Halal slaughterhouse staff investigated over alleged animal cruelty

Of course we have to mention halal for the sake of it....
The same stuff happens in every other slaughterhouse too.
Not in all of them of course, but mentioning halal is just to appeal to the anti Islamic sentiment, which is pretty irrelevant when we are talking about slaughtering animals.... as if non-halal meat is treated any better

why is it so hard to say "dear muslims/jews, if you want to live here you've got to upgrade from 1268 to 2015. we simply don't have halal and kosher meat here because it doesn't accord to our rights and ethics. period. if you don't like it we're sure there are other countries that will fit you!"
our slave mentality especially when it comes to pleasing muslims is disgusting. we rather have our animals tortured.
and all this because we fear to be labelled as nazis.

a reply to: paraphi

Basically, all killing of animals performed in Abattoirs/Slaughterhouses are not pleasant; not just halal or kosher killings. I purchase my meat from an organic butcher shop whose family owns the farm the meat comes from. The animals are treated well and not confined into pens for their entire lives like most slaughterhouses throughout the world. BUT they are killed the same way. Stun gun to the head that leaves them unconscious and then Exsanguination (knife).

Sure, I get it; not stunning the animal causes much stress and suffering but, so does confining them into pens for their entire existence as most commercial corporate slaughterhouses do.

I have no problem with Jews and Muslims, but I do have a problem with bigots...

Methods

Many countries have adopted the principle of a two-stage process for the non-ritual slaughter of animals. This is to ensure a rapid death with minimal suffering. The first stage of the process, usually called stunning, renders the animal unconscious, and thus not susceptible to pain, but not necessarily dead. In the second stage, the animal is killed. Countries differ in the methods which have been legalized for different species or different ages, some regulations being governmental, others being religious.

Stunning

Stunning a cow with a captive bolt pistol
Various methods are used to render an animal unconscious during animal slaughter.
Electrical (stunning or slaughtering with electric current known as electronarcosis)
This method is used for swine, sheep, calves, cattle, and goats. The current is applied either across the brain or the heart to render the animal unconscious before being killed.

Gaseous(Carbon dioxide)

This method can be used for sheep, calves and swine. The animal is asphyxiated by the use of CO2 gas before being killed. In several countries, CO2 stunning is mainly used on pigs. A number of pigs enter a chamber which is then sealed and filled with 80% to 90% CO2 in air. The pigs lose consciousness within 13 to 30 seconds. Research has produced conflicting results with some showing pigs tolerate CO2 stunning and others showing they do not.[5][6][7]

Gaseous (Inert gas hypoxia)

Various concentrations of argon and nitrogen have been used to induce unconsciousness, often in conjunction with CO2. Domestic turkeys are averse to high concentrations of CO2 (72% CO2 in air) but not low concentrations (a mixture of 30% CO2 and 60% argon in air with 3% residual oxygen).[8]
Mechanical (Captive bolt pistol)
This method can be used for sheep, swine, goats, calves, cattle, horses, mules, and other equines. A captive bolt pistol is applied to the head of the animal to quickly render them unconscious before being killed. There are three types of captive bolt pistols, penetrating, non-penetrating and free bolt. The use of penetrating captive bolts has, largely, been discontinued in commercial situations to minimize the risk of transmission of disease when parts of the brain enter the bloodstream.

Mechanical (gunshot/free bullet)

This method can be used for cattle, calves, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, and other equines. A conventional firearm is used to fire a bullet into the brain of the animal to render the animal quickly unconscious (and presumably dead). A second method may be used (e.g. drug administration) to ensure the animal is dead.
Killing

Exsanguination

The animal either has its throat cut or has a chest stick inserted cutting close to the heart. In both these methods, main veins and/or arteries are cut and allowed to bleed.[9][10]

a reply to: Involutionist
The fact is that people eat meat. Animals need to be slaughtered. Like it, or not, abattoirs are a fact of life.

The point of the OP is that you can treat an animal with respect and still kill it as humanely as possible, or you can compromise your own ethics and allow cruel practices to intrude in the process.

I have no doubt that abattoirs are grim places, but why make it worse? If you allow halal (and kosher) practice, then you can use that as an excuse not to improve other standards.

Pressure by animal rights groups mean that many UK supermarkets insist on CCTV in the abattoirs as a means of preventing bad practice, such as seen in the OP.

Regards

They are 2 different problems, the ill treatment of animals in sluaghterhouses, as already stated is not limited to hallal or kosher places.
I think it's disengenous to try and make out the 2 are linked they are not.
The method of slughter is a different issue to the treatment of animals before slaughter.

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
They are 2 different problems, the ill treatment of animals in sluaghterhouses, as already stated is not limited to hallal or kosher places.

Ah, but my contention is that they both the same. Halal (and Kosher) involve cruelty to animals, whichever way you try to paint it. If you want to improve animal welfare and reduce animal suffering at end of life, then you remove these practices. There is no place for slitting the throat of a conscious, un-stunned animal in UK abattoirs.

Regaards

a reply to: paraphi

The point of the OP is that you can treat an animal with respect and still kill it as humanely as possible, or you can compromise your own ethics and allow cruel practices to intrude in the process.

I know, and that is why I presented a list of the different methods used in slaughterhouses around the world in my previous post to emphasize the fact that ethics are being compromised regardless if they are stunned or not before being slaughtered. Also, there is NO humane way to kill an animal...

Being locked up alive in pens their entire lives is inhumane. The Japanese pay people to massage the cows daily at their farms. Everywhere else they are treated barbarically.

Gassing pigs to death is a cruel practice. Stringing chickens up and slitting their throats is a barbaric practice that compromise ethics. So why are you singling out how Jews and Muslims go about the process when pigs are being gassed to death while there are controversial reports that some of the pigs are still alive because gassing is not fool-proof?

Basically, why single out a certain demographic when everybody is guilty?

What drove you more to post this:

A) You're a vegetarian or PETA volunteer who cares for the rights of ALL animals.

B) You don't mind how animals are killed, but are using this topic as a platform (smoke and mirrors) to express animosity towards a certain demographic.

C) You have never ever stepped foot in a modern slaughterhouse and witnessed what really goes on in there and therefore honestly believe it all roses when it comes to the slaughter.

Gaseous(Carbon dioxide)

This method can be used for sheep, calves and swine. The animal is asphyxiated by the use of CO2 gas before being killed. In several countries, CO2 stunning is mainly used on pigs. A number of pigs enter a chamber which is then sealed and filled with 80% to 90% CO2 in air. The pigs lose consciousness within 13 to 30 seconds. Research has produced conflicting results with some showing pigs tolerate CO2 stunning and others showing they do not.[5][6][7]

What are your thoughts concerning the above practice in regards to these words of yours:

you can compromise your own ethics and allow cruel practices to intrude in the process.

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
The method of slughter is a different issue to the treatment of animals before slaughter.

I agree. The real issue is the treatment of animals before the slaughter, as there is evidence for both sides regarding the method of slaughter used & the results of the methods used.

I'm against commercial farming, by that I mean those organisations that don't give animals there basic rights of a natural environment, natural food source. The animals should not be breed purely to make up orders, each animal should be allowed to live to a decent life span before being put on the chopping block. There are many smaller individual or privately owned farms/slaughter houses which do treat animals in a more appropriate manner. Can't believe some of these people who work with animals, they have lost all sense of humanity.

Eating meat was a luxury in the past. We tend to abuse everything in modern society.