Former teacher found not guilty of animal abuse

Caracus2k

Caracus2k

Caracus2k

Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,641
Saw this in the news


Few observations...

A circa 800kg horse running wild (as the horse appeared close to doing) on the road poses a real risk to both the horse and other road users.

The woman's actions in this case appear to have worked. (The horse was quickly moved to the box after the woman struck it)

There's always going to be a rather glaring inconsistency between anyone who is appalled by a video like this but who eats meat and/ or uses animal derived products (yes I know some don't but the majority of people do)

I think intent is important. If the woman had acted like this out for mere frustration, spite or to torment the animal it would be different. But as per point one there was obviously some urgency to get the animal under control.

I have never owned or had to look after horses but I know that other animals often require a bit of 'stick' as well as 'carrot' to keep them under control.
 
Last edited:
If you have to encourage cattle to move along you soon realise what a thick hide and plenty of flesh and muscle does to insulate them from your best physical efforts, and why electric cattle prods were invented for those having to do it on a large scale.
 
I don't know enough about horses to have much of an opinion - I'm sure it hurts them more when they get whipped racing?

People have compared it to a bloke who got done for animal cruelty when he punched a police horse though - He got 12 months.
 
Last edited:
VincentHanna said:
I don't know enough about horses to have much of an opinion - I'm sure it hurts them more when they get whipped racing?

People have compared it to a bloke who got done for animal cruelty when he punched a police horse though - He got 12 months.
Click to expand...

Nope, the whipping does nothing to them physically that would be considered harmful, they react to the noise primarily and secondarily to the sensation of being smacked on the backside, just like a person would smack the backside of a horse to make it move.

Their hides are very thick.

As for the police horse incident, rightly so even if the punch didn't hurt the horse its a service animal and as such the criminal should be treated as if striking an officer.
 
Last edited:
The defence was the horse was panicking so she hit it bring it back under control. I guess if she done nothing the horse could have run into people or worse yet a car which would have caused even more harm to the animal. I'm no horse expert but whatever it was she did it seemed to work. Lesser or two evils?
 
VincentHanna said:
People have compared it to a bloke who got done for animal cruelty when he punched a police horse though - He got 12 months.
Click to expand...

A silly comparison considering the person in the latter case was drunk, it was in the middle of some serious disorder the police were dealing with and he punched a horse with a mount for no good reason.
 
Last edited:
Freddie1980 said:
The defence was the horse was panicking so she hit it bring it back under control. I guess if she done nothing the horse could have run into people or worse yet a car which would have caused even more harm to the animal. I'm no horse expert but whatever it was she did it seemed to work. Lesser or two evils?
Click to expand...

Pretty much this.

The use of violence always has to be looked at contextually.

I would not support the use of such tactics on a day to day basis around the stables but there is a clear need to quickly resolve an animal running free on a road.

Although there are many difference in the circumstances (wild animal, and force used arguably to prevent an attack against the human using the force and not to subdue an animal who may cause itself and third parties harm) this case reminds me of the infamous 'man punches kangaroo' video.


In both cases the use of force appears to have been effective and unlikely to have caused much 'damage' to the animal.

It would have course have been different had the man just ran up to the kangaroo and hit it for a joke/ dare etc. But in this case the kangaroo had hold of his dog and poses a real risk to the dog and once the kangaroo released the dog it was clearly adopting a fighting stance towards the man.
 
Last edited:
Caracus2k said:
Pretty much this.

The use of violence always has to be looked at contextually.

I would not support the use of such tactics on a day to day basis around the stables but there is a clear need to quickly resolve an animal running free on a road.

Although there are many difference in the circumstances (wild animal, and force used arguably to prevent an attack against the human using the force and not to subdue an animal who may cause itself and third parties harm) this case reminds me of the infamous 'man punches kangaroo' video.


In both cases the use of force appears to have been effective and unlikely to have caused much 'damage' to the animal.
Click to expand...
Ha ha, I was thinking of this exact video when I saw this story! Brave man taking on that kangaroo, that could have easily killed his dog or harmed him in next to no time if it wanted.
 
Caracus2k said:
Saw this in the news


Few observations...

A circa 800kg horse running wild (as the horse appeared close to doing) on the road poses a real risk to both the horse and other road .

The woman's actions in this case appear to have worked. (The horse was quickly moved to the box after the woman struck it)

There's always going to be a rather glaring inconsistency between anyone who is appalled by a video like this but who eats meat and/ or uses animal derived products (yes I know some don't but the majority of people do)

I think intent is important. If the woman had acted like this out for mere frustration, spite or to torment the animal it would be different. But as per point one there was obviously some urgency to get the animal under control.

I have never owned or had to look after horses but I know that other animals often require a bit of 'stick' as well as 'carrot' to keep them under control.
Click to expand...

That horse was not out of control and kicking and slapping a horse in the face is not a method used in horse husbandry.

So if we eat meat we shouldn't care how animals are treated? That's nonsense and not inconsistent.

Utter tripe observations.
 
Last edited:
Another way to look at this, who is to blame if nothing is done and the horse crumples a child?

What is THE acceptable method of bring a horse that is (questionably) out of control back to safety, for itself and those around it.

All well and good saying punching it and kicking it (lol, I bet it totally didn't give a ****) isn't the way, but what is? Cattle prod? Tranquiliser? Big net?

Edit: my point being, as ineffectual and stupid psychically hitting a horse is, it was some attempt and doing something. Alternative is what?
 
Last edited:
adidan said:
That horse was not out of control
Click to expand...
It was running free before the woman got hold of it on a road an obvious danger to the animal and others


adidan said:
and kicking and slapping a horse in the face is not a method used in horse husbandry.
Click to expand...
Source? The use of many other forms of physical force have been a mainstay of horse husbandry for millenia! And again it's not necessary to say that the woman's actions should be routine just whether they were justified *in the circumstances*

adidan said:
So if we eat meat we shouldn't care how animals are treated? That's nonsense and not inconsistent.
Click to expand...

Animal suffering is a neccesary component of meat and dairy production. The suffering can be minimised but you are deluding yourself if you don't think the diet of most humans involves a lot of animal suffering.

Even the Vegans and Vegetarians don't get a pass on this one. Dairy farming is very cruel (vegetarians) and the farming of crops also necessitates animal cruelty to clear land and prevent animals from trampling/ eating crops.
 
Last edited:
ttaskmaster said:
OMG, Does Something Need To Be Done About Teachers?

I feel I don't need to wonder why she's a 'former' teacher...
Click to expand...

She's a former teacher because the video went viral and employers are spineless and are under some illusion that all humans are perfect, and that falling below the level of this fabled perfection means they can't fulfill the role they have trained for and may actually be close to perfection in.

I bet if we held a camera near most people long enough, they'd do something the internet would find questionable, and lead an employer to ditch us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom