The slaughter industry generates abuse? As I’ve asked before if this is true and you all think its true why support slaughter of other species?
Reading this reinforces to me that some people who support slaughter continue to fabricate claims that those who oppose slaughter are PETA whackos “advocating legislating vegtarianism.” Please point me to any posts looking to legislate us any kind of vegetarianism, because I haven’t seen that from anyone here - or from any of the people leading the anti-slaughter movement in this country. Everyone has been abundantly clear that it is banning horse slaughter we’re focused on, not banning slaughter of animals raised for food.
I think everyone here has agreed that once a horse something is dead, whatever happens to it is irrelevant. Again, it’s the inhumanity of the transportation to slaughter and the slaughter process itself that it objectionable.
Actually, that is incorrect. 92.3 % of horses arriving at slaughter plants in this country are in “good” condition, according to the US Department of Agriculture’s Guidelines for Handling and Transporting Equines to Slaughter. Just like beef consumers, people who eat horse want young tender flesh. Most horses going to slaughter are not “unwanted”, they are simply at the wrong auction at the wrong time, and if given the chance, could likely have lead a productive life.
[QUOTE=county;1876086]
The slaughter industry generates abuse? As I’ve asked before if this is true and you all think its true why support slaughter of other species?[/QUOTE]
Is there a bill that I can support? If so then post it. I am against big Ag business in general and will fight for small farmers rights any day of the week. Big Ag is IMO the main source of animal abuse because they move large numbers in methodical ways, the conveyer belt! They have little respect for life or suffering and are putting small farmers out of business. I am vehemently against NAIS also, BTW support bill S3862.
But, I work 40hrs per week, have a mini farm with nothing finished (construction wise), 11 animals, two toddlers and a husband. I can’t handle too many causes. All I really have time for is coming out here while at work and contacting my reps.
I have been horse crazy my whole life, therefore they are my biggest priority. When I say slaughter I am referring to Horses. Again the transportation and handling of horses intended for slaughter is abusive. People trying to squeeze the last buck out of a horse instead of humanly euthanizing him; that is abusive. Take away slaughter and you take away the abuse that is generated by moving a horse to slaughter.
All other abuse of horses will be unchanged. People have the option of slaughter now and look how much abuse takes place. These people will be unaffected by it, abuse will remain a constant until we start educating livestock owners.
Why must you continue to group the slaughter of cattle, pig, and chickens together with horses? Each has different issues that would need to addressed separately; you can’t possibly legislate all species together. If you understand the abuse that takes place say with large Ag chicken houses then you would understand it would make no since to pass a bill that could handle the individual problems associated with the two species.
Why do I continue to group cattle slaughter with horse slaughter? Because I don’t place one species of livestock over another and I’ve also been horse crazy since I was a kid. To me it makes no sense to ban the slaughter of one species when all are transported, killed, suffer abuse etc. same as the other.
Why do anti slaughter people keep grouping dogs and cats with horse slaughter?
And here I thought it was to get us off track from the actual bill on the floor to end horse slaughter :rolleyes:
Probably because horses, dogs and cats are not raised as food animals in the US.
Cows, chickens, lambs, pigs, etc., are bred and raised as food animals.
[QUOTE=county;1876204]
Why do I continue to group cattle slaughter with horse slaughter? Because I don’t place one species of livestock over another and I’ve also been horse crazy since I was a kid. To me it makes no sense to ban the slaughter of one species when all are transported, killed, suffer abuse etc. same as the other.
Why do anti slaughter people keep grouping dogs and cats with horse slaughter?[/QUOTE]
If you think cattle suffer and you own cattle; what are you doing to end their suffering?
[QUOTE=MSP;1876183]
Is there a bill that I can support? If so then post it. I am against big Ag business in general and will fight for small farmers rights any day of the week. Big Ag is IMO the main source of animal abuse because they move large numbers in methodical ways, the conveyer belt! They have little respect for life or suffering and are putting small farmers out of business. I am vehemently against NAIS also, BTW support bill S3862.
But, I work 40hrs per week, have a mini farm with nothing finished (construction wise), 11 animals, two toddlers and a husband. I can’t handle too many causes. All I really have time for is coming out here while at work and contacting my reps.
