[Beso]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

What about when 'stunned' cattle regain consciousness whist trussed upside down waiting in line for the bolt gun?

I think there will be guidelines and laws that are broken if that happens.

[T*]

Originally Posted by Who Is She?

Are you joking me at beer

They should put that on the label

Not all of them DW

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Who Is She?

Are you joking me at beer

They should put that on the label

No joke, something to do with fish.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Who is saying this isn't awful?

Well there's no Britain first expose on that practice :/

[user104658]

Originally Posted by _Tom_

I believe all animals must be slaughtered humanely.

Again... there is no such thing, and if you have a genuine problem with animals suffering in order for us to enjoy their delicious, delicious meat... then your only real option is to go vegan.

Uncomfortable truth: Animals suffer when they are being slaughtered. There is no painless / humane method. It doesn't happen.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

If you were in the animals position I think we know which death you would choose. One option is obviously far more preferable no matter how politically correct you're trying to be.

You're missing the point, as per usual.

I wouldn't want either death because the method is irrelevant, it's still death either way. It's still butchering an animal for food that we do not even need. I'm not defending either method of execution, I'm saying that, in the end, neither is preferable to the animal, neither is painless and neither of them are REALLY humane. People just delude themselves into thinking that there's a humane way of doing it.

As a meat eater I don't see the difference between the two methods, it's only the bleeding hearts that are deluding themselves into thinking they are good people for preferring the stunning method. Eating meat is selfish and people do it because they like it, not because they need it. I'm not deluding myself into thinking that there's a good painless way to kill animals because there isn't.

It's funny that you're saying I'm being politically correct, surely the PC view of things is the view that you have in which you've fooled yourself into thinking that one method is better than another.

[Black Dagger]

Delish.

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You're missing the point, as per usual.

I wouldn't want either death because the method is irrelevant, it's still death either way. It's still butchering an animal for food that we do not even need. I'm not defending either method of execution, I'm saying that, in the end, neither is preferable to the animal, neither is painless and neither of them are REALLY humane. People just delude themselves into thinking that there's a humane way of doing it.

As a meat eater I don't see the difference between the two methods, it's only the bleeding hearts that are deluding themselves into thinking they are good people for preferring the stunning method. Eating meat is selfish and people do it because they like it, not because they need it. I'm not deluding myself into thinking that there's a good painless way to kill animals because there isn't.

It's funny that you're saying I'm being politically correct, surely the PC view of things is the view that you have in which you've fooled yourself into thinking that one method is better than another.

More like you're the one trying to be edgy and go against the grain as usual. Yes no animal NEEDS to die for food however it is human nature to eat meat and therefore if a method is in place where that can happen whilst causing as little suffering as possible to the animal that is only a good thing. I just find your view on the situation as negative and narrow minded and you need to get off your high horse judging people for trying to show some empathy.

[T*]

People can be hypocrites because they're still eating meat yes- but stunning is still the more humane option out of the two... There's no real reason to go around tutting at people for having that opinion or try and convince them otherwise because lbr it's not going to achieve anything...

[Alf]

Mmmmmmmmmm! Meat!

[Ninastar]

I can totally understand why people are against Halal meat, but I can also see why someone would think it's hypocritical. TBH, I wouldn't eat Halal meat if I had the choice, but I don't judge others who do. You believe what you believe and the only thing I don't agree with is people telling other people how to live their lives.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

More like you're the one trying to be edgy and go against the grain as usual. Yes no animal NEEDS to die for food however it is human nature to eat meat and therefore if a method is in place where that can happen whilst causing as little suffering as possible to the animal that is only a good thing. I just find your view on the situation as negative and narrow minded and you need to get off your high horse judging people for trying to show some empathy.

If you're going to try to drag me at least try something that's applicable since that failure of an attempt was embarrassing.

Again, you've missed the point. I don't give a **** about either method of slaughter, my issue is with the people who look down on one method while championing another equally barbaric method. The point is that slaughter is inhumane no matter HOW you present it. You are still slitting a creature's throat and hanging it upside down to drain the blood. One method just involves delivering an electric shock to the animal's brain beforehand.

Slaughter houses are not a humane way of killing animals. You can dress it up all you want with faux concern for the animals but that's not going to change the facts.

If you cared about these animals then you'd take a stand but you're too happy eating burgers so I'm not gonna take your little soapbox routine seriously. I like burgers too but I'm not gonna take the moral highground over how my meat is slaughtered and I am not fooling myself into thinking there's a humane way to do it. The animals don't have a preference, they'd prefer to live.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Ninastar

I can totally understand why people are against Halal meat, but I can also see why someone would think it's hypocritical. TBH, I wouldn't eat Halal meat if I had the choice, but I don't judge others who do. You believe what you believe and the only thing I don't agree with is people telling other people how to live their lives.

You just reminded me of a song I haven't heard for ages.

Great album is London 0 Hull 4.

Youtube video

Mmmmmmmm Meat

[Jordan.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

If you're going to try to drag me at least try something that's applicable since that failure of an attempt was embarrassing.

