Steve, please respond

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

PETA may not know what they're talking about when it comes to specifics about horseracing. But I would not criticize them for being critical of horseracing. When you have horses being forced to race and breaking their legs and dying, that is pretty hard to defend. Most of my livelihood comes from horseracing, but I can't sit here in good conscience and claim that there is no cruelty in horseracing. And I'm certainly not going to get mad at a group (PETA) who sees horses dying and wants some answers.
I'm glad someone is speaking up. I'm glad that someone cares. PETA's specific criticisms may not be correct, but if they were properly educated I think they would come up with tons of legitimate criticisms.
What happened to Eight Belles may have been a fluke, but most breakdowns are not flukes. Most horses that break down are very unsound horses that should not be racing.

lets say it was your horse in the derby that broke down, and while you were dealing with the anguish, Peta named you as someone that should be suspended, without doing any type of investigation into whether or not you did anything wrong, but went right to the national media and called you out for sanction. would you still not be mad, and be talking about how great it is that they are speaking out?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I think those are extremely poor analogies because nascar drivers have a choice. Nobody is forcing them to race cars for a living. Jockeys have a choice. They know the risks. Horses do not have a choice. They are forced to race.

my comparisons were to show that other sports have times when someone is killed, but those sports are not then forced to answer questions as to why it should continue to exist.
i've also heard comparisons made of horse racing to dog fighting. but the sole purpose of dog fighting is to have a dog die. i don't see a comparison to that either.
and yeah, it's not as tho horses gather on the corner and set up a race. but we all just need to continue to work towards having owners/trainers make the best choices for their horses, and try to make this sport safer.

[pgiaco]

I think before you condemn anything as cruel or question whether a sport should exist you should have a basic knowledge of what the sport is about.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

lets say it was your horse in the derby that broke down, and while you were dealing with the anguish, Peta named you as someone that should be suspended, without doing any type of investigation into whether or not you did anything wrong, but went right to the national media and called you out for sanction. would you still not be mad, and be talking about how great it is that they are speaking out?

They have to speak up now while the event is still getting coverage and still on people's minds.

Of course I would be upset if PETA blamed me for a horse's death and the death was not my fault. I would be upset but by the same token I would understand where they're coming from. They see something like this happen and they want to blame someone. That's understandable. But in this case, there may not be anyone to blame. It may have just been a fluke.

I don't always agree with PETA's methods but as long as they're trying to speak up for animals, I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

I can tell you one thing. Horseracing certainly does not do a good job of policing itself. If animal groups speaking out will encourage the horseracing industry to do a better job of policing itself then I'm all for it.

It obviously would have been better if PETA would have simply demanded answers and demanded an explanation, rather than criticizing individuals who were probably not at fault. But what do you expect? They know very little about horseracing.