• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Disgusting - Video of a horse shot in the head by a slaughter proponent in New Mexico

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Lady Eboshi View Post
    Now HERE's a constructive solution, FINALLY! Because most of the people I've known who are "breeding for the killers" horses of indifferent quality, and then frequently not properly training them, have one BIG, FAT thing in common:

    They are breeding for the tax write-off.

    They don't really have a ~USE~ or a ~MARKET~ for their output, because the entire point is to write it off against something else. I've known people with thousand-acre ranches and postage-stamp side yards who do this.

    What's the definition of a horse breeder? Someone who's making a large fortune into a small one. Since virtually no one MAKES money at it, they're generally writing off their losses and if we eliminate THAT, I guarantee you Quarter Horses will be on the Endangered Species List within five years!

    You'll still have a RIGHT to breed--you just won't be subsidized to produce surplus horses!
    Since you have proof they are breeding for slaughter please publish their names. You can not be sued IF youare speaking the truth.

    Senerio. John buys 10 mares and one stallion. Breeds all of the mares for slaughter (no stud fee) 9 mares produce so he has purchased feed for these mares during pregnancy and now has to feed them for two more years until they will be of a sufficient weight. Since they are not trained they might actually bring more money as they would not be given any banned substances (due to non handling) and therefore can be guaranteed for their passport

    Now they write off their losses. Which would be considerable however under U.S. IRS laws they must show a profit 2 out of 7 years. You can get away with not filing for a couple of years however when you go after the deductions..that is the trip wire.

    The IRS does not allow deductions for very long when the sale price on the horse would be an absolute maximum of $250.00 due to passport and then have losses of $2500.00 (at a minimum) per horse.

    If all of these individuals are, as you state, BREEDING for slaughter they should be in big demand as they would have passport horses available.

    URBAN LEGEND. Regan closed that loophole many many years ago.
    The Elephant in the room

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
      I don't want my tax dollars to support the richest non-profit animal rights extremists in this world either, that are working so hard to eliminate the use of animals I have cared for all my life, but they still get by with that designation and avoid paying taxes on all those millions in income.
      Why would you assume that the HSUS would get these funds?
      Do you really think that no-one else is capable of coming up with a legit way of promoting equine welfare?
      ************************
      \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by luvmytbs View Post
        Why would you assume that the HSUS would get these funds?
        Do you really think that no-one else is capable of coming up with a legit way of promoting equine welfare?
        If modeled similarly to the beef check-off, then state horse councils would nominate individuals to an operating committee.
        "No matter how cynical I get its just not enough to keep up." Lily Tomlin

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ahf View Post
          If modeled similarly to the beef check-off, then state horse councils would nominate individuals to an operating committee.
          I would be leery about state horse councils. The KY one is definitely pro-slaughter.

          And they just wasted $ 300,000 on a survey which they claimed to be the most comprehensive ever conducted in KY. Yet they only sent out 15,000 questionnaires.

          http://www.kentuckyhorse.org/KES-Results/
          ************************
          \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by luvmytbs View Post
            I would be leery about state horse councils. The KY one is definitely pro-slaughter.

            And they just wasted $ 300,000 on a survey which they claimed to be the most comprehensive ever conducted in KY. Yet they only sent out 15,000 questionnaires.

            http://www.kentuckyhorse.org/KES-Results/
            There will always be people who don't see things like you do, sitting down to the table.

            I was involved in the middle 90's for the first Virginia horse industry surveys. It cost considerably more than 300k to do, and that was 20 years ago. Those surveys do not come cheap.
            "No matter how cynical I get its just not enough to keep up." Lily Tomlin

            Comment


            • Originally posted by luvmytbs View Post
              Why would you assume that the HSUS would get these funds?
              Do you really think that no-one else is capable of coming up with a legit way of promoting equine welfare?
              Sorry, I was talking about the HSUS non-profit status, that lets them not pay taxes for all those millions income they get every year, year after year.
              Those are taxes the rest of us have to make up with our taxes and money the HSUS has to spend to fight our uses of animals.
              Kind of like helping those that are out to harm you, never a smart idea.

