Turn on thread page Beta

Should we ban the grand national due to animal cruelty? watch

  • View Poll Results: Should we ban the grand national due to animal cruelty?
    Yes, ban it.
    89
    46.84%
    No, don't ban it.
    101
    53.16%

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by siwelmail)
    You don't ban wars because people die do you?
    Okay, firstly that is really stupid example. Secondly, there are only two legal reasons now that allow countries to go to war, as dictated by the UN Charter and they are 1. in self defence and 2. in defence of another. And those who are in complete violation of these rules are brought to the International Crinminal Court. Also, in the EU, a member state cannot declare war against another member state, as a result of WWII.

    So yes, warfare is partially banned under some circumstances, or at the very least severely discouraged.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by High As A Kite)
    It's about the horses, you idiot
    you're a ****ing horse
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arcanine)
    So are you suggesting that any race with tall jumps should be changed? A lot of the excitement the grand national gets is because of the big jumps. If the race was changed a lot of publicity would go and this would mean less money coming in, which is what it all boils down to at the end of the day. And to your first question, these horses have brilliant lives where they're treated brilliantly and you're moaning because some fall and die?
    Bull. Obviously, you get good trainers who dote on their horses and the incredibly bad ones, but the practices are still largely all the same.

    I've worked with ex-racers and overall I have to say I've never met one that hasn't been affected by it's time in the industry be that in temperament (a lot that I worked with were aggressive from being beaten), physical ability (some were only good for light hacking) or just plain mental working, with many displaying stereotypies such as windsucking or crib biting that tend to come with being boxed for days on end.

    They typically suffer from hernias and colic easily, they're ridden as young as 1 and a half which is the human equivalent of making a 5 year old work down the mines all day and every day. If they don't make the grade, they'll most likely be shot. If a foal is born that's not *perfect*, it'll probably be shot.

    Racehorses are treated as robots, they get fed far too much high energy feed for their exercise regime to give them oomph on the gallops, they rarely get turned out for longer than a few hours at a time, if they don't succeed on the track the majority of them are shot or stuck in a breeding stables for the rest of their short lives. Out of all the racehorses bred last year in the UK, something like only 40% went on to race, and once their careers were over, whether it be by death or by retirement, only a handful of them go on to be rehomed and retrained. You can pick an ex-racer up for under £1000 if you know the right people and you might be able to make it a stunning dressage or eventing horse, even a hack horse or a hunter, but you don't know whether you'll get one who's brain or body has been fried by the high pressure industry.

    Racing is a massive racehorse production machine and very few people seem to care about the horses that fall by the wayside. It's the same in Greyhound racing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arcanine)
    So are you suggesting that any race with tall jumps should be changed? A lot of the excitement the grand national gets is because of the big jumps. If the race was changed a lot of publicity would go and this would mean less money coming in, which is what it all boils down to at the end of the day. And to your first question, these horses have brilliant lives where they're treated brilliantly and you're moaning because some fall and die?

    And how can you say you cannot see how anyone can argue against making it "safer" when more people want it the way it is than changed. I just think that people against it are oversensitive and that really annoys me. I mean, go and try to change a situation where humans are treated like crap instead of moaning over a few horses.

    Edit: Also look above, where someone who has rode horses. All of her points are valid.
    I don't agree with anyone, animals or humans, being treated like crap.
    I just don't like seeing any animals suffer needlessly. Even if it is a only "a few". Animals dying for our entertainment is not justified. Who cares if it's "exciting" for those watching? Why is their brief 30minutes of excitment more important than a horses life?

