truman Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 How do you think conventionally slaughtered livestock is killed? After stunning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 After stunning? Well the thread is about meat being supplied to schools, which based on the evidence I've seen is pre-stunned. Besides which, the common method of pre-stunning conventional livestock could hardly be described as humane, the captive bolt (the clues in the name), requires the animal to be placed into a restraining cage, whilst a slaughter man fires a bolt through its skull into its brain. Grahame pointed out earlier that this might be done twice if the first attempt is unsuccessful. I'm not defending halal slaughter by the way, but it's a bit tedious reading all these accounts of how barbaric it is when conventional slaughter hardly involves a cow being marshalled into a five star hotel, and given a euthanasia injection whilst the slaughter man strokes its head and sings lullabies to it as it shuffles on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 Well the thread is about meat being supplied to schools, which based on the evidence I've seen is pre-stunned. Besides which, the common method of pre-stunning conventional livestock could hardly be described as humane, the captive bolt (the clues in the name), requires the animal to be placed into a restraining cage, whilst a slaughter man fires a bolt through its skull into its brain. Grahame pointed out earlier that this might be done twice if the first attempt is unsuccessful. I'm not defending halal slaughter by the way, but it's a bit tedious reading all these accounts of how barbaric it is when conventional slaughter hardly involves a cow being marshalled into a five star hotel, and given a euthanasia injection whilst the slaughter man strokes its head and sings lullabies to it as it shuffles on. I was answering your question on how conventional slaughter is carried out..I think you were trying to suggest that there is no difference.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 I was answering your question on how conventional slaughter is carried out..I think you were trying to suggest that there is no difference.... I was responding to a poster who appeared to be suggesting conventional slaughter didn't involve suffering There are shortcomings with both methods, whether pre stunned or not. Muslims don't employ the captive bolt as a means of stunning, preferring electrodes. They also don't allow animals to see other animals being slaughtered because they believe it causes distress. Whether the respective methods of humane slaughter make any material difference to the animal is a moot point, but I guess the main benefit is that it makes us feel better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 I was responding to a poster who appeared to be suggesting conventional slaughter didn't involve suffering There are shortcomings with both methods, whether pre stunned or not. Muslims don't employ the captive bolt as a means of stunning, preferring electrodes. They also don't allow animals to see other animals being slaughtered because they believe it causes distress. Whether the respective methods of humane slaughter make any material difference to the animal is a moot point, but I guess the main benefit is that it makes us feel better. As a meat eater it would be hypocritical of me (and others) to say that slaughter is bad,but it needs to be as humane as possible..prestunning seems to fit that bill.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 As a meat eater it would be hypocritical of me (and others) to say that slaughter is bad,but it needs to be as humane as possible..prestunning seems to fit that bill.. I don't disagree (depending on the method of pre-stunning), however I confess to feeling quite compelled whenever I see programmes where animals are raised and killed by people for their own consumption, no pre-stunning there, usually a swift twist of the neck, or sharp knife to the throat, the fresh meat is then enjoyed by a family or shared with people in their community. It seems a less noble or virtuous means of slaughter when it's done outside of a natural or small husbandry environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
English Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 For those of you who think eating halal is ok, perhaps you should delve into this disgusting barbaric slaughter. Animals can take up to 10 mins or even longer to die. After being mechanically turned upside down in a crate and having had their throats slit whilst fully conscious they are then hoisted onto hooks through their hind legs and left upside down to bleed to death. Oh and if the animal will not go into the crate they shove a steel rod into its rectum to make it arch it's back, so they can then get it in the crate! For those of you who are against it, perhaps you may like to sign the on-line petition to ban religious slaughter in the uk. You will find this on the gopetition website. Impossible :loopy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAREN4697 Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 Impossible :loopy: What is impossible? =================================== Yes all slaughter is cruel, but surley pre-stunning is more kinder to the animal, imagine someone cutting your throat whilst fully conscious?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 What is impossible? =================================== You claimed it took 10 minutes or more for an animal to die having had it's carotid artery and jugular vein severed. They supply and take away blood from the brain, death is pretty much instantaneous. Yes all slaughter is cruel, but surley pre-stunning is more kinder to the animal, imagine someone cutting your throat whilst fully conscious?? You have a rosy eyed view of pre-stunning-have a look up of 'captive bolt' stunning and the features of it. Personally I believe all animals should be stunned (humanely, whatever that means), but don't pretend that there's any sanitised way of doing it, an animal knows little of having it's throat cut as it does having a bolt sent into it's skull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAREN4697 Posted August 11, 2010 Share Posted August 11, 2010 You claimed it took 10 minutes or more for an animal to die having had it's carotid artery and jugular vein severed. They supply and take away blood from the brain, death is pretty much instantaneous. You have a rosy eyed view of pre-stunning-have a look up of 'captive bolt' stunning and the features of it. Personally I believe all animals should be stunned (humanely, whatever that means), but don't pretend that there's any sanitised way of doing it, an animal knows little of having it's throat cut as it does having a bolt sent into it's skull. Well if it was having my throat cut, I would prefer to be stunned first. Scientific evidence has proven that non stunned slaughter is definatley not instantaneous. The RSPCA, DEFRA, VIVAB, BVA and many other organisations want this slaughter banned from the UK does that not tell you something?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.