              Right now, the HSUS has a lawsuit against the pork board and beef checkoff, just to make them spend money on fighting that, not promoting pork and beef, as they should with the money they get from producers.

              I expect if we have some kind of horse checkoff, the same will happen, the HSUS will see that the money is spend on any other than helping horses, as that is the least thing they want.
              They want to ELIMINATE any use of animals by humans.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                Since you have proof they are breeding for slaughter please publish their names. You can not be sued IF youare speaking the truth.

                Senerio. John buys 10 mares and one stallion. Breeds all of the mares for slaughter (no stud fee) 9 mares produce so he has purchased feed for these mares during pregnancy and now has to feed them for two more years until they will be of a sufficient weight. Since they are not trained they might actually bring more money as they would not be given any banned substances (due to non handling) and therefore can be guaranteed for their passport

                Now they write off their losses. Which would be considerable however under U.S. IRS laws they must show a profit 2 out of 7 years. You can get away with not filing for a couple of years however when you go after the deductions..that is the trip wire.

                The IRS does not allow deductions for very long when the sale price on the horse would be an absolute maximum of $250.00 due to passport and then have losses of $2500.00 (at a minimum) per horse.

                If all of these individuals are, as you state, BREEDING for slaughter they should be in big demand as they would have passport horses available.

                URBAN LEGEND. Regan closed that loophole many many years ago.
                I'm talking about people breeding, GENERALLY, for the tax write off, not specifically for meat. And I think you know that, too . . .

                As in, East Coast Urban Cowboy Wannabe hides some of his hedge-fund money in a Montana "dude ranch." He buys a well-bred QH stallion (with a club foot) and turns him out to run with a dozen mares chosen by his "ranch manager" who's totally seen him coming. Wait 25 years, 5 dispersal sales and a divorce. Exactly how many young horses looking for a home is THAT? Do the math? Hey, they got tons off their taxes for their "livestock breeding operation."

                To their credit, these people DID find real homes for their horses and not sell them off through at auction. I've got one of their good-hearted but dink-legged offspring out back right now. If I hadn't bought her, she'd probably have been a Premarin prospect. Capice?

                Comment


                • If individuals are abusing the tax system there are many ways those loop holes can be closed.

                  Horse Councils. Maryland Horse Council is composed of the "owner" of DEFHR which is a HSUS affiliate, Equiery Magazine..the voice of the Maryland horsemen..whoops..they are actually the mouth piece of the HSUS and so on. I understand Oregon and numerous other states have the same issue. HSUS is so imbeded into state infrastructure and councils that they can get ammendments to give them control, once the money starts rolling in.

                  Overall, however, it might be the only solution...so I wouldn't be too quick to toss out the idea...just understanding there would ahve to be laws in place that would prevent HSUS and other groups, rescuess etc from using it as their own piggy bank
                  The Elephant in the room

                  Comment


                  • [QUOTE=Bluey;6900207]
                    Originally posted by Sannois View Post

                    Sannois, I will try one more time, hope not to offend, but where does that any one place of work lets any one that wants to in there "to watch they do it right"?
                    Where does anyone demand they have videos streaming so all can see that "they do it right?"

                    That is an absurd demand and that is why animal rights extremists make such, they know the gullible will follow their thought there and not think on how absurd that is.

                    How would you feel if you had video cameras streaming all day long in what you do to any and all out there, just to be sure you do what you do right?
                    In your Drs office, in hospital exam and operating rooms?

                    How far do we want nanny cams in all we do, to be sure to catch those few that may abuse by not doing their job or do it right and that be out there for all the public to comment on, ALL of it?

