Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should the Grand National go on?

Announcements Posted on
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    It should not be banned though more could be done to make it safer.

    Just out of interest do you eat meat?
    Have you ever crushed a spider/fly?
    Do you wear leather?
    Have you ever littered?
    Have you ever used anything involving the production of palm oil?
    Have you ever used soya?


    All these contribute far more to the death of animals for our (unncessesary) gains!
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Another two horses have been put down at this year's Grand National as a result of fractured legs. Another horse I believe died earlier in the three-day race meeting. I'm not an expert on horse racing but I can't help think that the race as it is today is wrong and shouldn't be continued. Harsh as it sounds, the injury of a jockey, while sad, doesn't bother me half as much as the injury or death of a horse - the horse has very little choice in wheter it 'competes'. I think this was proven today by Synchronised, the favourite who was put down after falling at the 6th jump, who unseated his jockey before the race began, most likely because he simply didn't want to do it.

    The manager of Aintree today said:
    "Safety is the first priority for the organisers of the Grand National and we make every effort to ensure that everyone involved in the event is able to participate in safety."

    Another official also spoke of the Grand National needing to maintain its unique identity (presumably by keeping the unnecessarily high jumps and dangerously tricky turns). What identity is this exactly? So-called 'entertainment' which sees animals being treated as money-making business tools, with the owners having little consideration for the animal's welfare, and which practically guarantees the death of at least one horse per year.

    What do others think?
    I was shocked at the death of synchronised, especially as I had picked him out. Rather sad stuff but then tonight I looked down at my Beef in black bean sauce and realised animals have been killed who were perfectly healthy as well, I'm not going to turn a vegetarian.

    So my conclusion, initially shocking but relatively its not that bad. Still RIP Synchronised and the other horse (sorry don't know?)
    • Thread Starter
    • 33 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumsteele1)
    the horses die because they trip though theres no evil force striking them down and giggling about it and tbh tripping is an accident, its unfortunate the consequnces of it but none the less two horses give or take a couple a year is not that great a number is it? compared to things like game hunting [comparable because its a sport and a form of entertainment] its negligable plus the animals are treated impeccably arent they? despite the occasional death it cant be said the animals dont enjoy a good life otherwise? without horse racing the need for these horses to exist is gone isnt it?
    The deaths aren't occasional. If they were, I wouldn't have posted this thread. The horses aren't always treated as well as you think. And yes, it's an accident when the horse falls over but the organisers know full well that the jumps are lethal and they have the power to make them safer.

    If horses are only to exist for man's sick amusement then I'd rather they didn't exist at all. Fortunately, racing isn't what the horse was created for.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    i agree with the OP

    the grand national should be made less harsh. It will still be fun to watch.

    I dont like seeing which horses have died today for the sake of sport.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by littlehobbit)
    The horses who don't want to race, refuse to jump, the ones that do, jump the fences and race on. They love what they do. Ultimately, they wouldn't have even had lives if they weren't bread for racing. These horses probably lead better lives than you and I... they're pampered, fed, watered, and get to do what they love day in, day out, and that's race!
    this is definitely wrong. they are taken from their mothers, kept in small stables, fed too much, exercised too little, and that is all before they even start training. i know i have worked with them.
    • Thread Starter
    • 33 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stringer987)
    So only the one horse will be treated tonight and the 30 odd others will be banished to the stables to reflect on a bad day?
    I think you need to open your eyes to the fact that racehorse owners don't see their horses as pets that should be kept and loved till the end. If they have no use for them and the horse is making no profit, the owner most likely won't have any problem with sending the horse to the slaughterhouse. After all, it's just another object of busines to be disposed of when no longer useful.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Glow in the dark)
    Serious question.

    Can't they just repair the horses fractured legs?
    They won't make a good racer anymore, it will cost a lot in vet bills, it will take a lot of recovery time.

    Not my choice though...
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mendeleev's Table)
    Most if not all of the horses that ran today probably spend their time being pampered more than I do, when they're not training. Horses die in the wild. What happens to a horse that, say, breaks its leg in the wild? It suffers.
    Yes but these horses are not wild. The technology is available to fix a horses leg but a horse that has broken its leg will not be able to race again, in this situation they are worth more to the owners dead through insurance money.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Another official also spoke of the Grand National needing to maintain its unique identity...
    Presumably, it means he was employing a common fallacy:

    argumentum ad antiquitatem

    http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallac...20antiquitatem

    This is the familiar argument that some policy, behavior, or practice is right or acceptable because "it's always been done that way." This is an extremely popular fallacy in debate rounds; for example, "Every great civilization in history has provided state subsidies for art and culture!" But that fact does not justify continuing the policy.
    I believe it should go on, because it's powerfully good fun. A man should always believe in something. I believe in gambling and drinking; all the better since such an event comes but once a year.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    The deaths aren't occasional. If they were, I wouldn't have posted this thread. The horses aren't always treated as well as you think. And yes, it's an accident when the horse falls over but the organisers know full well that the jumps are lethal and they have the power to make them safer.

