Bolt guns are used primarily because they’re not cruel. The animal doesn’t suffer, it’s like flipping a switch. Penetrating bolt guns don’t even stun, they instantly kill. I don’t have an issue killing an animal for meat, as long as it’s done quickly and the animal doesn’t feel pain. Animals eating animals is part of nature, and we do it a hell of a lot nicer than any other animal.
I’m a vegan and I actually partially agree with your sentiment about “quick death + no pain = maybe not too unethical”, and that’s actually the justification I used for a while to defend why I wasn’t vegan.
Just know that this view is not inherently incompatible with veganism. Go vegan because of the way the animals are treated while they’re alive. Also, most animals are not killed without suffer.
Cows for meat are possibly the only animal we eat that actually sometimes get decent treatment, if they’re pasture raised with no growth hormones. But non vegans act like this is significant. Only about 3% of cows get to live their entire lives on a pasture. I would commend someone if they actually held a strict rule that they only ate pasture raised beef, but I’ve never met anyone like that. That would mean you could never order beef from a restaurant, you could never eat beef your friends made, etc. unless you’re 100% sure it was pasture raised. Because just about every other cow had to live it’s entire life in a space so small it can’t even turn it’s head and doesn’t get to see outside.
That being said, virtually every other animal product does not have that going for them. Chicken is never pasture raised (too expensive), their lives are absolutely atrocious and the vast majority of the time they are killed by being hung on an assembly line upside down.
I’m not going to go into all the details but just know that, even if you do hold the belief that it’s okay for an animal to die if it is quick and painless, that you can still recognize that veganism is correct.
You didn’t answer my question. The dog in the picture, if someone came over and instead of rescuing it would have instead stunned it and slit its throat. Again, not because of hunger, just because of taste preference, would you call that cruel?
Oh btw. something being part of nature surely isn’t justification for humans to do it. Animals mate without consent in nature and I hope you are not a proponent of that as well.
And bolt guns specifically stun their victims, they don’t kill. For the bleeding out to be quick and efficent, the heart of the animal has to be beating still. I’ve been to slaughterhouses and I’ve seen it.
Is it their dog? Is it raised for food, or would the person otherwise starve? If the answers are yes, then no, I don’t find it cruel. I might find it distasteful, but not cruel. Does that answer surprise you? Good. Maybe you’ll start to see that morals are not universal and not everyone has to conform to yours. That’s the kind of thinking of a child.
Also, penetrating bolt guns are a thing and yes, they do kill.
Also, *penetrating* bolt guns are a thing and yes, they do kill.
Nope, they stun as well.
“The bolt penetrates the skull of the animal, enters the cranium, and catastrophically damages the cerebrum and part of the cerebellum. Concussion causes destruction of vital centers of the brain and an increase in intracranial pressure, causing the animal to lose consciousness. This method is currently the most effective type of stunning, since it physically destroys brain matter (increasing the probability of a successful stun), while also leaving the brain stem intact and thus ensuring the heart continues to pump during the exsanguination.[2] One disadvantage of this method is that brain matter is allowed to enter the blood stream, possibly contaminating other tissue with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, colloquially known as mad cow disease).”
Lol you are changing the hypothetical cause you know exactly that this would be cruel and that you would try to stop it if you saw it happening. It’s so dishonest.
Bolt guns are used primarily because they’re not cruel. The animal doesn’t suffer, it’s like flipping a switch. Penetrating bolt guns don’t even stun, they instantly kill. I don’t have an issue killing an animal for meat, as long as it’s done quickly and the animal doesn’t feel pain. Animals eating animals is part of nature, and we do it a hell of a lot nicer than any other animal.
I’m a vegan and I actually partially agree with your sentiment about “quick death + no pain = maybe not too unethical”, and that’s actually the justification I used for a while to defend why I wasn’t vegan.
Just know that this view is not inherently incompatible with veganism. Go vegan because of the way the animals are treated while they’re alive. Also, most animals are not killed without suffer.
Cows for meat are possibly the only animal we eat that actually sometimes get decent treatment, if they’re pasture raised with no growth hormones. But non vegans act like this is significant. Only about 3% of cows get to live their entire lives on a pasture. I would commend someone if they actually held a strict rule that they only ate pasture raised beef, but I’ve never met anyone like that. That would mean you could never order beef from a restaurant, you could never eat beef your friends made, etc. unless you’re 100% sure it was pasture raised. Because just about every other cow had to live it’s entire life in a space so small it can’t even turn it’s head and doesn’t get to see outside.
That being said, virtually every other animal product does not have that going for them. Chicken is never pasture raised (too expensive), their lives are absolutely atrocious and the vast majority of the time they are killed by being hung on an assembly line upside down.
I’m not going to go into all the details but just know that, even if you do hold the belief that it’s okay for an animal to die if it is quick and painless, that you can still recognize that veganism is correct.
You didn’t answer my question. The dog in the picture, if someone came over and instead of rescuing it would have instead stunned it and slit its throat. Again, not because of hunger, just because of taste preference, would you call that cruel?
Oh btw. something being part of nature surely isn’t justification for humans to do it. Animals mate without consent in nature and I hope you are not a proponent of that as well.
And bolt guns specifically stun their victims, they don’t kill. For the bleeding out to be quick and efficent, the heart of the animal has to be beating still. I’ve been to slaughterhouses and I’ve seen it.
Is it their dog? Is it raised for food, or would the person otherwise starve? If the answers are yes, then no, I don’t find it cruel. I might find it distasteful, but not cruel. Does that answer surprise you? Good. Maybe you’ll start to see that morals are not universal and not everyone has to conform to yours. That’s the kind of thinking of a child.
Also, penetrating bolt guns are a thing and yes, they do kill.
Nope, they stun as well.
“The bolt penetrates the skull of the animal, enters the cranium, and catastrophically damages the cerebrum and part of the cerebellum. Concussion causes destruction of vital centers of the brain and an increase in intracranial pressure, causing the animal to lose consciousness. This method is currently the most effective type of stunning, since it physically destroys brain matter (increasing the probability of a successful stun), while also leaving the brain stem intact and thus ensuring the heart continues to pump during the exsanguination.[2] One disadvantage of this method is that brain matter is allowed to enter the blood stream, possibly contaminating other tissue with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, colloquially known as mad cow disease).”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_bolt_pistol
Lol you are changing the hypothetical cause you know exactly that this would be cruel and that you would try to stop it if you saw it happening. It’s so dishonest.