The National

Randy said:
Some cracking posts in here.

Unfortunately the horse I backed finished outside the top four. 🥺

As for cruelty to horses I'm guessing it's because some died? If we ban horse racing because of that what else do we ban?

Motorsports? Drivers and riders have died over the past decade taking part in car and bike racing.

Football? Players have had to retire or have passed because of health issues related to the fitness requirements. Let's knock that sport on the head too? Too dangerous.

Rugby? Repeated concussions causing problems later on in life? Make it tag rugby only and no scrums.
Click to expand...
As I've posted earlier, if there is a line to be drawn then I'd put it at being able to make a conscious decision after understanding the risks involved.

As information changes (or science/technology improves) you might need to amend the rules (e.g. heading a football).

Nosmo-King said:
Hey Sherlock here’s a tip for you? Why not ban traffic from the roads so foxes and badgers can stroll safely and pheasants can fly without fear of being killed?

Surely worth another 100 posts from you……
Click to expand...
So you think we should allow bullfighting?

So you think we should allow fox-hunting?

Or do you think should we take everything on it's own merits and make rational decisions based on all the factors involved?
 
Scrote said:
As I've posted earlier, if there is a line to be drawn then I'd put it at being able to make a conscious decision after understanding the risks involved.

As information changes (or science/technology improves) you might need to amend the rules (e.g. heading a football).


So you think we should allow bullfighting?

So you think we should allow fox-hunting?

Or do you think should we take everything on it's own merits and make rational decisions based on all the factors involved?
Click to expand...
There's two things going on in this thread.

Some posters like Nosmo and AET are just looking for reasons to attack me individually because they have little better to do, which is a shame.

There are also some posters who clearly believe people have a right to treat animals in any way they see fit. This is equally sad and a real indictment of what the world has become. Nailed on that these people are climate change deniers too who don't care what happens in the future because it's not affecting them now.

Some of the posters fall into both of these camps and want to paint me as the problem so they don't have to reflect on their own behaviour....just look at the pile-on after I posted a very brief comment.

I feel a bit sorry for them to be honest.
 
sherlock1969 said:
There's two things going on in this thread.

Some posters like Nosmo and AET are just looking for reasons to attack me individually because they have little better to do, which is a shame.

There are also some posters who clearly believe people have a right to treat animals in any way they see fit. This is equally sad and a real indictment of what the world has become. Nailed on that these people are climate change deniers too who don't care what happens in the future because it's not affecting them now.

Some of the posters fall into both of these camps and want to paint me as the problem so they don't have to reflect on their own behaviour. I feel a bit sorry for them to be honest.
Click to expand...
Don’t flatter yourself.
 
sherlock1969 said:
There are also some posters who clearly believe people have a right to treat animals in any way they see fit.
Click to expand...
To be honest I'd put myself in this bracket for the most part.

I'm against blood sports but I happily eat animals. I don't agree with the entertainment aspect of the former (when it comes to the killing).

Things are far more complicated than some of the posters on here want to accept. The Grand National have tried to improve safety but the people involved are willing to allow horses to die for enjoyment. That puts it in the same category as blood-sports for me. I accept that others see it as a price worth paying. What I object to is the mental gymnastics involved in justifying one over the other.

And I like a good (and respectful) argument!
 
Scrote said:
To be honest I'd put myself in this bracket for the most part.

I'm against blood sports but I happily eat animals. I don't agree with the entertainment aspect of the former (when it comes to the killing).

Things are far more complicated than some of the posters on here want to accept. The Grand National have tried to improve safety but the people involved are willing to allow horses to die for enjoyment. That puts it in the same category as blood-sports for me. I accept that others see it as a price worth paying. What I object to is the mental gymnastics involved in justifying one over the other.

And I like a good (and respectful) argument!
Click to expand...
That's a fair viewpoint but I don't think eating animals necessarily puts you in the camp of treating animals in any way you see fit. I'm thinking you'd be against caged hens for eggs for example?
 
sherlock1969 said:
I'd much rather you just ignored me if I'm honest, you bring only negativity and anger.
Click to expand...
And you could have concluded this thread pages and pages ago simply by saying to the many who disagree that we agree to disagree.

However you chose to continue post after post when even anyone with a semblance of brain matter would realise the two sides of this argument would never agree.

For reasons best known to yourself you’ve chosen not to…..
 
Nosmo-King said:
And you could have concluded this thread pages and pages ago simply by saying to the many who disagree that we agree to disagree.

However you chose to continue post after post when even anyone with a semblance of brain matter would realise the two sides of this argument would never agree.

For reasons best known to yourself you’ve chosen not to…..
Click to expand...
So two sides to the discussion yet it's incumbent on me to be the one to close it down? Why is that?

By the way, you were the insulting one calling me an idiot, there is no route to the moral high ground for you here.
 
Randy said:
Some cracking posts in here.

Unfortunately the horse I backed finished outside the top four. 🥺

As for cruelty to horses I'm guessing it's because some died? If we ban horse racing because of that what else do we ban?

Motorsports? Drivers and riders have died over the past decade taking part in car and bike racing.

Football? Players have had to retire or have passed because of health issues related to the fitness requirements. Let's knock that sport on the head too? Too dangerous.