    And where on earth do you get the idea that animals in the entertainment industry get treated brilliantly? Are they hell :rolleyes:
    How can someone who cares and treats their animals "brilliantly" enter it for a race that could result in a painful death.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JKGB)
    I think too much money is being made for any official to consider banning it, but they defiantly need to lower the fences or lower the amount of runners, IMO 40 is too high.
    Agree that with less runners there would be much less risk, but the hight of the fences are what makes the race appealing to such a wide audience.
    Anyway, they have been lowered and made much safer. They are brush fences anyway, which means the horses can plow their way through the top. Definatly not as perilous as cross-country, with fixed solid fences which horses just flip over if they make a wrong move.
    Plus, you encounter fences that size and bigger when out hunting, and thats on more uneven ground. At least the ground is evened out for them on take off and landing. A lot of measures have been taken to ensure safety, but realisticaly, as I said before, its a dangerous sport.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    no, of course not, and while we're at it we should reinstate fox hunting
    they're noble british traditions
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Ganging up on me now ey? :awesome:

    Too bad that nothing will be done about horse racing/grand national that will be significant. Even if the course is changed, horses will die. And I think you two probably both know that. And if you compare it to fox hunting for example and say something will be done, the people against fox hunting was greater than those for it. It's not the case for horse racing and there would be uproar if something radical was done.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shan<3)
    Agree that with less runners there would be much less risk, but the hight of the fences are what makes the race appealing to such a wide audience.
    Anyway, they have been lowered and made much safer. They are brush fences anyway, which means the horses can plow their way through the top. Definatly not as perilous as cross-country, with fixed solid fences which horses just flip over if they make a wrong move.
    Plus, you encounter fences that size and bigger when out hunting, and thats on more uneven ground. At least the ground is evened out for them on take off and landing. A lot of measures have been taken to ensure safety, but realisticaly, as I said before, its a dangerous sport.
    A decent XC course won't be fixed any more, it'll have frangible pins. If it's not fixed then rotational falls are more frequent, especially at a lower level. It's a massive thing atm because a few youngsters have been killed out doing low level XC when they've jumped a small jump, their horse has caught it with their legs and they've rotated onto them.

    The difference between eventing and the GN is in eventing, you train your horse through all the levels before entering it into that event, and you don't enter a horse that you don't think will make it round the course in one piece. Plus when an eventer breaks down, 9/10 it'll be rehomed to a decent place that can look after it. There's more differences as well... It's madness that horses (and dogs!) are treated like this and people can justify it at all, imo.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arcanine)
    Ganging up on me now ey? :awesome:

    Too bad that nothing will be done about horse racing/grand national that will be significant. Even if the course is changed, horses will die. And I think you two probably both know that. And if you compare it to fox hunting for example and say something will be done, the people against fox hunting was greater than those for it. It's not the case for horse racing and there would be uproar if something radical was done.
    Unfortunately on this point we'll have to agree. Racing is far too big an industry and there are too many people who have their hands in very big pots for it to go anywhere or be changed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Genocidal)
    It doesn't matter. The horse is treated well in this sport for the risks it takes and the owner owns the horse. You can't ban a race because some horses die. If this was banned then how long before all animal related sports were banned?
    You cant exactly say they have been treated well when they are put through a sport like this. Just because they own the horse does not mean they have the right to put it through cruel obstacles... I mean if I own a dog and I put it through a cruel obstacle course which injures(sevearly)/kill it then thats a whole different problem one for which I am held accountable for. Oh but because ive treated it nicely up untill this point, thats ok, right? You can't ban a race if its a rare occourance. But quite frankly it is a very consistent and cruel occourance and happens on a yearly basis. 51 dead horses since 2001 or something int he double figure magin. Its cruelty to animals point blank. Your last statement, its over generalised really we are adressing a specific event which is over the top.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by storna)
    Does the horse know the risks before (s)he voluntarily consents to being entered into a race? Nobody forces the horse to enter, right? :rolleyes:
    you wanna try making a horse do what it doesnt want to do, good luck horses are strong powerful stubborn proud animals - if it doesnt want to run - it wont.

