Nsw To Ban Greyhound Racing From July 2017

[corvus]

Maddy, you were the one that complained about false equivalences. But as soon as someone brings up an arguably fairer equivalence, apparently that's an argument for not changing anything in the greyhound industry. Sounds like moving the goal posts with a straw man to me. If someone is making that argument, then it's a terrible one. Equally, banning a practice state-wide because some people are breaking the law over it somehow just doesn't happen very often. Nor does self-regulation often work, for that matter, but people are usually given a chance to make it work for a reason, and sometimes it turns out to be the compromise that allows a practice to continue. I don't see any sense in arguing bitterly about it at this point. The industry has a lot of work to do. They seem to realise that, at least in some states. We can argue that the industry will or won't change until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is we get to find out, whether we wanted to or not. I'm interested to see if they can raise the bar for animal welfare in all animal-related industries. Some of them might find themselves left behind.

[Maddy]

 

Maddy, you were the one that complained about false equivalences. But as soon as someone brings up an arguably fairer equivalence, apparently that's an argument for not changing anything in the greyhound industry. Sounds like moving the goal posts with a straw man to me. If someone is making that argument, then it's a terrible one. Equally, banning a practice state-wide because some people are breaking the law over it somehow just doesn't happen very often. Nor does self-regulation often work, for that matter, but people are usually given a chance to make it work for a reason, and sometimes it turns out to be the compromise that allows a practice to continue. I don't see any sense in arguing bitterly about it at this point. The industry has a lot of work to do. They seem to realise that, at least in some states. We can argue that the industry will or won't change until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is we get to find out, whether we wanted to or not. I'm interested to see if they can raise the bar for animal welfare in all animal-related industries. Some of them might find themselves left behind.

Completely unrelated industries and their associated animal welfare issues are used over and over again to draw attention away from the racing issue.

For example.. "Well, greyhound racing has problems but what about how chickens are killed? Why aren't we talking about that, if welfare is such a concern?"

It's an irritating as "Oh, the greyhound industry might kill X number of dogs, but the RSPCA kills X!!! number of dogs! Who's the real killers here hurrhurrhurr!" (followed by much self-congratulatory back-slapping at having come up with such a thoroughly brilliant argument)

To make it very simple, using the shortcomings of other groups/industries to excuse away the problems. 

 

As for whether or not things will change.. there's really no argument in some areas. Down here, things are as bad as usual. Corruption and mismanagement continues, Tasmania is the last stop for many below-average dogs and some thoroughly shitty people (who were very publicly banned), are back at it. Ted Medhurst, seasoned dog shooter and forger, was initially given an 8 year ban. That ban was made very loud and public, to show that the industry was serious about welfare. But quietly, his ban was overturned. Which tells you a lot more about how much welfare is really prioritised, when the general public have lost interest in the case. Ted Medhurst was slipped back in for the same reasons that the unnamed trainer I mentioned before were- because at the end of the day, welfare is a nice idea but it's a business and the money must always come first. 

[corvus]

 

Completely unrelated industries and their associated animal welfare issues are used over and over again to draw attention away from the racing issue.

I'm aware of that. As I said, it's a terrible argument for not changing anything within the industry. It's illogical and irrelevant and the purpose is emotional framing, which doesn't count as an argument to me. That certainly was not my intention in offering a different comparison. I think the key is precedent rather than comparison. It would be nice if we could avoid conflating the two. Precedents for banning anything because some are not doing the right thing are often roundly criticised. E.g. bikie clubs, pitbulls... That's not a comparison of the issues involved. It's a comment on where banning things that are not inherently damaging through legislation has occurred before.