                    We already have inspectors and regulations and now independent observers.
                    What else do we want that makes sense and why do absurd demands by animal rights extremists even get traction in some minds?
                    Follow the pattern, if there were open video streaming, what do you think animal rights extremists would do with that?
                    Remember the "ick" factor so much we do in life has, including slaughter.
                    How will that go over as daily entertainment of the masses?

                    Right.
                    Actually, that was my suggestion, and if you review my posting history, you will see that I am more "pro" than "anti", so at least apologize for the suggestion I must be an animal rights extremist pandering to the gullible.

                    And if you don't think there is a large difference between a video to ensure and to prove that animals that can't complain are treated with respect and without cruelty, and video to make sure your gynocologist is doing your pap smear correctly then you may have to consider that your paranoia is a bit extreme.

                    If my employer states my job will be videotaped to allow others to ensure my job is done accurately I have a choice as to whether I want to work there or not: it is his business and his decision, not mine. My choice is limited to whether I want to work there.

                    Yes, I think that the filming being more widely accessable would benefit the slaughterhouses.

                    Of course some of the 'exaggerated" antis are going to try to twist things: that is the point of having the entire thing available; to easily show that those parties have "jumped the rail" and are making things up.....Oh right, that already happens and then the plants have to try to prove it's not what it seems: that has certainly worked well, as seen right here with many still referencing those altered tapes; how's that working out for them, again?


                    And it will show that they are willing and able to compromise in order to satisfy all parties. Yes, they have inspectors and some independent observers; are you saying that enlarging that to make a show of faith is such a bad thing?

                    I'm not saying post in on youtube for kids to see, I'm saying available to more parties than those entrenched in the process.
                    I find it kind of insincere to bemoan the average person being so removed from agricultural processes that they think hamburger is raised in pink styrofoam trays in the back of the grocery store, and then fearing the "ick" factor will turn them off meat forever.

                    And no one has to allow the videos; it would be the slaughterhouses' option, obviously.
                    But you want to stop the stories of how bad it is (the stories that encourage people to demand legislation to stop it)?
                    Then you have to think outside of the box, because staying in it isn't working so well.

                    If thinking so makes me suddenly an "animal rights extremist" in your eyes I'll easily live with it.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JSwan View Post
                      So? Duck hunters don't necessarily hunt deer. And yet all sportsmen pay the ammunition tax.

                      I think most of you are interested in trying to punish only a few people you have decided are 100% responsible for horse slaughter. And I'm telling you - every one who owns or rides are horse is part of the horse industry. All of us. IF you want an industry wide solution, the industry as a whole must be part of it.

                      It seems that everyone is all up in arms about equine welfare, but the second they might have to pay a few pennies to improve welfare all of a sudden everyone is coming up with excuses as to why it cannot be done or why they are completely devoid of any responsibility or complicity. It's always "the other guy" who must be made to pay.

                      We are all "the other guy". Maybe y'all would prefer equine rescues beg and plead and live hand to mouth to save horses, rather than having access to consistent revenue.

                      Or maybe y'all would prefer the slaughter industry continue to offer a really easy and expedient way out for policymakers with constituents to please and an election coming up.

                      Because the slaughter industry is indeed offering a really easy and profitable way to dispose of a local, regional, or nationwide problem. If y'all want that to change, come up with a better solution. One that beats what that industry is currently offering, rather than shooting down ideas because you might have to pay a few pennies here or there.
                      Excellent idea and a possible solution most would get behind!
                      I would happily pay a small tax on my equine purchases for such a reason, and agree that we all need to be part of the solution.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ahf View Post
                        There will always be people who don't see things like you do, sitting down to the table.

                        I was involved in the middle 90's for the first Virginia horse industry surveys. It cost considerably more than 300k to do, and that was 20 years ago. Those surveys do not come cheap.
                        That survey actually cost $ 600,000. The other 300,000 was paid by IIRC some local university......

                        Problem I have with this particular survey is that the HC only contacted x number of their members, in the industry.
                        You cannot call it comprehensive if you ignore all the horse owners out there who are not part of the industry nor a member of the HC.

