Horse Deaths

Your obviously one of these *.

Get built or be prepared to get mounted from the Chelteinghan 2.20 ya woofter

 

Don't hold back mate, just let it all fall out...

 

Contender for line of the year.

 

kk

 

If I'm classed as being sensitive so be it, rather be that then an uncaring * who goes around killing for and proclaiming false wars on the innocent.

I love animals they are simple and love unconditionally in all forms it is a cliche to use but those who have an affinity to animals will say they can become part of the family like children, I can see why, we raise them, feed them, give them a home and discipline them and so on.

I hate to see any animal suffer be flies to foxes.

soft men are not the end of the world, it's power hungry, money whores who go about * over the less fortunate and kill under false claims.

 

I think people are forgetting animals don't love unconditionally - maybe domestic animals aye. Animals are wild beasts and will kill each other in a heartbeat.

What I don't like is degrading the horses and putting needless pain and strain upon their bodies. Let everything be.

 

They do so to survive and eat, unlike humans we are just as wild if not more beastly then any animal.

 

Aw aye, I know that. We were just lucky that evolution was kinder to us :smiley-laughing002:

 

True, although come to think of it the * humans do to each other are we really that lucky:smiley-laughing002:

 

Humans will also kill each other in a heart beat, just look at all the wars all over the world.

 

I know they will - we are worse but at least we have the ability to reason - whether we use it or not is a different matter though. :smiley-laughing002:

All I was meaning is that,animals aren't as loving and as innocent as everyone likes to believe.

 

I know what you mean, but strictly speaking they are innocent, as they dont know any better.......when they react to anything, it is pure instinct.

That guy who was so macho........just so you know mate, because you clearly dont know......none of the horses at Cheltenham could have satisfied you, as they have all had their balls cut off.(then again, maybe you like em flacid!!!)

 

So a jockey's life is more valuable than "just" a horse's? That's a * disgusting attitude to have especially coming from someone who is involved with the animals. They may be animals but to devalue the life of an animal like this and basically have the attitude of "ach, they're only horses" is pretty pathetic. Horses are put in situations like these because of humans yet when something goes wrong the one who ultimately pays the price is the innocent one which is the horse.

When falls happen I have more sympathy for the horses than the jockeys riding them. Jockeys choose to put themselves in that situation...horses don't.

 

Who cares, it's a * horse

 

This.

 

I think intuitively most people would place more value on the life of a random human rather than the life of a random animal. I don't think it is a disgusting attitude, he just puts it rather bluntly.

If given the situation where someone had to chose to decide to save the life of a baby human or two baby horses, I think almost everyone would save the baby (even leaving aside other variables like peer pressure, etc). That is a very simple example of placing more value in the life of a human than an animal.

Personally I don't have an issue with it, and I think to have an issue with it is quite incompatible with logic as it is nearly impossible to apply that across our day to day lives. People therefore chose their favourite animals to place value on (horses, dolphins, monkeys, dogs, cats, etc), while are less motivated about protecting the lives other living beings (insects, birds, rats, fish).

Taking the idea of equality to its logical extreme, one should never drive in the summer time as doing so leads to the mass murder of the flies that end up splattered on your windshield. And as mowing your lawn and tidying your garden kills not just hundreds of living beings, but potentially destroys entire biospheres of life. This may sound stupid, but it if it does it is because you do not place value on the lives of flies and insects. Would "ach, they are only insects" be any more or less valid an opinion that what you say about horses?

That is why, while I find these discussions so interesting, I find it hard to consider human and other life forms equal. I think as humans we place more value on things that we feel we can relate to and that means animals that have features similar to our own. So we look at the big eyes of a puppy and think they are cute. We look at the antics of monkeys and laugh. But we don't really give a toss about the life of a fish or a rat because they do not show emotion, and we struggle to relate to them. To me that is what it comes down to rather than treating all life as equal.

 

Many people care, many people see animals as companions.

It doesnt bother me either way but i understand where people are coming from on this.

 

I created this thread, then found out I had to go away. Anyway here is my tuppence worth.

I should maybe clear up something here,I was being a bit tongue in cheek when I said "put the jockey down". I obviously would not choose an animals life over a humans life, although there are some people who I would gladly have put down before an animal. My point at the time was due to the amount of money generated in horse racing surly it's not to much to expect, that should the horse be injured while "entertaining people" then surely just going with the cheapest option is wrong. However after reading PP post and learning about the thickness of the horses bones etc then that changes somewhat. Although the horses bones and thickness has something to do with the breeding that these horses are subjected too. Which is as a result of human intervention, So the cost argument should have no place in the choice made regarding treat or shoot.
I have noticed that some people are keen to be funny or try to be anyway. In answer to "am I a vegetarian" No is the answer, Why ?.
As I said and has been said here, the horse has no choice but the jockey does.

Whipping should be illegal full stop.

IF there are that few horses injured then I would assume the cost to insure them would not be that severe, surely. Being honest I think its all about the "cost's" and that shooting is cheaper.

Seen that :smiley-laughing002:

Gotta have hurt, was the jockey badly injured.