Less Than One Month Until Greyhound Racing Vote
Next month, Massachusetts voters will get yet another chance to ban greyhound racing in their state. The last election (in 2000) was very close, with the dogs losing and sentenced to further boredom and loneliness, living in kennels, combined with dangerous spurts of activity that could easily fatally injure them, break their legs, or paralyze them (and don’t think the owners are going to pay for their medical treatment).
For those who say racing isn’t dangerous, I don’t even allow my greyhounds to play race with other dogs because of how easily any of them can get seriously injured while running at 40 mph (they’re a bit slow since their "retirement"). They cut each other off, leap over each other, and when they turn you’re sure they’re going to dislocate their legs at the hip.
And that’s when they’re playing.
The industry–even according to the industry–is dying.
Here’s a great article from AnimalLaw called "Greyhounds: Racing to Their Deaths." In these tumultuous economic times, it could be very easy for the industry to convince the public that the thousand or so jobs the tracks provide are more important than the dogs. Out of fear, people who might otherwise vote against the tracks might change their vote. And that would be a shame. Christine Dorchak of Grey2kUSA said any loss of jobs was regrettable, but added, “Our economy should not be built on cruelty to dogs.”
Of course, I don’t think our economy should be built on using dogs for entertainment and profit, regardless of the number of injuries and deaths. It’s pathetic that when some humans observe the talents and gifts and beauty of other sentient beings, all they see is dollar signs. And it’s unethical, not to mention disgusting, that our system is set up to help them amass as many dollars they can, in any way they can, and will defend their right to do so.
Go to The Committee to Protect Dogs to learn more, and tell everyone you know in Massachusetts to Vote Yes on 3! Let’s continue to chip away at the industry, and accelerate its deterioration to a quicker death that its on pace to experience.
Every state ban helps thousands of dogs.
Regarding danger:
It's not just the danger to the greyhounds, it's also the danger to other dogs and cats. Spent racers are not always adoptable to households with small dogs or cats (like mine) because the greyhounds are sometimes "keen." And then there's also the psychological harm to humans who euthanize unadoptable greyhounds.
Regarding the economy:
Money made from the industry is mostly about betting. Well, you can change that system into betting on human sports or betting in table games. There are alternatives that don't involve cruelty to animals.
One usually thinks of animal rights as something that can't be imposed from the top down, but has to start with the individual. This, however, is a wonderful example of a legal step toward abolition. I hope it passes. How can I find out if greyhound racing is legal in my state?
Here are the states where racing is still legal, and the number of tracks in the states. Check out Florida for why I write about this so much. Go to http://www.grey2kusa.org for more. GreyhoundRacingSucks.com(http://www.greyhoundracingsucks.com/index.htm) is great, as is the Greyhound Protection League (http://www.greyhounds.org/gpl/contents/entry.html) and the international site to abolish racing, Greyt Expectations (http://greytexploitations.com/).
Alabama (3)
Arkansas (1)
Arizona (3)
Colorado (3)
Connecticut (2)
Florida (16)
Iowa (2)
Kansas (2)
Massachusetts (2)
New Hampshire (3)
Oregon (1)
Rhode Island (1)
Texas (3)
West Virginia (2)
Wisconsin (2)
Florida… Florida, Florida! My "sunshine state" and shameful "home". I never realized there were that many greyhound tracks here! It's the sorry underbelly here, that is corrupted further by excessive "retiree" dollars. I guess when you're bored And wealthy, the combination makes for the cruelest of exploitations. I'm California Dreamin all the time…
"If you take away the tracks, you would probably see the end of the greyhound breed," McKinnon said. "I can't see greyhounds being bred for pets. I also don't picture the people behind the ban caring for all the greyhounds that the tracks now own. What's going to happen to those dogs?"
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/10/09/track_owner_in_race_to_win_ballot_fight/
These are the words of the track owner. Predictably, he's "concerned" with the future fate and welfare of the animals he's abusing "now".
Racing advocates always spew that kind of bunkum, Bea. Just like with every other track closing, there's a network of rescuers throughout the country who will mobilize and take the dogs, if they are permitted, and get them treated and adopted out. The only reason I have two greyhounds is that there's greyhound racing–and it's the state I live in and I felt like I had to help. They–and no other dog–should be bred for pets. Though they're exquisite, that's no reason to breed them. That's like saying we should breed them because they taste good; it's all about us.
Of course I agree that these dogs should never have been bred to begin with – as beautiful as they are… The logic of the track owners reminds me of the way horse murder has been presented by animal agriculture. That the slaughtering of the horses must continue in order to avoid the "suffering". I know it's all so twisted – and it is all about "us".