Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 175 comments are related to the topic:
How many horses murdered this week?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 3 of 5  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 175
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:04
I don't know what that means.
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 06 Apr 13 19:06
Do you have pets?
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:06
Yes, two dogs.
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:06
Do you eat fish or other sea life, Mr Angry?
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:07
No fish or sea life.
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 06 Apr 13 19:07
Do you own any humans?
By:
blackbarn
When: 06 Apr 13 19:08
Thank you Mr Angry, but that does not answer my question. It help me understand your background but not your boundaries. The question gives numerous examples - a simple yes/not in favour will suffice to start.
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:08
Lots of pet dogs have miserable lives through neglect or lack of interest from their owners. If we're going to go through the whole 'is jumps racing justified' argument, why should we keep breeding pet dogs, just because some arse thinks they need to have an anonymous hound wandering along in their wake.
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:10
Thank you Mr Angry, but that does not answer my question. It help me understand your background but not your boundaries. The question gives numerous examples - a simple yes/not in favour will suffice to start.

Dressage, no (if the training leads to suffering)
Crufts, no (if the breeding leads to suffering)
Whateverelse, no (if it leads to suffering).
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:12
But why does being a racehorse lead to suffering?  (Apart from in the odd case.)  Many of those animals lead very enjoyable lives. So why should they not be given the right to live?
By:
telepathic
When: 06 Apr 13 19:13
I see that Mr Angry avoided any answer to my GELDING thread, I am not surprised as it would probably have told us much more about his attitudes than he wants us to know.
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:13
But why does being a racehorse lead to suffering?  (Apart from in the odd case.)  Many of those animals lead very enjoyable lives. So why should they not be given the right to live?

If there is no suffering, why the need to lower the fences at Aintree?
By:
carrot1960
When: 06 Apr 13 19:13
about 3600 burgers give or take a few
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 06 Apr 13 19:14
You don't own humans do you Mr Angry but you will happily consider your dogs to be property and to buy and sell animals for your enjoyment why is that? Clearly you see a difference between humans and dogs but still attempt to make comparisons of roman gladiators with race horses.
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:14
Because people like you complain that it's unfair on the horses, Mr Angry
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:15
To be honest, I think the problems with the National are more to do with the number of horses than the fences, anyway.  I'd be happier with higher fences but only 20-25 good quality runners.
By:
salmon spray
When: 06 Apr 13 19:17
Mr Angry has said he would support animal culls in the right circumstances. As he appears to be opposed to the normal uses of thoroughbreds he presumably would support a cull instead.
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:18
Here's a concept to consider:

A horse race without jockeys.

Put the horses on the start line, then see which horse gets to the finishing line first, with no human interference.
By:
telepathic
When: 06 Apr 13 19:19
SS I await his answer with interestLaugh
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:20
And why exactly would that help, Mr A???
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:22
Mr Angry has said he would support animal culls in the right circumstances. As he appears to be opposed to the normal uses of thoroughbreds he presumably would support a cull instead.

I do not understand.  Is this a statement or a question you would like me to answer?  If a question, please could you rephrase?
By:
salmon spray
When: 06 Apr 13 19:25
OK. Seeing that you have stated that you are opposed to the way most thoroughbreds are used and that it would be extremely cruel to dump them in the wild,would you support a cull ?
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 06 Apr 13 19:25
Heres a question put some dogs outside a pet shop and see which ones come round a housing estate to knock on your door and ask to have a leash put round their necks and have their balls cut off.
By:
telepathic
When: 06 Apr 13 19:25
Wink
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:25
It's quite simple Mr Angry. Do you think all jump horses should be destroyed?  Because that's pretty much the logical conclusion of what you're saying.  Get rid of jump racing, and most of those horses will be killed.  And countless other happy horses of the future will be denied the chance to be born and live fulfilling lives.  Are you happy with that?
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:28
OK. Seeing that you have stated that you are opposed to the way most thoroughbreds are used and that it would be extremely cruel to dump them in the wild,would you support a cull ?

