Why do people get put in jail for animal cruelty, but slaughter houses are perfectly legal?

I know, it is weird, with all the evidence of abuse, it's allowed. I think it is all about money and taste buds.

Jewels D: People do not *need* to eat meat, they eat it for pleasure, and it has no nutritional value that you can't get it from other sources. And there are plenty of meat substitutes out there, they are healthy and taste to a lot of people, exactly alike.

The UK does have *better* methods for killing the animals than the USA & China, and some other countries, but it is still a gruesome process, the whole raising them, then prepping them, then killing them, then slaughtering/cutting them, then checking to make sure it is *safe* to eat, then the slicing and packing, then shipping off the dead body parts to store.

Deluded by societal norm - Freakonomics, Meat-politics & religious stigma.

IF WE KNOW THE TRUTH :

If you go behind the walls the industry erects to hide the truth, you will find the situation worse than you could have imagined. In my opinion, if most urban meat eaters were to visit an industrial broiler house, to see how the birds are raised, and could see the birds being ‘harvested’ and then being ‘processed’ in a poultry processing plant, they would not be impressed and some, perhaps many of them would swear off eating chicken and perhaps all meat.

RELIGIOUS BIAS & MEAT-POLITICS :

We just alike the sheep herds. For modern animal agriculture, the less the voters and consumer knows about what’s happening before the meat hits the plate, the better. If true, is this an ethical situation? Why should we only visit the zoos, not the slaughterhouse? Should they be reluctant to let us know what really goes on, because we’re not really proud of it and concerned that it might turn us to vegetarianism?

The answer is in your own question: "...but slaughter houses are perfectly legal?..."

Your bleeding heart definition of cruelty is not reflective of how the rest of society, the majority, feels about it. Until such time that the majority of the society in which you live decide that killing animals for food is "cruel" then slaughterhouses are going to continue to exist. There are already laws in place where the treatment of animals destined for slaughter should be humane. Again, this definition is not based on ARs sentimental definition but on practical ideas of what constitutes humane. however, enforcement of such laws is lackluster at best.

the current situation is that: the minority (about 2 percent of the population) cannot dictate on the majority (97-98 percent). Nor can it define what is acceptable and what is not. The majority ALWAYS decides.

Because owners of slaughter houses have licences issued by the government stating that they can kill animals for commercial uses as long as they dispose of waste properly and keep proper hygiene.

I have pasted one on several occassions and have been deeply hurt when I heard the animal cry in pain; idk how people could do that for a profession.

Animal cruelty can be done in homes; such as ill-treating a house pet e.g. dog. You can be arrested for that, since there is no permit issued stating that you can hurt or kill animals at your own free will at home.

Since most police men eat meat, then they aren't going to arrest a butcher; if one does then that will be a shock lol.

Put simply, People make money from those places. All the way from the feed suppliers to the supermarkets. They sponsor the politicians who make or approve the laws. We believe whatever the marketeers want us to. So the wheel turns. If there was no profit in it, the places would close down and crumble into the dust from which they came. But they spin money, so the places continue. If money was being made from breeding people for cannibalism, we would be told that cannibalism was OK, because it was just nature, and the circle of life, and people were born to eat people, and all that. But the cannibalism thing hasn't got off the ground, yet, so the marketeers have no money to bluff us with. That's money. That's life. Cheers!

I agree with you 100%, infact, I know people that spend so much emotion and dollars on their dogs and cats yet are fine with eating cows.

I love animals very much, but right now I suppose I am willing to take any form of non cruelty laws, versus none. Its like, I know how bad things are, but I will beg for any form of stoping cruelty.

I hope one day people view cruelty to animals the same way they view racism or sexism. - remember women have only been voting in the last century.

My husbands family is so removed from their meat food. So in the next few months I am going to help out at a local farm shelter and take photos of the happy cows, and put them around my house. I will not say anything, but show that all life deserves respect and love!

This is quite a complex situation, but to put it very simply: our culture is interested only in protecting the "cute" animals. Your average joe doesn't see a chicken as man's best friend and thus doesn't feel guilty about torturing, killing, and eating it. It's quite unforunate that people who have control over solving issues like this generally don't see the parallels between domestic animal cruelty and slaughterhouses.

I agree! If I had been Michael VIck, I would have used that as my defense! Why is it okay to raise animals for food in horrid conditions, inhumane slaughter, and other atrocities, just so it can end up on a dinner plate? Who decided that cows, chickens and pigs can be treated that way, but not other animals. I often wonder about self proclaimed "animal lover" who still eat meat. I have a friend that is on about animal rights all of the time, but if you show up at her house around dinner time, there is sure to be a dead animal of some sort on the menu. She AND her dog will be chowing down on it, and all the while carrying on about the inhumane treatment of animals-makes no sense to me. What makes it okay to eat a cow, pig or chicken, but not a dog, cat, or parrot? You can get all of the nutrients you need from a plant based diet, so I see no reason why ANY animal should have to die, just to satisfy the tastebuds of a human.

There really is no way to humanely kill anyone.

And yeah, it is a double standard that is quite troubling. Worse, what few protections exist for animals don't apply to poultry, who comprise 90 percent of all animals slaughtered for food, AND enforcement is feebler than a 90-year-old man on his deathbed.

I cant speak for other countries but in the UK it is illegal to home kill for food use.

Slaughterhouses in the UK operate under very strict controls & conditions & have inspectors and vet present at all points of opperation to ensure that welfare is the top concern throughout the procedure. If it were not so, there would be outrage in the UK.

Hala

I am one of those many who produce the animals which go through the slaugherhouses & have gone with my animals on occassion to check what goes on.

I agree, there may be the odd one or two incidents of animal cruelty within slaughterhouses, but these days, with it being a very skilled job & one in which the skill carries a great deal of pride for the men/women who do that job, abuse is rarely tollerated since it comes down on the repuation of the entire crew.

Ohh and in the uk , there are laws, very strict laws. which is why the uk slaughter houses have one of the best repuations.

As for chickens. I know, I run a free range unit & have for years campainged to have intensive rearing of chickens stopped & I know full well from the demands of my customers just how much the Uk is turning more and more towards demanding free range only within the uk & thats not only in chickens, throughout the uk the smaller producers like myself, who rear less but with the highest welfare standards are seeing a hugely increasing demand for the meats we produce. The consumer is becoming more aware of what goes on with intensively produced food & thankfully is turning towards higher quaility meats that do not have a a cruelty label.