Vegans have been sharing slaughterhouse footage for eons but thank goodness nonvegan CCTV is now available to “protect” animals in slaughterhouses………..
Spy Cams Reveal the Horrible Animal Suffering Required in Slaughterhouse Gas Chambers : See above and additional footage of Smithfield Foods Gas Chambers recently exposed by Investigator Raven Deerbrook (@RestlessDoe).
I received an email yesterday from the RSPCA asking me to sign a petition requiring CCTV in slaughterhouses to “protect” animals. Of course I had to write back.
And they responded!
As did I. Again. Because I’m not one of those people who needs to be “assured” (the irony) animals don’t suffer for humans (they do, relentlessly) and donate $50 for a free tote bag showing alive animals (the irony), while proudly displaying Bumper Sticker Activism (SAVE THE WHALES!) while eating fish (again, the irony) …
Don’t come at me with your wordy nonsense suggesting you’ve made the bold and noble decision to sacrifice ethics and support animal suffering because most of “civilization” is also challenged by decency … while also – bizarrely – stating you don’t encourage animal consumption … while simultaneously sharing a link to your RSPCA-Assured scheme (scam) that LITERALLY encourages humans to abuse animals by consuming their abusively-and-violently-killed bodies.
Hypocrisy much?
Vegans have been exposing and sharing slaughterhouse footage since practically the birth of time to mostly willfully ignorant people who blame vegans for exposing such horrific violence rather than themselves for participating in and causing said horrific violence.
But somehow, nonvegans recording animals’ required violent killings will benefit those animals.
Somehow.
Some…
How…
Wait. How???
If it wasn’t so hypocritically violent, it would be satire.
Who’s going to watch, industry employees? An assigned “independent consultant” who also consumes animals? It won’t be available to the public but who would watch anyway? (Besides vegans of course.)
Here’s the thing: footage that reveals cruelty is ALWAYS IGNORED by people who instead favor, “Not here! Anomaly! Illegal!” How many times have YOU excused suffering based on, “It should be blahquickblahpainlessblah.” (Which conveniently ignores the suffering animals are required to experience before the final violent act of being killed.) Did you know using “should” is your subconscious tell? Because you know it’s NEVER “should”, it’s ALWAYS violent suffering.
Why is it that people accept that laws prohibiting human abuses don’t prevent human deaths but people think regulations that “illegalize” animal abuses magically prevent animal abuse/death??? You know how ludicrous that is, correct?
If animal abuse was globally illegal, slaughterhouses wouldn’t exist … because animals should NOT be exploitatively abused.
You will agree that violently killing others is unethical as well as inhumane, correct? Because if someone’s companion dog being violently killed is “inhumane” – based on the victim’s capacity to experience pain and cruelty (though not required) rather than the abuser’s motive for inflicting pain and cruelty – then the human categorization of “inhumane” shouldn’t change based on species, and that being killed is being inherently abused. But when applied to “consumed animals” your “ethics” dramatically shift to the “conditions-that-benefit-me, tho” clause. Not to mention that trillions of animals are violently killed EACH YEAR but supposedly all animals globally will be “protected” by CCTV requirements. You can’t even count that high. And all animal exploitation is related: if you eat chickens in the US, you are contributing to a foundation of normalized violence that forgives animal consumption elsewhere of catsdogshorsesrabbitsetcetcetc.
And nobody except zero people has ever suggested that companion animals be “euthanized” in slaughterhouses because it’s all so humane due to “CCTV, tho”. Right?
And on that topic, people who (understandably) “aggressively” campaign against the CDMT (“cat and dog meat trades”) aren’t demanding video coverage of the cat and dog victims’ violent deaths to “protect” cats and dogs, they’re demanding an uncompromising elimination of the CDMT industry in whole. (But since the vast majority of them aren’t vegan, they’re heralded for their brave and necessary advocacy…)
Anything to smother that bit of conscience, huh?