                        KY has way more horses than the numbers they came up with.
                        The KHC should have made a statement to that effect instead of giving the impression they were counting each and every horse in KY. (Which yes they did when they first announced the survey).

                        And you are right, in a committee you hope to find common ground among the members. And select individuals who are working for the intended purpose rather than some agenda.
                        ************************
                        \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by jenm View Post
                          GREAT comment.

                          I can already predict the argument the pro-slaughter would bring up? Who's going to buy those horses?

                          Nailed it. Who is going to pay for those horses? And why aren't they already doing so in large enough numbers to make a dent?

                          If the horses were properly assessed as to training, health and personality, I bet a lot of people would purchase them, especially if the price was not inflated.

                          I completely agree; again, who is going to pay or donate the feed and training for them? And why aren't they doing so already?
                          Wait, that's what many traders already do for a living, and it seems that unless they are doing so with the pricey horses they are looked down on as one step above a kill buyer (you know "he's just a horse trader").

                          Kill buyers don't have some majikal lock on the market; anyone can buy a cheap horse at auction or off craigslist, so why aren't they doing so in numbers large enough to make a dent in the slaughter trade already?
                          .

                          Comment


                          • What in the world is so hard to understand about this. Fairfax??? Bluey??
                            Here you are back again - because we do not agree with your philosophy of "slaughter - one size fits all" Suddenly the innuendos come out and the OMG you must be RARA's rhetoric.
                            I personally will probably never eat horsemeat no matter what - but there are also a whole bunch of other things I don't want to eat.
                            Most of us have said we would be much more likely to support the small local abattoir than what happens now - the sad fact is that now most of the animals we eat end up making a much longer trip than is really necessary. The system that we now have in place is not particularly working as it should for what we are already doing - why do you insist we need more when what we already have needs fixing??
                            The other thing you need to think about is this - if we put horses in the food chain do you not realize that they will have to be tracked from day 1 just like every other "processed" animal. How much less invasive to your "rights" do you really think that will be??
                            But yea I totally get it WE aren't listening and WE are all just RARA's who support PETA and HSUS. You two are just fine for pointing fingers at everyone who doesn't agree with you and yet you are usually the first to start calling names.
                            IMHO the only one that can talk the talk and walk the walk is JSWAN and she can out argue the 2 of you with one hand tied behind her back.

                            Originally posted by EKLay View Post
                            I am perfectly okay with euthanasia via well placed gunshot. I am perfectly okay with eating horsemeat. I am perfectly okay with my cats/dogs eating horsemeat. (Assuming, of course, the meat is actually free from drugs.)

                            However, I also think that anytime a large business has to choose between profit and doing the right thing, profit will inevitably win out. (In the case of horse slaughter, I would personally define "the right thing" as always providing humane, respectful transport and slaughter.) Because of this, I cannot support horse slaughter as it is currently available. If there were small, local places that could do the job, I would absolutely support them.

                            For the record, I do eat meat and I do get it from small, local places I can trust. Interestingly, everyone I personally know who does not support horse slaughter refuses to support it for the same reasons - not trusting that large companies are always humane and not being able to be sure that there are no drugs in the meat. Not a single person I know is refusing to support horse slaughter just because it's horses getting slaughtered, but that is a statement/accusation that seems to come up a lot. I know 'the plural of anecdote is not data', but it is interesting.
                            The problem with political jokes is that they get elected.
                            H. Cate

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by jenm View Post
                              GREAT comment.

                              I can already predict the argument the pro-slaughter would bring up? Who's going to buy those horses?

                              If the horses were properly assessed as to training, health and personality, I bet a lot of people would purchase them, especially if the price was not inflated.
                              When considering the hand wringing question 'but what will we do if we can't slaughter them???!!!'... comparing the Horse slaughter industry to the beef industry can be enlightening...

