not in your face is more sinister.

This anti slaughter thread is a common example

He will NOT try and remove horses from us…taking reins out of our dead fingers. He will remove piece by piece ownership rights. Many of you have no idea how close NAIS came into being…finally horse owners realized if they were just going to take their horse to the favourite trail, by trailer…they were going to have to pre plan AND file paperwork…same with a trip to the vet…to the stud farm.

Many horse owners said “the other side was over reacting” NO government could enforce it…Thankfully there were those who saw ALL of the problems and beat it.

Well…HSUS was pro NAIS. They kept a low profile however their mode is to create division…split the forces and then go after the weaker one. The felt that slaughter was the weaker one…they were and are wrong…

They quietly use those 52 lawyers (I posted an update that accounted for the extra) to look for loopholes. Look at the legislation for this current petition…STOP the transportation out of the country of any group of horses. That would include the Olynpic team going to Spruce Meadows…oh…they are not going to actually stop them…just have a bunch of paperwork to file…and maybe permits to purchase. But it will make owners reconsider whether or not to purchase a couple of horses for breeding or usage and bring them into Canada. It will stop big trainers who bring 15 or more horses to the Toronto Royal of the Arabian Horse Canadian Nationals…as the shows cut back…so does interest in horses…

Try get laws or ownership licenses in place. On ABN a newbie was trying to sell the idea under a guise of…gosh, golly gee…I think this would help the over population of horses by bad back yard breeders like the one I just conventiently met … a license to purchase a horse…to breed, to own stallions etc.

They won’t try and stop you…but they will make it more expensive AND just another pain in the butt for paper work.

As shows and ownership become more expensive as things do…NEW people will look at the costs AND license fees AND And And…okay…they get a boat…license fees…but they don’t have to feed it and they can dry shore it during the off season…same with their skis, roller blades, tennis rackets…

I have already viewed a shift in ownership over the past ten years…and from the ten years prior to that. Where we lived off the Banff Coach Road in Calgary is now a housing development overlooking Calgary. Where we used to trail ride up the road is now packed like inner city and the acreage folk are long gone…taxes too high…and an anti horse poop sentiment.

No fun just riding in your arena or around your property. We had Western Riders (for everyone) and we rode every Sunday morning and every second Sunday we also had a BBQ.

No longer…it is a BMW race track.

Horse ownership is very expensive. Land here is very expensive. So people don’t just get a pony for the kids any more…and kids don’t want one…they would rather go to their computer or hang out with friends.

Take what is occuring naturally and then add in a few fees and registrations and government controls and you have the perfect storm…reduced horse ownership…reduced say with government

No less than Olds Ag College have done studies on this as they teach equine classes and they have a sport horse division. They are concerned about costs and the average person.

So…up at five…I guess my concerns are shared by many of my peers. I am fortunate that I have my own hay…and property…to house 15 Saddlebreds. In ten years I am not sure if that will be possible.[/QUOTE]

As long as it took to type this rambling manifesto, you evidently have way too much time on your hands.
Don’t you have some big-hair dogs you need to go brush or something?

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Abercrombie;7129198]
As long as it took to type this rambling manifesto, you evidently have way too much time on your hands.
Don’t you have some big-hair dogs you need to go brush or something?[/QUOTE]

Honestly, why the personal attack?:no:

Lets debate, not try to shoot messengers with personal digs.

[up-at-5]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7129209]
Honestly, why the personal attack?:no:

Lets debate, not try to shoot messengers with personal digs.:([/QUOTE]
Really, Bluey? Really? That is less of a personal attack than what you and your ilk have dished out at me and many others on here.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=up-at-5;7129216]
Really, Bluey? Really? That is less of a personal attack than what you and your ilk have dished out at me and many others on here.[/QUOTE]

" … “you and your ilk”?:eek:

[Abercrombie]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7129209]
Honestly, why the personal attack?:no:

Lets debate, not try to shoot messengers with personal digs.:([/QUOTE]

That’s ironic coming from someone who loves to hang the “AR/HSUS/PETA” nametag on anyone who opposes slaughtering horses.

Maybe take your own advice? Just a thought. :yes:

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Abercrombie;7129246]
That’s ironic coming from someone who loves to hang the “AR/HSUS/PETA” nametag on anyone who opposes slaughtering horses.

Maybe take your own advice? Just a thought. :yes:[/QUOTE]

Where is saying some seem to be pushing animal rights extremists agendas, not naming anyone, just in general, going by what they post, is insulting anyone personally?

It would seem that is what they represent and what they are clearly bringing to the debate here, this “SAFE Act Banning Horse Slaughter”, as in the title of this thread, being just that.

Ironic that pointing that out is seen as an insult.

Just a thought.

[luvmytbs]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7129209]
Honestly, why the personal attack?:no:

Lets debate, not try to shoot messengers with personal digs.:([/QUOTE]

OMG
You’re kidding, right?

[Abercrombie]

@Bluey;7129258

Where is saying some seem to be pushing animal rights extremists agendas, not naming anyone, just in general, going by what they post, is insulting anyone personally?

Despite my opinion of your opinions, I know you’re more intelligent than you’re pretending to be here.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Abercrombie;7129264]
Despite my opinion of your opinions, I know you’re more intelligent than you’re pretending to be here.[/QUOTE]

Let me explain further, that may make this a bit more clear.