If you’re a nonvegan promoting CCTV as necessary to “protect” animals while those animals are being violently killed, what is a more ideal and actually meaningful way to protect animals than NOT SENDING ANIMALS TO SLAUGHTERHOUSES IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Indeed, if you admit slaughterhouses are badbadbad enough to require CCTV, then why are YOU sending animals there?
And for certain, you will NEVER see footage of CO2 chambers publicly released by the industry. Never.
Listen, folks, to protect animals, you don’t have to donate to welfare organizations who profit from animal exploitation and tell people what they want to hear – that violating, controlling, and violently killing animals is beneficial to animals and helps protect them (?!?). What you need to do is just stop ab/using animals. Just stop. It’s also 100% meaningless to sign petitions or frame animal violence in human-acceptable manners via pathetic and paltry welfare improvements (a prison with a death sentence is still a prison with a death sentence even if the confinement is slightly larger – and animals are innocent), you just have to stop harming animals.
If you’re advocating for the “humane treatment” of animals, what is more humane than NOT harming/killing them?
Nonvegans never answer that question, it’s just their way of defining the pain they inflict on others in manners that makes them feel comfortable inflicting pain on others. SL
Download Your FREE Vegan PDF HERE
Order a FREE vegan kit HERE
Dairy-Free Info HERE
Take the Dairy-Free Challenge HERE
Click HERE for more Dairy-Free
Fish alternatives can be found HERE
Learn about eggs HERE
Find bacon alternatives HERE and HERE
Take PETA’s Cruelty-Free Shopping Guide along with you next time you head to the store! The handy guide will help you find humane products at a glance. Order a FREE copy HERE
Searching for Cruelty-Free Cosmetics, Personal-Care Products, Vegan Products, or more?
Click HERE to search.
Free PDF of Vegan & Cruelty-Free Products/Companies HERE
Click HERE to find out How to Wear Vegan!
Want to do more than go vegan? Help others to do so! Click below for nominal, or no, fees to vegan literature that you can use to convince others that veganism is the only compassionate route to being an animal friend:
PETA HERE
Vegan Outreach HERE
Get your FREE Activist Kit from PETA, including stickers, leaflets, and guide HERE
Some humans are a rather limited and clueless bunch who live their lives by the hypocritic oath
Our Compass 
Some humans are a rather limited and clueless bunch who live their lives by the hypocritic oath
LikeLiked by 1 person
Right? I’ve never seen such obsessive, disturbing defense of violence towards innocents and socially-accepted hateful attempted maligning of humans (vegans). Thank you as always, hon, it’s perfect and, sadly, true. ❤
LikeLike
You are so welcome . Even in our techno savvy state, we as a species remain in a cave of ignorance
LikeLiked by 1 person
… and do and say anything to remain there. On a literal note, technology has enabled activists to expose the cave dwellers.
LikeLike
Hypocritic oath. 👍
LikeLiked by 1 person
Asking someone that’s telling you that humane slaughter is fine by them if they’d take Fido to an abattoir to be euthanised is very often a good way to see the cogs start turning, but it’s also very often that the reply will be “but that’s different”. “How is it?”….”because it’s my dog. I’m not getting into this conversation with you, you have your opinions.” Etc, etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Humane slaughter is a most moronic oxymoron
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, often spouted by fully fledged morons.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yup, exactly. And just regarding facts, the HSA (Humane Slaughter Act or rather, The Methods of Humane Slaughter Act – it was changed), excludes the largest group of animals killed – fish and birds. Only 1 out of 10 billion land animals are included in the HSA; 9 billion “poultry” (and all fish) are specifically exempt. But since all slaughter is INhumane, the distinction is only relevant when vegans are involved. Also, the AVMA who recommends the methods of slaughter, specifically state that “pets” or companion animals should NOT be killed (euthanized) in the same manners. Shocker.
People will grasp any excuse to believe their violent acts aren’t violent, they don’t want to believe that their actions cause suffering to innocents.