    (Original post by mellie220)
    The jockeys know the risks, I don't give a crap if they're injured - it's not exactly the safest sport.
    This is animal cruelty in the name of gambling and it's ****ing disgusting - the horses don't consent to jumping over back breaking obstacles.
    You can't exactly ban it though... but I'd set regulations for obstacles etc. to give the horses a little more safety on the track.
    interesting - never mind the jockey but as long as the horse is ok. :rolleyes:

    (Original post by Rainbow-Dream)
    The owners may know the risks, but the horses don't have a choice in the matter.
    To answer OP's question, I'm in two minds about this. I think the racing tracks should atleast be made easier, with less jumps, and lower fences etc. Also - I'd like to see the training hours for the horses regulated and monitored more closely. It's so sad to see such beautiful creatures killed.
    Oh ffs - look the horses that run the grand national are better looked after than many humans, they have supurb accomodation, the best food, medical attention, excercise you name it, they are well catered for far better than the jockey is (and riding a horse is not just a case of sitting there in a bright top). And the horses enjoy the run, they like doing it.

    (Original post by Mad Cat Lady)
    I think horse racing should be continued, purely because the animals do get a good life, BUT, I think the dangerous jumps should be removed (not just for the horses sake, jockeys get trampled to death when they fall off too) and I would like to open a sanctuary for injured racehorses, just to give them a second chance...
    you mean ones with broken legs and such like,

    go read up on leg injuries in horses. Putting them down when it happens is the best method and this has been known for hundreds of years.

    I will however give you credit for thinking of the humans as well though.

    (Original post by kiss_me_now9)
    Racing is a massive racehorse production machine and very few people seem to care about the horses that fall by the wayside. It's the same in Greyhound racing.
    Now i find that strange (note im not saying its not possible) my mother has been around horses for years and has owned a few down the line, most of her friends are horse people (and to be honest ive often felt that my mother cared more about her horses than she did her own children) and i ahve never met anyone who less than doted on thier horses. granted though they set them up more for dressage than racing.

    (Original post by secret_smile)
    And where on earth do you get the idea that animals in the entertainment industry get treated brilliantly? Are they hell :rolleyes:
    How can someone who cares and treats their animals "brilliantly" enter it for a race that could result in a painful death.
    Boxing, formula 1. MMA UFC, wrestling, fencing, kendo, all sports where the stars get treated very well but they play sports that can result in death. and please dont come back with the horse doesnt get the choice, it damn well does, if the horse doesnt want to run it wont run.

    Anyway my two cents. I dont think it should be banned but i do think things like the fences need to be lowered not so there is no risk at all couldnt happen in a million years but so there is less risk. Those fences are (as has been proved) freaking dangerous. Do not make the race shorter though introducing a knock out series of races before the GN wouldnt be a bad idea
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Genocidal)
    Oh **** off hippie! Every owner and jockey knows full well the risks of the national. Nobody forces them to enter it and yet they choose to anyway.
    are you a ****ing idiot? the horses dont choose to enter it do they?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kiss_me_now9)
    A decent XC course won't be fixed any more, it'll have frangible pins. If it's not fixed then rotational falls are more frequent, especially at a lower level. It's a massive thing atm because a few youngsters have been killed out doing low level XC when they've jumped a small jump, their horse has caught it with their legs and they've rotated onto them.

    The difference between eventing and the GN is in eventing, you train your horse through all the levels before entering it into that event, and you don't enter a horse that you don't think will make it round the course in one piece. Plus when an eventer breaks down, 9/10 it'll be rehomed to a decent place that can look after it. There's more differences as well... It's madness that horses (and dogs!) are treated like this and people can justify it at all, imo.
    Of course, the frangible pins have been a lifesaver, but like you say not all of them have them (the nearest xc course to me doesn't, and it frequently holds competitions).
    I have to say that the racehorses are trained and progressed to that level over the years. Its highly doubtful that a trainer would enter a horse that he didn't believe could make it round, seeing as a lot of trainers do not techincally own the horses, plus the entry fee along with the training and general keep of the horse is so great that you'd think nobody would risk a horses life like that.
    I'm all for the rehoming of racehorses (I have one myself) but they are bred to run, making it pretty hard to find a suitable home for them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arcanine)
    Ganging up on me now ey? :awesome:

    Too bad that nothing will be done about horse racing/grand national that will be significant. Even if the course is changed, horses will die. And I think you two probably both know that. And if you compare it to fox hunting for example and say something will be done, the people against fox hunting was greater than those for it. It's not the case for horse racing and there would be uproar if something radical was done.
    Agreed, simply because many people are greedy and selfish and due to the amount of money in this industry they would never abandon it.