Rugby? Repeated concussions causing problems later on in life? Make it tag rugby only and no scrums.
Click to expand...
Come on man, You’re talking about sports where the host has the choice to play or ride in that sport, the horse just has to die for our pleasure.
 
Scrote said:
It's a silly question because I do know what the jockey is there for.

It's not a silly question when it's replying to you telling me that a horse knows exactly why it's at the racecourse, has memorised the course, understands the risks and is happy to take part.

The horse is instinctively running with the herd. We saw a bunch of horses that had unseated their riders running alongside the course but not over the fences. Had they forgotten where they were supposed to be going in all the excitement?

Personally, I'm not against animals in sport (or animals for eating) but don't dress it up as something it isn't.



Again, this is disingenuous. I don't need to know the first thing about horses to know that humans using animals for entertainment can be viewed as a moral wrong and in a completely just universe it wouldn't happen.

Are you pro-slavery (human)? If not (and I'd like to assume you're against), why not?

If you put a race horse on a plain with a bunch of other horses and then drive up with a horse box that the race horse will associate with going to a race course, would you expect the race horse (given your extensive article reading that allows you an opinion) to leave the herd and climb into the horse box?

If not, why would you deprive the horse of it's freedom to put it there. What rights do you have over the horse? Where is the line drawn?
Click to expand...
I am out of this debate, I can't be bothered with this kind of nonsense.
 
Sexpom said:
Come on man, You’re talking about sports where the host has the choice to play or ride in that sport, the horse just has to die for our pleasure.
Click to expand...
So the argument changes somehow then in your eyes?

Could it be, and here's a mind blowing suggestion, that people don't give the intelligence of horses enough credit or the the trainer's enough credit for the way they look after their horses.

For example is wager a small fortune that a horse bred for racing is better looked after than a gypsy horse that's left to feed itself in the **** end of an industrial estate somewhere with no shelter from the elements etc.

As for the argument about horses been kept what gives anyone the right to own a dog and only walk it when the owner takes it for a walk etc?

Horse racing isn't going away and isn't going to be banned, you'll only see the protests at the likes of the national or the derby. You won't see them at the 13:45 at Wolverhampton or the 17:10 at Sedgefield because there isn't any "HEY LOOK AT ME AND MY VIRTUOUS ACTIONS" folks attracted to those two venues.
 
Fat_Dragon said:
Why are the fences so high in the Grand National? Do you think if the height of the fences were lowered that would make it safer for both horse and jockey? Also reduce the amount of riders in the race as it does get very crammed.

One point about horses being forced to run. If a horse does not feel up to racing then it will not race. The horse will refuse to go into the starting gate (not applicable in National) and if need be unseat its rider to make its point. If you try and make a horse do something it doesn’t want to do then you will come off second best.
Click to expand...

We have to stop this kind of narrative.
Most 4 legged animals can jump to varying degrees and, I’ve no doubt, many enjoy it.
These horses are trained to jump high fences a la national. They are schooled day in day out - by humans. I’m sure some have faced ‘consequences’ of refusing to jump and, indeed, refusing to race.
We have had the horrible site of one of the top trainers in Ireland posing for a selfie as he sat on a horse whilst it was dead on the ground. It beggars belief that kind of behaviour is a one off.

Yes, some horse object.
Much like any animal that is ‘trained’. Some just get fed up and refuse.
 
Laughing said:
I am out of this debate, I can't be bothered with this kind of nonsense.
Click to expand...
So why get involved in the first place then?

You declared that Sherlock couldn't be on the right side of the argument because he didn't have enough evidence or facts (despite declaring your own five minutes of googling).

You now want to ignore the one simple fact that the only logical position, in a just universe, is to not use animals for entertainment, full stop.

You either agree with that or you don't. If you don't then where do you draw your line?
 
Randy said:
As for the argument about horses been kept what gives anyone the right to own a dog and only walk it when the owner takes it for a walk etc?
Click to expand...
Nothing. That's the whole point.

We make moral decisions based on a whole host of factors, but it is the human's decision to own the dog. Not the dog's decision to be owned.

Randy said:
Horse racing isn't going away and isn't going to be banned, you'll only see the protests at the likes of the national the derby. You won't see them at the 13:45 at Wolverhampton or the 17:10 at Sedgefield because there isn't any "HEY LOOK AT ME AND MY VIRTUOUS ACTIONS" at those two venues.
Click to expand...
Why would a protester target the internationally famous and hugely televised event over the one that three people and a dog bother with?

A million people marched against the Iraq war and were ignored.

Thousands marched against Brexit (or for second referendums etc.) and were ignored.

Hundreds camped outside St Pauls for weeks and were (largely) ignored.

These few dozen protesters did something that it was virtually impossible for the people in charge to ignore. It was a sensible decision on their part.
 
Randy said:
For example is wager a small fortune that a horse bred for racing is better looked after than a gypsy horse that's left to feed itself in the **** end of an industrial estate somewhere with no shelter from the elements etc.
Click to expand...

All of them?

What about the thousands of horses bred for racing each year that don’t make the grade and are destroyed? Are they well looked after?
 
Another question for the pro-racing brigade.

Some horses who are injured in races suffer career ending injuries, but not life threatening injuries?

If racing is such a compassionate injury, why are they shot?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top