    If horses are only to exist for man's sick amusement then I'd rather they didn't exist at all. Fortunately, racing isn't what the horse was created for.
    they certainly dont occur as commonly as you make out though ... 2 this year 2011:2, 2010:0, 2009:1, 2008:1, 2007:1, 2006:1, 2005:0, 2004:0, 2003:1, 2002:1, 2001:0, 2000:0

    and a couple of these werent even due to falling but running riderless or the actual run which could occur at any event not neceserally the GN

    you may not have but IMHO you are over blowing the situation somewhat as whilst rgeretably some horses do die it is by no stretch the slaughter house you have made it out to be.

    that may not be what horses were 'created' for but none the less that is what they do they have been taimed for man and exist to serve man now. i for one dont especially like it but none the less it is a cold truth.
    • Thread Starter
    • 33 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jeester)
    It should not be banned though more could be done to make it safer.

    Just out of interest do you eat meat?
    Have you ever crushed a spider/fly?
    Do you wear leather?
    Have you ever littered?
    Have you ever used anything involving the production of palm oil?
    Have you ever used soya?


    All these contribute far more to the death of animals for our (unncessesary) gains!
    This argument gets tiring. It's not unreasonable to be in favour of eating animals while being against them being killed in a 'game' which has far little human benefit than meat eating. Sure, neither are essential to live but there can be and is a midlde ground. Further, most 'food' animals are killed in a humane way, they are not usually ridden hard over fences, whipped, and should they fall and break a leg, left thrashing around in agony for as long as 15 minutes before being put out of their misery, if food animals WERE treated this way, I think there would be a hell of a lot more 'veggies' around.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    I think you need to open your eyes to the fact that racehorse owners don't see their horses as pets that should be kept and loved till the end. If they have no use for them and the horse is making no profit, the owner most likely won't have any problem with sending the horse to the slaughterhouse. After all, it's just another object of busines to be disposed of when no longer useful.
    Exactly, these horses aren't seen as pets. There seen as prized possessions and in short treated far better than any pet.
    • Thread Starter
    • 33 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumsteele1)
    they certainly dont occur as commonly as you make out though ... 2 this year 2011:2, 2010:0, 2009:1, 2008:1, 2007:1, 2006:1, 2005:0, 2004:0, 2003:1, 2002:1, 2001:0, 2000:0

    and a couple of these werent even due to falling but running riderless or the actual run which could occur at any event not neceserally the GN

    you may not have but IMHO you are over blowing the situation somewhat as whilst rgeretably some horses do die it is by no stretch the slaughter house you have made it out to be.

    that may not be what horses were 'created' for but none the less that is what they do they have been taimed for man and exist to serve man now. i for one dont especially like it but none the less it is a cold truth.
    So it is more common that at least one horse will die in the GN than none will. That's too much as far as I see, when horse racing serves no valuable purpose. Clearly we are divided on that. Perhaps we are different in that I don't like to accept something just because it is.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    I think you need to open your eyes to the fact that racehorse owners don't see their horses as pets that should be kept and loved till the end. If they have no use for them and the horse is making no profit, the owner most likely won't have any problem with sending the horse to the slaughterhouse. After all, it's just another object of busines to be disposed of when no longer useful.
    So if you had an animal in your care and the best thing to do was to put it down, due to ill health, injury ect. What would you do? Let it die peacefully or let it suffer?
    • Thread Starter
    • 33 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gozatron)
    Exactly, these horses aren't seen as pets. There seen as prized possessions and in short treated far better than any pet.
    You have no idea.
    • Thread Starter
    • 33 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stringer987)
    So if you had an animal in your care and the best thing to do was to put it down, due to ill health, injury ect. What would you do? Let it die peacefully or let it suffer?
    I'd put it down because that's the most humane thing to do. But at least I would do so knowing that I hadn't played an instrumental role in its death. You're misunderstanding my point.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm sorry but it annoys the hell out of me when people go on about banning the grand national like it's the worst kind of animal torture. Millions of animals are killed each year for the fast food industry, some of them don't even see the daylight! Yet, people barely bat an eye lid when they go to kfc or mcdonalds. Also, I've heard someone say 'horse racing is killing animals for our entertainment and expense'. Eating meat is the natural way of life, but cheap fast food isn't.

    It sounds like I'm going off on a tangent, but it just really annoys me. I don't believe that the grand national should be banned. These horses aren't just taken out of a field, they're breed to race. They're also given a luxurious life in comparison to other animals and pets, and an unthinkable life in comparison to battery animals. I agree it's incredibly upsetting when they fall and have to be put down. But, it seems like people are forgetting that putting the horses down is the most humane way veterinary medicine has discovered. Putting the horses down relieves their pain, and they wouldn't be able to survive with just three legs.

    I agree that some of the fences need to be lowered and it should definitely be shorter. I also agree that synchronised shouldn't have raced. But, I'm also sick of people turning into animal rights activists every time the grand national comes on. They don't care every other month when horse races are taking place. It also annoys me when it's people who will happily use animal tested cosmetics (which is the worst kind of torture imo), eat fast food and buy cheap meat which isn't free ranged.

    I love animals so much. I don't eat fast food and have sheltered RSPCA animals in the past. I'm sick of people only caring when they actually see a horse being injured.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    How about we just ban horse racing all together.


    That would stop all deaths related to the sport.

    But What would happen to the 1000s of horses who suddenly had no use?

    Oh, wait...

    They'd get put down.

    lol
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    You have no idea.
    I think I do!
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Horse Racing is no better than fully grown men running around with a ball in their hands (baseball)

    All sports is a distraction to the real issues in society.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 20, 2012
New on TSR

Have a UCAS application question?

Post it in our dedicated forum

Article updates
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered sport threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.