    But there are a lot of people who do care about animal welfare and who are speaking out against such sports. Atleast they are trying to make a change for the better and I really don't think they should be ridiculed or belittled for their efforts and good intentions.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by secret_smile)
    Agreed, simply because many people are greedy and selfish and due to the amount of money in this industry they would never abandon it.

    But there are a lot of people who do care about animal welfare and who are speaking out against such sports. Atleast they are trying to make a change for the better and I really don't think they should be ridiculed or belittled for their efforts and good intentions.
    Debatable but I think we should just stop now, I'm bored of this and you probably are too.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shan<3)
    Of course, the frangible pins have been a lifesaver, but like you say not all of them have them (the nearest xc course to me doesn't, and it frequently holds competitions).
    I have to say that the racehorses are trained and progressed to that level over the years. Its highly doubtful that a trainer would enter a horse that he didn't believe could make it round, seeing as a lot of trainers do not techincally own the horses, plus the entry fee along with the training and general keep of the horse is so great that you'd think nobody would risk a horses life like that.
    I'm all for the rehoming of racehorses (I have one myself) but they are bred to run, making it pretty hard to find a suitable home for them.
    About Ornais:
    "The outsider of champion trainer Paul Nicholls' quartet and easy to see why. Decent novice form in 2007/8 but injury kept him off the track until February when beaten in two hunter chases. Needs a jet-booster."

    About Dooneys Gate:
    "His lack of experience over longer trips is a concern but could provide a decent outside punt after finishing 4th in the Topham Chase last year"

    "Highest-rated of the four Willie Mullins runners but probably the one with the least chance. Did well enough when fourth in last year's Topham over the big fences, and easy win at Clonmel last time, but have to be stamina worries"

    Not exactly positive comments... I don't think any eventer or rider in another discipline would even dream of entering above the level that their horse is safe and comfortable at.

    It depends on the horse I think, and the yard they come from. Like I said before there are some fantastic trainers and yards, likewise there are some awful ones. I used to know an OTTB who was so aggressive because he was beaten constantly in racing that you literally could not walk within an arms length of him, because he'd bite you. You couldn't let a child walk near him, because he'd bite them. And tacking up was a series of sneaking up on him, making sure he was cross tied short enough so that he wouldn't be able to bite you as you were putting his saddle on and dodging his legs as you tried to put his boots/bridle on. Take a broom anywhere within 5m of his stable and he spazzed out
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arcanine)
    Debatable but I think we should just stop now, I'm bored of this and you probably are too.
    Not to me. I don't see how someone who shows kindness and feels pity towards another living creature should be laughed at.

    But ok, we can agree to disagree I suppose.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by secret_smile)
    Not to me. I don't see how someone who shows kindness and feels pity towards another living creature should be laughed at.

    But ok, we can agree to disagree I suppose.
    Argh, because most people actually don't give a **** about a horse and have worse problems so when these knobheads (their view on things makes what I've said called them true) start protesting and generally just acting like ***** people just want them to shut up.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Genocidal)
    It doesn't matter. The horse is treated well in this sport for the risks it takes and the owner owns the horse. You can't ban a race because some horses die. If this was banned then how long before all animal related sports were banned?
    .........I doubt there are instant fatalities in Kurfts tbh.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by silverbolt)
    you mean ones with broken legs and such like,

    go read up on leg injuries in horses. Putting them down when it happens is the best method and this has been known for hundreds of years.

    I will however give you credit for thinking of the humans as well though.
    Yeh I know about leg injuries, I worked on a stable yard for 6 years... And yeh I understand about the whole thing with racehorses being reared to be energetic so when they try to move and it hurts its like mental torture... But I'm sure there are ways around killing them, like sedation or something, I just hate the idea of humans taking the lives of animals away like they mean nothing, I know I'm a hippy

    But upon reflection, if the jumps were lowered or taken away then there would be hardly any leg injuries anyway so...
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,107

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.