But people aren’t killing and eating animals because they honestly believe that NOT killing and NOT eating animals is INhumane or UNethical.
And as one of my mutuals often said, what form of slaughter is more humane than NOT slaughtering?
LikeLike
You make excellent points; however, the purpose of CCTV in slaughterhouses is so that the recording can be audited to spot-check for egregious cruelty or to document allegations of cruelty that may be made against workers. Of course, it would be better to shut them down, but until that happens, let’s try to reduce the animals’ suffering.
LikeLike
Yes, I know, but they’re not “my points”, it’s basic-decency behaviour and logical facts. I shouldn’t have to explain that.
Promoting CCTV in “your points” dilutes inherently violent and cruel death by implying slaughter is not cruel because of a greater “egregious cruelty” potential. In other words, as long as killing can be “egregiously cruel”, killing can also be “humane”, an undeniably antivegan position.
Furthermore, as I have already stated, there is a lot of slaughter footage that already exists, it seems as if people who are promoting CCTV as necessary, want to frame killing as cruel only “some times”.
“Spot-checking” diminishes individuality to mass produced insentient products.
Trillions of animals are violently butchered yearly by people who are all doing the job they’re tasked with that is inherently abusive – they’re literally doing their jobs, hired by a society that doesn’t want to know about it but that would prefer to fake moral outrage when one employee is accused of “abuse” … in a SLAUGHTERHOUSE. In other words, if you can focus on one employee for “abuse” you can claim the “system works” by suggesting all other employees are not committing abuse while violently killing animals, removing the focus from the ACTUAL ANIMAL VICTIMS, only a fraction of whom are actually “witnessed” by employees or govt-hired “consultants”, who all consume animals.
Reducing animals’ suffering requires veganism, especially regarding a place that is decidedly antivegan.
LikeLike
I’m a vegan and do not believe there is anything humane about slaughterhouses. However, I think it would lead to less egregious cruelty if there were CCTV in slaughterhouses.
LikeLike
You “think”? That is the false narrative that nobody, in particular vegans, should EVER promote, it leads to the idea – again – that slaughterhouses are normally humane because a “bad apple” was discovered. Why are you scaling suffering rather than rejecting all of it? And you should also be really clear about why you believe vegans should be making animal slaughter more comfortable for nonvegans.
Nothing good EVER happens in a slaughterhouse.
First and foremost, slaughterhouses require violent suffering of ALL animals.
Second, slaughterhouses don’t attract people who actually care about animals, but targeting one’s “badder behaviour” implies all others are treating animals “kindly” … in a SLAUGHTERHOUSE where the job is to KILL ANIMALS. Do you think people who are paid to kill are really concerned with animals’ comfort? They’re asked to kill by society who will pass the blame onto one “horrible person” and not themselves.
Third, mechanical errors often have no human to blame.
Fourth, again, WHO IS WATCHING? People who consume animals who ALSO don’t want to admit their actions cause violent suffering?
Fifth, nobody has yet defined how CCTV actually “reduces animal suffering”. Seeing an animal on video who wasn’t stunned properly and is boiled while fully conscious doesn’t prevent that animals’ suffering. Of course, you can go through the motions of writing it up and retraining employees, only to have it happen again because, once more, IT’S A SLAUGHTERHOUSE where NOBODY cares about animals’ comfort in a place where they go to violently die. It’s been years since it was exposed that 10s of 1000s of chickens are boiled alive yearly. What’s happened since? Nothing. People take to social media screaming about how cruel it all is and how it SHOULD happen instead but do nothing because it SHOULD happen differently. 100% meaningless to the animal victims. Anybody can access the USDA data that demonstrates that they are still boiled alive, there’s also 1000s of pages of USDA data demonstrating “violations” in the slaughter process. This information is ALREADY available to the public. And videos also already exist. But somehow CCTV is going to magically reform an inherently violent system?
