Sen Ensign on CSPAN 2 NOW..

[nettiemaria]

Who is that statement directed to County?

[county]

The person who decided that everyone in a state thinks the same way

[nettiemaria]

Well, that wouldn't be me then. I did not see THAT post.

[county]

I did

[nettiemaria]

Oh, I see now. Well anyway,

[county]

It will be interesting to see what happens after the year is up. The plants plant to ask for their own inspectors for a year in which case if approved its business as usual. Does anyone know the plan for when the year is up?

Personally it doesn't change much for most people other then I'm not sure what happens to the mean or dangerous horses other then they get killed just to be dead much like the Humane Society places do now that kill dogs and cats just to get rid of them. Myself I'll still buy neglected horses when I see them but will bwe paying much less as theres just one less avenue to recoup expenses so that others can be bought. Will be interesting to see if this benifits horses or peoples agendas the most

[Susan P]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Lildunhorse:
!!!!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

&lt;&gt;&lt; &lt;&gt;&lt;

[nettiemaria]

County, I have an idea. How bout instead of of people trying to "pawn off" these dangerous horses in the first place at auction or via dealer - on some poor unsuspecting person, why don't those people take responsibility for that horse? Can you imagine how many people get hurt when an idiot takes a horse to the local horse dealer to pawn it off, because they don't want to take responsiblity for the horse when people come to look at it, and when the thirty day drugs wear off, that the buyer who went to the dealer GETS SERIOUSLY HURT? I think this will actually protect some buyers, because the dealers won't be taking in these horses anymore, and the responsibility will stay with the person who had the dangerous horse in the first place. The person who "made" the dangerous horse, that is to say that the horse is just not nuts, it SHOULD be their responsibility. IF we all made wiser buying decisions in the first place, then we wouldn't be stuck with these dangerous horses, and we wouldn't NEED to recoup any expenses. This has happened numerous times with a dealer in our area to many people that I know. I'm talking 8 hours of surgery, broken shoulders, legs, arms, concussions, etc. I know for a fact that these particular dangerous horses I am speaking of went through many buyers and back to that same dealer many times, and probably finally made it there, hurting people all along the way. I bought two of them myself. Trying to "recoup" my expense, I took it back to the same dealer and got another one!

[county]

Hey I'm all for that, now tell me how you propse to make it happen? Personally I'd much much more see people take responsability for the kids they breed and abuse. Horses are just an animal that can serve a purpose as food. People are here till there dead and the entire world has to live with them. Child abuse and neglect is about a million times more important to me.

[nettiemaria]

It's GONNA happen because the dealers won't be able to "recoup THEIR expenses" on a dangerous horse. I will be glad when this particular dealer I am speaking of won't be selling these horses to beginner riders, or ANY rider for that fact. I think it's just terrible.

And, if child abuse and neglect is a gazillioin times more important to you - KUDOS TO YOU! Then you realize your calling in life, which is EVEN BETTER. I didn't choose my calling - I certainly don't think it's the most important thing in the world, VERY FAR FROM IT. It's just what I am supposed to do. Don't know why, just is.

[onthebit12000]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by county:
It will be interesting to see what happens after the year is up. The plants plant to ask for their own inspectors for a year in which case if approved its business as usual. Does anyone know the plan for when the year is up?

Personally it doesn't change much for most people other then I'm not sure what happens to the mean or dangerous horses other then they get killed just to be dead much like the Humane Society places do now that kill dogs and cats just to get rid of them. Myself I'll still buy neglected horses when I see them but will bwe paying much less as theres just one less avenue to recoup expenses so that others can be bought. Will be interesting to see if this benifits horses or peoples agendas the most </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

By the time the fiscal "year" is up, we will have passed HR 503 and its Senate bill companion and horse slaughter will be forever banned from our country.

Our legislators have twice now, sent a clear message that they agree with the American people on this issue, that the cruel practice of horse slaughter has no place in our country. In fact, a few senators noted yesterday that they recieved more calls and letters on this issue than they had even on the Roberts Supreme Court nomination!

The slaughter plants can "ask" for their own inpsectors until they are blue in the face, and it will never happen. It is against the Federal Meat Safety Inspection Act for any slaughter plant processing human food to do this. Period. End of story.

Here is a quote from this months The Horse Magazine in which the correct an article they ran last month quoting Cavel's James Tucker as saying that they would just hire their own inspectors...

Bonnie Buntain, DVM, MS, Dipl. ABVP, ACVPM, Chief Public Health Veterinarian, USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, Office of Field Operations, states: "All establishments slaughtering meat for interstate and international use must have USDA inspection, including meeting all requirements of Humane
Methods of Slaughter Act and its requlations covering livestock (horses are included in this)".

In answer to The Horse's question: Would the lack of that USDA inspector close the slaughter plant? Buntain says " An establishment may not produce meat or poultry products for interstate or international use without USDA inspection of every carcass. If the USDA is not present, the product is not eligible for the USDA seal and therfore is not eligible for export out of the state".

I hope this clears it up for you, County. Please try to garner the facts before posting. Your constant promulgating of the slaughter plants propaganda is getting really old. We are all sick to death of the lies and spin. This is America and if the slaughter plants cant live by our laws and the will of the American people, then they really ought to just simply pack their tack and head on back to the countries they came from.

[county]

So because a horse can't be sold for meat that means that people accross the country are just like that going to take responsability for their horses? Your dreaming, kids can't be sold for meat and that hasn't exactly made people take responsability for them.

[county]

So tell me onthebit do you have as big a problem with others in real life expressing their opinions as you do here? Rather sad if you do I imagine your family and freinds just shrug you off as someone whos obsessed with your own ideas.

[Lildunhorse]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Child abuse and neglect is about a million times more important to me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Human beings are remarkable creatures in that they can have concern for all living things, not just one at a time. We're awesome multi-taskers.
I have advocated loudly to end horse slaughter, while being employed as a victim's advocate for victims of domestic violence, which includes child abuse.
I can tell you that one hasn't taken precedence over the other, nor has one interfered with the effectiveness of the other.
Pretty cool, huh?

[SweatySaddlepad]

Hi Gail so what's the word on HR 503? Any idea when it may come to vote? Are we looking at weeks or months?

[Susan P]

VERY COOL!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Lildunhorse:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Child abuse and neglect is about a million times more important to me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Human beings are remarkable creatures in that they can have concern for all living things, not just one at a time. We're awesome multi-taskers.
I have advocated loudly to end horse slaughter, while being employed as a victim's advocate for victims of domestic violence, which includes child abuse.
I can tell you that one hasn't taken precedence over the other, nor has one interfered with the effectiveness of the other.
Pretty cool, huh? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

[county]

I don't see anywhere that I said a person can't feel strongly about more then one thing?

[jetsmom]

county, can you link me to the child abuse and neglect message boards where you are posting? I'd love to see what kinds of things you are posting there, and suggestions you are offering. I won't ask you to elaborate on this board since it wouldn't be horse related.

[county]

Who says I posted on one? And why would I give you the loink? Here you've been nothing but insulting to anyone that thinks differantly then you do. You hardly open minded with any thought differant then your own. Your certainly not looking for anything but your own agenda.

[jetsmom]

Can you point out where I've been insulting?? I even referenced one of your points about slaughter on page 3 (about halfway down).
I assumed that because child negect/abuse was a million times more important to you than the slaughter issue, that based on the number of posts here on an issue you don't care as much about, that surely you are voicing your concerns somewhere else. I just can't imagine posting with such frequency or venehmence about a topic I was a million times less interested in, than another topic.