                              Secondly and an even more compelling in dismissing this argument is the fact that in the overall picture of livestock disposal, horses aren’t even a blip on the screen. According to a study commissioned by the National Renderers Association[11] in which no mention of horses was made, almost 3.5 billion pounds of livestock and poultry mortalities were reported in 2000. During that same year, the US based horse slaughter facilities slaughtered 47,134 horses. Had all of these horses been disposed of by non-slaughter methods resulting in the need to dispose of approximately 47,134,000 pounds of matter (based on an average weight per horse of 1,000 pounds), this would have represented a measly 1.3% increase in the total livestock and poultry mortalities that year.

                              [11] Livestock Mortalities: Methods of Disposal and Their Potential Cost - March 2002, National Renderers Association, http://www.renderers.org/Economic_Im...itiesFinal.pdf



                              http://www.vetsforequinewelfare.org/white_paper.php
                              Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                              http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                                Of course, all those antis don't listen at all, that is why we have to repeat the same over and over and over again.

                                I have already stated there ARE already surveillance cameras and independent auditors and why that is so, why those are not on youtube for all to see, as some would love to have, to pick at all and everything anyone does and give it their "interesting" spin.

                                Where does asking for general public access to streaming videos of any work place, especially a slaughter plant, makes any sense, but to animal rights extremists with agendas?

                                For those that don't believe who the HSUS really is and what they are after, well, there is enough out there to prove what I say, including the lawsuit they lost after finally being caught paying someone to lie about abuse in a circus.

                                When any of us present irrefutable reasons to be careful of animal rights extremist groups, like the truths in those web sites, then there are attacks on the messenger and absolute silence on what is exposed and a change to another subject of attack, as some just did when I again posted the links and why those are true, go back to the old worn abuse or mismanagement card, that has been explained again time again as not a reason to ban slaughter.

                                I don't care if there is or not a slaughter plant in the USA, best really if there was not, less of a target for animal rights extremists, but I do think it is foolish to ban slaughter, that is a perfectly good process to use the one natural, renewable resource SOME horses have always been for us thru it.
                                Please, those that still don't understand what "natural" and "resource" are, go back to grade school and get a refresher on what you obviously missed.

                                You ignore what animal rights extremists do, that will affect all of us that have animals so cavalierly, on your zest to ban slaughter or else?
                                Cutting your nose to spite your face.
                                SOME cattle SH's have video cameras monitored by a company THEY hire. Tapes are only reviewed by SH mgmt. There are NO surveillance cameras in any of the horse SH, which even TG confirmed. She even asked them to do it, because she said that things were fine when she was there, but every time she turned her back or left, serious problems occurred.

                                Having a week of streaming live video avail to be seen by people would show how humane it is. If there is less than a 10% miss rate, and no egregious humane violations, it would benefit the SH's. The fact that they won't do it, makes them suspect. As to doctoring the videos, the SH would have the original footage, so it would be quite easy for them to show that the tapes were edited.
                                My offer to Fairfax still stands.

                                Re- Tax- I'd be all for it if the money was used to benefit the horses.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by jetsmom View Post
                                  SOME cattle SH's have video cameras monitored by a company THEY hire. Tapes are only reviewed by SH mgmt. There are NO surveillance cameras in any of the horse SH, which even TG confirmed. She even asked them to do it, because she said that things were fine when she was there, but every time she turned her back or left, serious problems occurred.

                                  Having a week of streaming live video avail to be seen by people would show how humane it is. If there is less than a 10% miss rate, and no egregious humane violations, it would benefit the SH's. The fact that they won't do it, makes them suspect. As to doctoring the videos, the SH would have the original footage, so it would be quite easy for them to show that the tapes were edited.
                                  My offer to Fairfax still stands.

                                  Re- Tax- I'd be all for it if the money was used to benefit the horses.
                                  Oh, yes, have rabid animal rights extremists there to check how they do their work.
                                  Makes perfect sense.