Again, you've missed the point. I don't give a **** about either method of slaughter, my issue is with the people who look down on one method while championing another equally barbaric method. The point is that slaughter is inhumane no matter HOW you present it. You are still slitting a creature's throat and hanging it upside down to drain the blood. One method just involves delivering an electric shock to the animal's brain beforehand.

Slaughter houses are not a humane way of killing animals. You can dress it up all you want with faux concern for the animals but that's not going to change the facts.

If you cared about these animals then you'd take a stand but you're too happy eating burgers so I'm not gonna take your little soapbox routine seriously. I like burgers too but I'm not gonna take the moral highground over how my meat is slaughtered and I am not fooling myself into thinking there's a humane way to do it. The animals don't have a preference, they'd prefer to live.

Okay well to me your whole logic and argument is wrong because they are NOT equally as inhumane or barbaric. It's hilarious you think anyone else is trying to take the moral highground whilst looking down your nose.

And there's pretty much nothing else to say on the matter without going in circles.

[Rob!]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

It's a meaningless difference. If the animal understood what was happening it wouldn't care how it was going to die, only that it was going to die.

If you cared that much about the animal's suffering then you'd be a vegetarian. People who eat meat don't get the right to act offended. It's hypocritical and vain.

I'm pretty sure if the animal understood it, it would choose to go the least painful way possible.

Prolonging the agony of an animals death purely in the name of religion is abhorrent. Simple as that.

[DemolitionRed]

I'm in two minds here. I ran a livery yard for some years and I had the unfortunate job of standing with some clients horses that needed to be euthanized. This could be done by lethal injection and the other is by a humane killer (dead bolt pistol). The second is very traumatic for the person standing with the horse but its quick, its clean and on the three occasions I was witness to it, the horse didn't show any fear or have any notion of what was about to happen.

The problem I have with slaughter houses is not the method of death but the smell of adrenalin those animals must smell when entering. That animals, especially chickens, can see what's happening to the line in front of them. Someone who once worked in the 'killing room' of a slaughter house told me, as the animal enters that room it will always defacate from fear.

But then I look at some countries in the far east who skin snakes alive and throw cats alive into boiling pots of water whilst other cats in crowded cages watch on. There are some heinous methods of slaughter and there are some kinder methods of slaughter, just as there are some kinder methods of animal husbandry and some horrific methods such as veal crates, battery hens and foie gras geese.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Not really, complaining about how animals are killed when you're happy enough to gorge on the meat is hypocritical. Death is Death, the animal wouldn't thank you for killing it in a way you'd deem acceptable. It's a vain way of making yourself feel less guilty for what is an indulgent act.

I eat meat, I love it but I'm not going to bleat on about how one way of killing a defenseless animal is better than another because at the end of the day the end result is the same and the only difference is that you're desperately trying to justify the method you think is humane.

Nope you are missing the point, death is not death, for instance putting a terminally ill pet to sleep in a vets or leaving it to die in pain results in the same end but not in the suffering endured by the animal, you can argue all you like but you cannot no matter how hard you try make these two endings comparable.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Well there's no Britain first expose on that practice :/

Because it isn't common practice? This isn't a Muslim issue as some people are trying to intimate, it's an animal rights issue same as companies that transport animals in inhumane conditions have been exposed, it's unfortunate that the video which I haven't watched is by Britain First I guess that doesn't sit well with some who have PC agendas :/

[Denver]

How many of you eat Kebabs? Do you know they are all Halal

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Firewire

It's meat, just killed in a different way. People shouldn't put themselves on a high horse over halal meat if they are meat eaters since both involve murdering the animal.

I would eat non-halal and halal. Absolutely does not bother me.

Better still Firewire ,don't eat it at all,better for your health too

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Nope you are missing the point, death is not death, for instance putting a terminally ill pet to sleep in a vets or leaving it to die in pain results in the same end but not in the suffering endured by the animal, you can argue all you like but you cannot no matter how hard you try make these two endings comparable.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

If one extends the argument and say, the NHS is under pressure, so lets remove the pain medication for the terminally ill, they are going to die anyway, it makes no difference.

Lets see how long that argument lasts.

Of course we should be humane. We need meat and killing humanely is a no thought option.

EXACTLY,right it's all well and good deciding if an animal suffers or not as we don't feel it,but put that scenario to humans and that thought soon changes,selfish humans deciding anything can suffer but us.

[Rob!]

Originally Posted by Adam.

How many of you eat Kebabs? Do you know they are all Halal

I'd be amazed if what is in a kebab even constitutes as meat.

[Kazanne]

I wonder how many people would eat meat if they had to kill it themselves.While it's packaged in neat little trays I am sure some people don't even equate it was once a living ,breathing animal.

[smudgie]

I not not want any meat ending up on my plate to have been killed humanely, I want it to have had a happy life as well, however short that life has been.
Nothing at all wrong with that, doesn't make me a hypocrite, just means I care.
Let's face it, if it wasn't for meat eaters then most of these animals wouldn't have a life to start with.