(January 19, 2014 at 5:51 pm)LastPoet Wrote: The paper he linked deals with the importance of making accurate shots when killing the animals and perform maintenance to the guns, it really doesn't support his 'argument' at all. If anything, recommends better practice, that I support (the meat has better quality if the animal is killed correctly).
Anyway, he has gone the deep end and calling everything a fallacy... Forgetting his all 'argument' since the beginning has been one big appeal to emotion.
It also says that even "despite being shot accurately, 13.6% bulls were inadequately stunned" The fact is killing animals causes suffering, no process is perfect and you will always be subjecting some animals to one of the most horrific deaths imaginable. Far better just to not eat meat. No cruelty, its better for your health and better for the environment.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7120/09627286.22.4.473
