Concerns raised after three racehorses die at North Yorkshire course (From Gazette & Herald)

If these protesters had their way and racing was banned how many owners would continue to fork out for the (expensive) upkeep of thousands of racehorses? The result of their actions would be to condemn thousands of the creatures they pretend to care about to the slaughterhouse. Is that what they really want? Perhaps Mr Stansall and his allies might think through their actions before opening their mouths.

Quite so Grumpy Old Man.

I would ask those who are in agreement with the stated aims of Animal Aid to consider where they would draw the line on the list below.

Fur wearing
Fox hunting
Game shooting
Greyhound racing
Horse racing
Fishing
Pigeon racing
Drug testing
Dairy farming
Egg production
Meat production
Leather wearing

All the above have been condemned by various factions of the animal rights movement.
Remember, zealots like these never say "job done" and go home after a victory, they simply move on to the next most vulnerable target.
At some point, we'll all be singled out for a bit of vilification and nocturnal tyre slashing, or worse.

.. if animal rights campaigners had their way there would be no humans (also an animal), it's time someone sued them for infringing human rights! (... and stop their benefits - their fundraising raises an income well above the allowance that they don't declare).

Is a dead horse pie in the sky?

Whistlejacket wrote:
Quite so Grumpy Old Man.

I would ask those who are in agreement with the stated aims of Animal Aid to consider where they would draw the line on the list below.

Fur wearing
Fox hunting
Game shooting
Greyhound racing
Horse racing
Fishing
Pigeon racing
Drug testing
Dairy farming
Egg production
Meat production
Leather wearing

All the above have been condemned by various factions of the animal rights movement.
Remember, zealots like these never say "job done" and go home after a victory, they simply move on to the next most vulnerable target.
At some point, we'll all be singled out for a bit of vilification and nocturnal tyre slashing, or worse.

I would ask those who aren't in agreement with the stated aims of Animal Aid, to consider where they would draw the line on the list below.

Wren bashing
Bear baiting
Dog fighting
**** fighting
Badger baiting
Otter hunting
Hare coursing
Hare hunting
Deer hunting
All of these things have been banned in Britain after concerted animal rights campaigns, and public support.

We all draw our line somewhere, apart from those who would never use an animal for anything and those who would offer no protection from any abuse for animals.

Where do you stand Whistlejacket?

Two tonne Thomas

We do indeed all draw our line somewhere. Obviously my line and yours are some distance apart.
However my point is that the animal rights fundamentalists are never honest about their ultimate objective.
They pick off their targets one by one, knowing that their adverseries won't stand together against them.
Pheasant shooters, on the other hand, probably aren't secretly working to bring back bull baiting
The majority of people in this country support the majority of activities on my list. I don't support all of them, but I wouldn't seek to ban any of them.
As for your list, I've only tried a few, but "wren bashing" sounds intriguing!

I'm with you 100% twotonethomas and, as for Whistlejacket's list, I disagree with many of the items on it and always will. I am sure if people realised the cruelty involved in many of these, then they would also feel uneasy about quite a few of them.

Why are comments open on some stories open but not others today? Are the press being leaned on by someone again?

Whistlejacket wrote:
Two tonne Thomas

We do indeed all draw our line somewhere. Obviously my line and yours are some distance apart.
However my point is that the animal rights fundamentalists are never honest about their ultimate objective.
They pick off their targets one by one, knowing that their adverseries won't stand together against them.
Pheasant shooters, on the other hand, probably aren't secretly working to bring back bull baiting
The majority of people in this country support the majority of activities on my list. I don't support all of them, but I wouldn't seek to ban any of them.
As for your list, I've only tried a few, but "wren bashing" sounds intriguing!

Whistlejackass, there isn't it mature to attempt jokes at others names?

I believe that 'animal rights fundamentalists' are perfectly honest about their ultimate objective, that's why they are 'fundamentalists'.

If the majority of people back the majority of activities on your list, you have nothing to worry about. Democratic governments tend to ban activities only when the overwhelming majority of the country they govern demand it.

Once again can I ask which of the activities on my list you would ban, if they were all still legal?

Fourkov wrote:

yorkborn66 wrote:
IF you disagree with Councillor James Alexander and the ruling Labour Party.
I have set up an E-petition
Go to – epetitions.direct.go


v.uk
Then search – York residents vote of no confidence.
Then - Vote!
WILL BE LIVE AFTER APPROVAL APPROX 6 DAYS
Are the Press now censoring for Labour, thought the press was not biased?
Cannot understand why genuine comments are not allowed on their reports, all now closed for comment.
Pass this on to your friends through social media etc- not sure how long before I am banned.
I have NO political affiliation to any party – but wish to make a stand against York been closed for business.

Is this a senile oaf posting spam all over the place?

No. To me it looks like someone who cares about freedom of speech. Something you have but obviously don't understand why you have it.

Woody G Mellor wrote:

Fourkov wrote:

yorkborn66 wrote:
IF you disagree with Councillor James Alexander and the ruling Labour Party.
I have set up an E-petition
Go to – epetitions.direct.go



v.uk
Then search – York residents vote of no confidence.
Then - Vote!
WILL BE LIVE AFTER APPROVAL APPROX 6 DAYS
Are the Press now censoring for Labour, thought the press was not biased?
Cannot understand why genuine comments are not allowed on their reports, all now closed for comment.
Pass this on to your friends through social media etc- not sure how long before I am banned.
I have NO political affiliation to any party – but wish to make a stand against York been closed for business.

Is this a senile oaf posting spam all over the place?

No. To me it looks like someone who cares about freedom of speech. Something you have but obviously don't understand why you have it.

What a complete **** you are.

Fourkov wrote:
Is a dead horse pie in the sky?

Spam?

Fourkov has obviously been here before, any guesses on their previous username?

Wren Bashing???

Wren bashing was a 'sport' that took place on Boxing Day, when wrens would be sought out and killed with sticks.

Is there something about Boxing Day and bloodthirsty idiots?

Whistlejacket wrote:
Two tonne Thomas

We do indeed all draw our line somewhere. Obviously my line and yours are some distance apart.
However my point is that the animal rights fundamentalists are never honest about their ultimate objective.
They pick off their targets one by one, knowing that their adverseries won't stand together against them.
Pheasant shooters, on the other hand, probably aren't secretly working to bring back bull baiting
The majority of people in this country support the majority of activities on my list. I don't support all of them, but I wouldn't seek to ban any of them.
As for your list, I've only tried a few, but "wren bashing" sounds intriguing!

Most people support the majority of acitivities on your list do they? If that's the case then my disdain for humanity is certainly justified. I disagree with the majority of things on your list and I think that it is down to pure laziness and selfishness that other people don't. They are more interested in their own entertainment, whether that comes from what they eat or watching sports, than the welfare of animals.
I can't believe some of the comments on here about people who are prepared to make a stand against cruelty to animals. As for picking off their targets one by one, what other method would you suggest? The aim is to end all animal suffering, it is logical to tackle each organisation one at a time. You wouldn't seek to ban fur wearing? Even knowing the disgusting methods used to obtain fur? Well shame on you and thank God for the people who do seek to ban such repulsive activities.

I couldn't agree more Mrs Honey. We (humans) are meant to be more intelligent than animals but the things we do to them beggars belief and I despair of the human race at times. How anyone can condone animals suffering is beyond me.