If ppl think CCTV will inspire employees to not abuse animals or deter employees from acting violently, then society needs to stop hiring ppl to violently and abusively kill animals for them.
I seriously don’t understand why I keep having to say this. To reduce animal suffering, stop sending them places where SUFFERING IS INHERENT. And none of this even addresses the horrors animals are forced to endure even before they’re killed, I’m so tired of people apathetically and selfishly saying that animals have great lives and one bad day but now vegans are cheering CCTV so why would any nonvegan actually gaf? No vegan should ever support such a violently lethal narrative.
VEGANISM is the moral baseline, not CCTV.
LikeLike
“We try to reduce animal suffering…” Sorry Kim Rogers Bartlett, I don’t understand what you mean by your comment!
There is only one way to reduce the suffering of other living creatures: stop “growing” them as if they were vegetables, and then kill and eat them.
Speciesism is the poison that will destroy us… man is the most brutal animal that exists, as a matter of fact. We don’t have to hunt to survive like predators in the wild. We are vicious, we believe we have the right above everything and everyone (anthropocentrism) and we are convinced that this is right.
I know I’m boring, but we are also on the list of endangered animals and our turn will come very soon.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As it has been and as it is now, slaughterhouses are a playground for sadists. (Not all the workers are sadists; some are simply desperate for a job and are demeaned and psychologically damaged by what they do.) If the sadists’ actions are recorded on CCTV and there is the possibility that they may be viewed by someone, and if the fear of exposure causes them to inflict even slightly less pain and suffering to just ONE animal, then the CCTV – however flawed a system – is worth having in place. Why is that view taken as condoning slaughterhouses? There will be countless animals murdered before any society gets to the point that slaughterhouses are shut down. In fact, President Biden allocated a billion dollars of tax money to open new slaughterhouses across the U.S. We can demand reduction in suffering at the same time as advocating veganism.
LikeLike
Really??? That’s your honest response? So you conveniently ignore all “good points” and are going with, “but catching sadists,tho”?
Wow, yay, slaughterhouses are great places to catch sadists. Should we build more and kill more animals to catch serial killers and mass murderers? Can we all look forward to your campaign to get CCTV in grocers and restaurants to catch their co-conspirators? Who cares about the animals being violently killed, at least humans can benefit by targeting other “really bad people” ….. Your ififififif position is ludicrous.
How would that even go down? A “consultant” sees an animal on video who was disemboweled while conscious and has a stern talking to the employee?
Like:
Consultant: I see on the video that a cow was sadistically violated while conscious, are you a sadist, what do you have to say about that?
Employee: No, sir, I’m not a sadist, I didn’t know, I saw no blinking.
Consultant: Well, clearly there’s a gleam in YOUR eyes as if you enjoyed sadistically harming that animal.
Employee: No, sir, I don’t enjoy sadistically killing animals, I enjoy getting paid to sadistically kill animals.
Consultant: Sorry for interrupting your lunch, please resume eating our victims.
???
ALL slaughter is SADISTIC. ALL slaughter CAUSES SUFFERING and PAIN. That’s what employees are paid to do. Stop trying to make the wrong “playgrounds” right.
And ppl don’t need to work in a slaughterhouse to get their victims, I’m bombarded w/ cases of ppl who sadistically harm animals everywhere else.
Using CCTV is not the issue; the issue is HOW it’s used and “promoted”.
Vegans aren’t responsible for nonvegan behaviour, ie., Biden building more slaughterhouses is because of nonveganism, don’t even try to posit that because humans are shitty, vegans have to accommodate their shitty behaviour. Nobody praises murderers for killing 10 vs 15 ppl.
And there is a HUGE difference b/t using slaughterhouse footage to END an inherently violent, lethal, and unjust system and using slaughterhouse footage to perpetuate an inherently violent, lethal, and unjust system. THAT is the difference b/t MY objection and YOUR approval.
LikeLike