Those who have horses, want to ever own horses or know someone READ

[speckledhen]

Pat, the phrase "and for other purposes" IS plain English-that is not legalese. It is a very plain phrase. I was saying that the "other purposes" are not defined and should be or the law is much too vague in that section. I think I just spoke plain English, didn't I?

 

[patandchickens]

Quote:
Actually it IS legalese. It just doesn't LOOK like it, because it is the kind of legalese where they use normal words to have special meanings. Stealth legalese!

Here is the original sentence, followed in underlined italics by a plain English translation, separated into several pieces for clarity:

"To amend the Horse Protection Act..." transl. "to amend the Horse Protection Act"

[bear with me, I broke it here to make the following clear]

"... to prohibit the shipping, transporting, moving, delivering, receiving, possessing, purchasing, selling, or donation of horses and other equines to be slaughtered for human consumption," transl. "so that horses can't be moved around or passed between owners for the purpose of killing for food"

"... and for other purposes" transl. "and this bill does another thing or two, also." (that being, the part gettin' you in trouble if you go shuffling sored horses around)

So, in sum it's "to amend the H.P.A. to do Thing One (slaughter-related) and for other purposes too (=Thing Two, soring-related)."

See?

I =UTTERLY AGREE= that it's dreadfully poorly written!

But that IS what the language of the Act is saying.

And you know, look, if they WERE endangering peoples' rights to transport horses in general, do you not think that every single horse industry organization under the sun would be saying so? Do you not think that all the rich influential people in the racing industry would be having expensive heart attacks and making sure their pet congressman Took Care Of It?

Yet look at the press release from the AQHA, which started the thread - it makes no claim that the Act would prohibit any trailering of any horse. Their beef is with other, subtler aspects of the Act (that it may infringe on peoples' abilities to dispose of horses, that it makes selling perilous, even that it may make *buying* perilous if the buyer is unaware that the horse is sored, which is regrettably common in QH breed shows these days, sigh). And what about the racehorse industries, which would be equally totally shut down by a total ban on horse transportation? THEY are not claiming this would happen, either - again, their opposition to Act 311 is about different and much more reality-based grounds.

I hope this clarifies. The problem with this kind of panicked misunderstanding, spread from one forum to another across the internet, is that it interferes with peoples' ability to oppose the legislation on PERFECTLY GOOD and persuasive grounds.

I would hate to see the bill passed because Congress got the impression that the folks writing/phoning in opposition to it are nitwits. Especially when they're NOT

Shutting up now,

Pat

 

[speckledhen]

I tell you one thing. None of these bills are written so an average person can skim through it one time and say, "Oh, I get it!". It takes reading and re-reading and then still, unless someone is an above average reader in the first place, it still may not make much sense. I for one wish legislation would be written in the simple language of the people. I am an excellent reader, but if I have to read it three times to get it, most will never get it, not enough to take any appropriate action on it. When a phrase makes plain sense, no other sense should have to be searched for between the lines. No wonder we have a bunch of stupid, nonsensical laws in this country! Enough of my soapbox about that. I dealt with contracts for years and things had to be written where it could be understood and not misinterpreted by either party. Wish the same applied to legislation. But, I think perhaps the point is that they do not want it to be understood properly. Stealth is a good word-sneak it in under the radar written in such a way as to make logical opposition near to impossible.
I learned the terms "sore" and "soring" today, though. In the context, I realized it was a term used outside of it's plain meaning so I'm glad it was defined in there. Good to know for future reference.

 

[Varisha]

Do please note that the first letter that triggered this thread did come for a large equine industery.

the American Quarter Horse Association who holds huge shows throughout the nation.

 

[Varisha]

I'm still 100% against this bill because it clearly bans horse slaughter for human consuption and I'm against that for a lot of reason some stated before others I have not stated here (yet)

another reason ... stopping slaughter of one type of livestock makes it a lot easier to stop the slaughter of other kinds of livestock.

 

[EggCentric]

Quote:
First off, there are MANY people that have no idea that their animal could end up going to slaughter from an auction. Just like a lot of people who give their horse away, actually believe that the "Wonderful family" that came to take their horse, couldn't POSSIBLY be a meat buyer.

There are still many many people here in the United States that have no idea that horses are even slaughtered for meat in other countries.

Black Beauty? News Flash, Black Beauty wouldn't have been abused and neglected if Anna Sewell hadn't written it that way.


"Sore" or "Soring" is referring to a practice of placing a caustic agent, screw, or other foreign object in a horses hoof to make it step higher. It does not mean "The horse's leg is sore from getting kicked by that other horse". So yeah, to outlaw the transportation of horses that have been the victim of "Soring" is a good thing.

Perhaps there are people in the United States that raise horses for human consumption, but I, for one, will not feel sorry for them when they have to find another way to make a living.

 

[Varisha]

First off, there are MANY people that have no idea that their animal could end up going to slaughter from an auction. Just like a lot of people who give their horse away, actually believe that the "Wonderful family" that came to take their horse, couldn't POSSIBLY be a meat buyer.

yes but again MOST know.

Perhaps there are people in the United States that raise horses for human consumption, but I, for one, will not feel sorry for them when they have to find another way to make a living.

what about the ones that eat it because that is the cheapest meat they can get ahold of in thier area? So is it ok for their families to starve? Are animals more important or even equals to humans and human lives?

Black Beauty? News Flash, Black Beauty wouldn't have been abused and neglected if Anna Sewell hadn't written it that way.

I know that black beuty was a story

but abuse and neglect happen to horses every second of every day. starvation, beat, neglegleted. the story had most of those examples so I used it as something even some not horse owners would know.​

 

[EggCentric]

Quote:
So that means they must be right? Perhaps they are pro-slaughter because of all the "Whoopsies" they make in their overly large breeding operations? I mean, they need somewhere to dump all those foals they breed that just don't make the cut. Or the older horses that have blown out knees from reigning competitions or chasing cows, winning their owners lots of prize money and stud fees, etc, only to be sent to slaughter as soon as they can't do it anymore? Yeah, gee, I wonder WHY the AQHA is pro slaughter?

It's simple, if they had nowhere to send their castoffs, they'd lose money.

 

[patandchickens]

Quote:
yes, that is what I pointed out - and they make *no claim* that the bill prohibits ALL horse transport.

Oppose the bill (as you do, and so do I) for what it actually says (as you have itemized), NOT for things it DOESN'T say (which was what this thread was started with).

Giving up,

Pat

 

[Varisha]

"Sore" or "Soring" is referring to a practice of placing a caustic agent, screw, or other foreign object in a horses hoof to make it step higher. It does not mean "The horse's leg is sore from getting kicked by that other horse". So yeah, to outlaw the transportation of horses that have been the victim of "Soring" is a good thing.

If you had read I posted the definition according to how it is currently in the law above.​