If I keep coming here, for years now, starting threads with propaganda and supporting those that agree that this Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus, to make this horse related, is the new GOD and will save the world from itself.

See all that is wrong, all those abuses, the world is all abuse, follow us and no more, all will smile and bow to each other, a Brave New World Order for all!

If I keep coming here and pushing mercilessly every chance for the Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus agenda, what would you think I am doing here?

Yes, I expect you would say I am shilling for the Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus agenda.
If I then would answer, no, no, I just want to say we need this Brave New World Order, you will see, all will be ok, just trust me, it will cure all ills.

On and on and on for years now.

Well, that is what animal rights extremist seem to be doing here.

All some of us are saying is, wait a minute, I think you got that wrong, that agenda is not what it seems or what you seem to think it is all about AND give reasons for it.

Now, the intelligent thing to do would be to debate why the rest of the world is wrong, not the one pushing for that Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus and the New Brave World Order.

Jumping at those that don’t agree and getting personal is really not going to help that agenda any, just makes that position seem untenable.
The one pushing for it comes across as being without a leg to stand on, when it can’t defend it’s position but by deflecting the ones with questions with personal attacks.

[Abercrombie]

[QUOTE=Abercrombie;7129264]
Despite my opinion of your opinions, I know you’re more intelligent than you’re pretending to be here.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7129290]Let me explain further, that may make this a bit more clear.

If I keep coming here, for years now, starting threads with propaganda and supporting those that agree that this Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus, to make this horse related, is the new GOD and will save the world from itself.

See all that is wrong, all those abuses, the world is all abuse, follow us and no more, all will smile and bow to each other, a Brave New World Order for all!

If I keep coming here and pushing mercilessly every chance for the Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus agenda, what would you think I am doing here?

Yes, I expect you would say I am shilling for the Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus agenda.
If I then would answer, no, no, I just want to say we need this Brave New World Order, you will see, all will be ok, just trust me, it will cure all ills.

On and on and on for years now.

Well, that is what animal rights extremist seem to be doing here.

All some of us are saying is, wait a minute, I think you got that wrong, that agenda is not what it seems or what you seem to think it is all about AND give reasons for it.

Now, the intelligent thing to do would be to debate why the rest of the world is wrong, not the one pushing for that Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus and the New Brave World Order.

Jumping at those that don’t agree and getting personal is really not going to help that agenda any, just makes that position seem untenable.
The one pushing for it comes across as being without a leg to stand on, when it can’t defend it’s position but by deflecting the ones with questions with personal attacks.[/QUOTE]

??? Or maybe not…<sigh> :no:

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=Abercrombie;7129304]
??? Or maybe not…<sigh> :no:[/QUOTE]

Here is your Flying Spaghetti Monster Pegasus at work:

—“The ultimate dream for animal rights advocates would be something like the application of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection to animals as well as humans. Such a ruling might ban the rearing of domesticated animals for meat altogether.
(I am adding, not just for meat, any animal use will be eliminated following that tenet, the horse we enjoy included)
And some major thinkers in the field – most famously Steve Wise of the Nonhuman Rights Project – are actively pursuing it.”—

Sure, that is an interesting intellectual exercise.

Once someone thinks that is a good way to change this world and starts working to do so thru the legal system, well, pragmatic voices will have to object to that, I would say.
That is what some of us are doing, objecting to what some are bringing to the table here.:yes:

[Sannois]

You seriously think the So called Pres and his cronies gives a rats patoot about horses?
Well Okaaay. HE could give a rats patoot about the citizens of this country.
But knock yourself out!
I think there are far more important things to worry about in this country!

[Sannois]

[QUOTE=Abercrombie;7129246]
That’s ironic coming from someone who loves to hang the “AR/HSUS/PETA” nametag on anyone who opposes slaughtering horses.

Maybe take your own advice? Just a thought. :yes:[/QUOTE]
But that is not a personal attack, it is just what is so very obvious that people are playing into the hands of the AR Groups.

[luvmytbs]

[QUOTE=Sannois;7129387]
But that is not a personal attack, it is just what is so very obvious that people are playing into the hands of the AR Groups.[/QUOTE]

It “plays into the hands of AR groups”?

So are we, the ones for animal welfare, expected to stop calling out the abuse and neglect and sit on our hands and just let it go on, as some (not naming anyone, LOL) would like us to do.

NOT GOING TO HAPPEN !!!

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=luvmytbs;7129395]
It “plays into the hands of AR groups”?

So are we, the ones for animal welfare, expected to stop calling out the abuse and neglect and sit on our hands and just let it go on, as some (not naming anyone, LOL) would like us to do.

NOT GOING TO HAPPEN !!![/QUOTE]

Pushing for this animal rights extremist driven BAN horse slaughter on the title of this thread is NOT animal welfare, but the agenda of those bound and determined to eliminate all animal uses, very active on many fronts today, BAN horse slaughter just the one we are talking about here.

Stopping abuse is what animal welfare is and is what most anyone working with animals is working for.
To eliminate abuse doesn’t mean eliminate all uses of animals with BAN this or that, here BAN horse slaughter.

Important differences some seem to keep mixing up.