I have been horse crazy my whole life, therefore they are my biggest priority. When I say slaughter I am referring to Horses. Again the transportation and handling of horses intended for slaughter is abusive. People trying to squeeze the last buck out of a horse instead of humanly euthanizing him; that is abusive. Take away slaughter and you take away the abuse that is generated by moving a horse to slaughter.
All other abuse of horses will be unchanged. People have the option of slaughter now and look how much abuse takes place. These people will be unaffected by it, abuse will remain a constant until we start educating livestock owners.
Why must you continue to group the slaughter of cattle, pig, and chickens together with horses? Each has different issues that would need to addressed separately; you can’t possibly legislate all species together. If you understand the abuse that takes place say with large Ag chicken houses then you would understand it would make no since to pass a bill that could handle the individual problems associated with the two species.[/QUOTE]
MSP- this a point where I think we’re beating our heads against the wall. big sigh. As always excellent post 
I’m still up for the challenge- are you?
I’m still waiting for an effective argument to keep slaughter in place.
Effective to who? I’m still waiting for an effective arguement to ban it.
What am I doing about the cattle. I never sell any except to butcher privatly or to local feed lots. Have fought with the slaughter plant I worked at along with other workers for changes on the kill floor.
If people should bring up cats and dogs because there not food animals to me it only makes sense to bring up other species of livestock with horses since there all slaughtered for meat.
[QUOTE=county;1876259]
Effective to who? I’m still waiting for an effective arguement to ban it.
What am I doing about the cattle. I never sell any except to butcher privatly or to local feed lots. Have fought with the slaughter plant I worked at along with other workers for changes on the kill floor.
If people should bring up cats and dogs because there not food animals to me it only makes sense to bring up other species of livestock with horses since there all slaughtered for meat.[/QUOTE]
Okay lets go on this…
Effective
In this conext as defined by Websters
"mean producing or capable of producing a result. EFFECTIVE stresses the actual production of or the power to produce an effect <an effective rebuttal>. EFFECTUAL suggests the accomplishment of a desired result especially as viewed after the fact <the measures to stop the pilfering proved effectual>. "
Cats and dogs: no one in the USA raises dogs or cats for processing for human consumption in a USA regional or national market. NO ONE.
Horses: No one in the USA raises horses for primary objective of processing for human consumption in a USA regional or national market. There may be isolated farms (example such as in the HRT production) which produces an excess or by-product of horses in which a profitable disposal method IS slaughterhouses but this is clearly a tiny TINY portion of the overall horse population.
YES horses are currently classified as livestock however you will notice that REGIONALLY the classification definition has been elaborated/further defined for reasons of zoning and taxing to differentiate it from other traditional livestock. Case in point… horses are livestock but can be housed in cities such as NYC for example in which you cannot ‘house’ cattle.
Also as defined by the American Horse Council- more than 60% of horses owned in the US are recreational animals.
So as we really need to clear the air on this- horses can no longer be compared to traditional farming livestock IN MAJORITY as it was in the past. IN MAJORITY horses’ place in USA culture has changed.
And I have no problem with people thinking that way if they choose to. But don’t try and ram it down anyone elses throat thats out decision how we look at them. I do not tell people to slaughter their livestock or not to, I will accept to less from others.
another plus being we won’t have to worry about fighting back restrictions on the drugs we are allowed to use to keep our horses healthy/comfortable - no more concerns about “not for use on animals to be used for human consumption”
[QUOTE=county;1876313]
And I have no problem with people thinking that way if they choose to. But don’t try and ram it down anyone elses throat thats out decision how we look at them. I do not tell people to slaughter their livestock or not to, I will accept to less from others.[/QUOTE]
I’m not ramming it down anyone’s throat- it’s the simple fact that the traditional definition of horses is changing based on society/community.
So the majority has to uphold the position of a minority on the issue?
Nobody is telling YOU that you CANNOT go out in your field right now and carve up a few horses and have some future tasty horse burgers.
What the MAJORITY of horse owners are saying… we do not condone horse slaughter as a commercial industry.