                                  By the way, I explained before when you keep repeating TG words that you are taking them out of context, just as you are about the independent auditing company, already explained above how that works.

                                  Comment


                                  • Considering the fact that even office workers are under "surveillance", simply by IT monitoring the activities on their PC's.
                                    No, they are not checking if you are picking your nose at your desk even though that could be possible with most work laptops now also having a built in camera.
                                    ************************
                                    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by luvmytbs View Post
                                      Considering the fact that even office workers are under "surveillance", simply by IT monitoring the activities on their PC's.
                                      No, they are not checking if you are picking your nose at your desk even though that could be possible with most work laptops now also having a built in camera.
                                      Yes, except there are no multi-million non-profits watching the cameras pointed at the office workers and wanting to shut them all, the whole process of working in offices down for the least infraction, maybe picking their nose would count?

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by Bluey View Post
                                        Sorry, I was talking about the HSUS non-profit status, that lets them not pay taxes for all those millions income they get every year, year after year.
                                        Those are taxes the rest of us have to make up with our taxes and money the HSUS has to spend to fight our uses of animals.
                                        Kind of like helping those that are out to harm you, never a smart idea.

                                        Right now, the HSUS has a lawsuit against the pork board and beef checkoff, just to make them spend money on fighting that, not promoting pork and beef, as they should with the money they get from producers.

                                        I expect if we have some kind of horse checkoff, the same will happen, the HSUS will see that the money is spend on any other than helping horses, as that is the least thing they want.
                                        They want to ELIMINATE any use of animals by humans.
                                        It's interesting with all the money the HSUS has to throw around and as tenacious as many make them out to be on this horse slaughter issue, HSUS did nothing, that I can find to help the citizens of Kaufman TX when the plant was not only not paying their taxes and fines, but also stretching out the process so as to make it financially impossible for the town to fight them:

                                        Over one six-week period, Kaufman issued 29 citations for wastewater violations, each accompanied by a potential fine of $2,000. Dallas Crown responded by requesting 29 separate jury trials, potentially causing yet another economic strain on the city’s budget.

                                        Kaufman could not afford to litigate in order to collect the fines, which went unpaid. “But things got a lot worse,” says Bacon. During a 19-month period in 2004–2005, there were 481 violations, at which point Dallas Crown refused entry to Kaufman’s engineers, preventing them from doing any environmental tests for nine months.


                                        http://www.forbes.com/sites/vickerye...cks-some-tail/
                                        Yo/Yousolong April 23rd, 1985- April 15th, 2014

                                        http://notesfromadogwalker.com/2012/...m-a-sanctuary/

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by Angela Freda View Post
                                          It's interesting with all the money the HSUS has to throw around and as tenacious as many make them out to be on this horse slaughter issue, HSUS did nothing, that I can find to help the citizens of Kaufman TX when the plant was not only not paying their taxes and fines, but also stretching out the process so as to make it financially impossible for the town to fight them:

                                          Over one six-week period, Kaufman issued 29 citations for wastewater violations, each accompanied by a potential fine of $2,000. Dallas Crown responded by requesting 29 separate jury trials, potentially causing yet another economic strain on the city’s budget.

                                          Kaufman could not afford to litigate in order to collect the fines, which went unpaid. “But things got a lot worse,” says Bacon. During a 19-month period in 2004–2005, there were 481 violations, at which point Dallas Crown refused entry to Kaufman’s engineers, preventing them from doing any environmental tests for nine months.


                                          http://www.forbes.com/sites/vickerye...cks-some-tail/
                                          When the plant was closed, the illustrious HSUS president gave an interview to the Dallas paper and was bragging that his herd of lawyers, if I remember well he assigned ten of them to this, were the ones that made it happen, getting the plant closed by finding that one 1947 law, intended to avoid horse meat being sold as beef and making a case in front of a helpful judge that meant no horse meat was to be sold at all.

                                          Now, what were you saying again, that the HSUS didn't help close the plants?

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X