I would support forcing the owner to look after them until natural death.  Animal culling in the wild is necessary to maintain the balance of this world which we have affected.  Culling animals we deliberately breed is irresponsible, and a cop out.
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:29
If a horse really doesn't like jumps, Mr A, no amount of urging will make him go over. If he does jump, but only reluctantly, he's unlikely to do well in jumps racing, and connections will soon tire of putting him in for futile races and will, erm, find other solutions for him..

Most of those horses jump and race because they like doing so, just as agility dogs like jumping over mini fences and hurtling through tunnels.
By:
telepathic
When: 06 Apr 13 19:29
COP OUT you got it right MR Angry you fool
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:30
If a horse really doesn't like jumps, Mr A, no amount of urging will make him go over. If he does jump, but only reluctantly, he's unlikely to do well in jumps racing, and connections will soon tire of putting him in for futile races and will, erm, find other solutions for him..

Most of those horses jump and race because they like doing so, just as agility dogs like jumping over mini fences and hurtling through tunnels.


So take the jockeys off.
By:
salmon spray
When: 06 Apr 13 19:30
But forcing them to run hard applies to flat racing as much as jumps. It also applies to 3 day eventing and show-jumping involves getting them to jump higher than you would think they want to. We'd better put them all down hadn't we. Including all yearlings,foals,broodmares,stallions as well as horses in training.
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:30
I would support forcing the owner to look after them until natural death.

Hate to break it to you pal, but nobody's going to be giving enough money for all those horses to be supported in fields and stables until their natural death.  The odd one will be kept on by some kindly owner. Most will be killed off if there's no jumps racing.
By:
homefortea
When: 06 Apr 13 19:31
Mr Angry is either a wind up merchant or a liberal limp wristed blot on society...

Or a teacher...Laugh
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:32
The jockeys actually help with safety, Mr A.  They keep the horses under control. The last thing you want is a bunch of horses crashing into each other. It's bad enough when two greyhounds collide, but just imagine what carnage you'd get with riderless horses bumping each other!
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:33
So that argument in support now appears to be: don't ban racing or we'll kill all the horses!
By:
telepathic
When: 06 Apr 13 19:33
I would say he is strong wristed.....practise
By:
Mr.Angry
When: 06 Apr 13 19:35
The jockeys actually help with safety, Mr A.  They keep the horses under control. The last thing you want is a bunch of horses crashing into each other. It's bad enough when two greyhounds collide, but just imagine what carnage you'd get with riderless horses bumping each other!

It's amazing that horses exist at all, having spent 65 million evolving without little men in coloured jerseys sitting on their backs stopping them bumping in to each other and keeping them safe.
By:
Coachbuster
When: 06 Apr 13 19:35
Mr Angry
I can see in some areas where you are coming from - and indeed in an ideal world no animal nor human would suffer - however it would be very hard to live a life with these constraints  ie we would still probably be living in caves as a result of being 'held back'

Inadvertantly we are all very much to blame  - don't get me wrong ,if Horseracing or any sport was banned on cruelty/dangerous grounds i'd move on ,however i sat down and enjoyed a coffee made with milk,quite innocuous ,however   - i have contributed in some way to causing the death of a male calf ,something i'm not happy about ...but realise whatever avenue i take i am in some way part of the cause .

Like someone said, are we to ban cars becuase folk die in road accidents ?
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:36
No, that's not 'the argument in favour'. We've given others. However, what we'd like you to say is whether you'd be happy with thousands of horses being killed off?  (Because that *is* what will happen if people like you get your way and jumps racing is banned.)
By:
LordBobbin
When: 06 Apr 13 19:37
I assure you, Mr A, there'd be very few horses living in this world today if it wasn't for racing.
By:
rothko
When: 06 Apr 13 19:37
you know how fec@ked up this country is when you get threads about animals that get care than children ffs
Page 3 of 5  •  Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com