The reasons may be ethical, spiritual, or in my case based on the prinicples of bad economics, poorly regulated policies, contradiction to current animal health standards, and the apparent detrimental effects to the actual health of the overall equine industry.
but you see by telling people you don’t condone a business you are ramming it down their throat. Horse slaughter is a legal business today if your telling anyone there wrong to partake in that business then your ramming it down their throat IMO. The rest of yiour post is nothing but opinion many are differant and certainly have the right to think that way as much as you do without being told their wrong as much as you do.
Make it illegal then you have the right to tell someone they should not sell to slaughter. Until then theres no more right then if I tell you to bad.
So you haven’t live in this country long have you- LOL (joke BTW).
The majority have determined that they do not condone a commercial horse slaughter industry. I don’t know how else to explain it??? Starts with grass roots efforts- the issue expands, debates pursue, opinions made and stressed, bills are presented, special interest lobby, house voted and the decision AGAIN in the MAJORITY that people in the USA just do not condone the industry. Kind of how things work in government.
Now do you want to move on to the ‘meat’ of the debate or bash around symantics and how the government works and is it ‘fair’ some more?
Are you actually reading the posts or just here adding trivial babble?
Actually I was thinking the babble came from you. But then thats always the style of the anti crowd make personal attacks when yourt not bright enough to hold a discussion.
BTW show me where the majority have said there against slaughter I don’t seem to remember a vote taken natioin wide. Have seen some polls taken by both sides and both say something differant.
Let me help you out a little. Site me some cases to argue PRO- slaughter?
Economic impacts to regional and or national, international benefit…
Economic interests to benefit international trade…
Precedent for the violation of personal property rights…
Site case (direct/indirect) in which slaughter can/does/will assist the majority horse owner as a disposal option?
etc etc etc…
[QUOTE=county;1876461]
Actually I was thinking the babble came from you. But then thats always the style of the anti crowd make personal attacks when yourt not bright enough to hold a discussion.
BTW show me where the majority have said there against slaughter I don’t seem to remember a vote taken natioin wide. Have seen some polls taken by both sides and both say something differant.[/QUOTE]
This is like shooting fish in a barrel…
Majority… Actually the first step of a ‘simulated’ national vote has been taken- through the house of representatives. There doesn’t exist in this nation an option to base laws by direct vote of the public. OR maybe we should add that too the debate?
Polls have been run through various cross sections of the equine community and yes they do vary. Was one done on Chronicle? I believe ‘The Horse’ did one and it was majority disapproving of the industry. Can anyone site me polls by the AQHA, AAEP, and others who do not endorse the bill? Most of the bill supporters of course have run their own polls and we already know where the majority stand.
Yes you right we do know where the majority stand and thats for slaughter. Of course I know you say the opposite. Big deal. And since when does something have to benifit the majority? I really doubt the majority think aliens from Mex. should be getting welfare but they still do.
BTW your right the first step to make slaughter illegal has been done. But therres still two more and they haven’t. So in the mean time you can jump up and down, scream, holler, and hold your breath till you turn blue and its still legal. You certainly don’t have to like it but then you have no more right to tell me its wriong then I have to say its right.
Sonesta: Thank you for your post. You said it well.
An observation pertaining to an earlier post: at the auctions in my area, when the meat buyers are not bidding/buying, the prices go down. Way down. So I do not expect that prices will go up if/when slaughter is banned.
And decent horses (the ones that have no obvious physical or mental problems) generally have a reserve on them that is too high for meat price. For that very reason. And most of them go home unsold. At the moment, again in my area, people do not want to pay over $600 for the type of riding horse one can reasonably expect to find at these auctions. Generally, if a horse comes to one of these auctions, it is because it was not saleable by word of mouth. In which case one has to wonder why it did not sell. A very very small number come to auction because their owners know of no other way to sell a horse.
My greatest fear in the event that slaughter is banned outright is that the owners who want to save on the euthanasia and/or make a buck or two will simply let the animals rot out in a field behind the barn since doing that will cost them nothing. It does happen and too often. For some animals the best to hope for may be that the owner has a buddy with a .22 and is willing to use it.
