Slashdot Mirror


Chicken Run

Applying modern technology to the task of corraling chickens for the slaughterhouse results in a chicken-catching machine that surprisingly is not as gruesome as it appears. Never thought about a "chicken vacuum" before? After reading this, you won't be able to get it out of your head. :) Sadly, scientists are already researching ways for the chickens to fight back.

9 of 550 comments (clear)

  1. but it's more humane! by sweeney37 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some of the biggest fans are animal-rights groups, including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. The machines are far more gentle on the birds than human handlers are. "We support using machines that reduce the panic, fear and horror of chickens," says Karen Davis of United Poultry Concerns, a Machipongo, Va., group that opposes eating chickens and also runs a sanctuary for a few lucky birds that manage to escape the farms (usually by falling off a truck).

    They do realize the bird's final destination, right?

    Mike

    1. Re:but it's more humane! by snarkh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are going to die too. Should you not be able to enjoy it meanwhile?

  2. Build a better chicken trap... by DavidBrown · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...and the world will come clucking at your door.

    --
    144l. ph34r my 133t l3g4l 5k1lz!
  3. Very nice, humane, but... by SamBC · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I personally would like to see more effort and ingenuity go into finding ways to kill the birds more humanely. I for one wouldn't want to go by being dipped in electrified water *then* beheaded. Just the beheading will do me, if it has to be done.

    Don't get me wrong - I support the eating of meat, for those who choose to (like me) - I just wish we could do it in more sensible, humane ways.

    1. Re:Very nice, humane, but... by droleary · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you were (or indeed are) in a country/state with the death penalty, would you rather be hung, gassed, put in the electric chair, or killed by lethal injection? Tip: one is far less painful than the others.

      Tip: Chickens are not people. Bonus tip: Dead is dead. Even if you believe in an afterlife, are you going to sit and dwell for eternity about how that last couple seconds/minutes of your life passed?

      In just the same way, there is no good reason to cause an animal more pain than necessary when slaughtering it for food.

      Of course there is! Humane too often means "in a way that makes humans feel good". How about we kill them in a way that makes the animal feel better, or at least gives them a chance to live another day? I think it is far better to have the chicken killed in a survival-of-the-fittest manner. Realistically, I actually expect animals would/should be killed in a manner that makes their meat most tasty and tender.

  4. Re:what if tolkien... by janda · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Ok, this is just a wee-bit off-topic, but...

    It's already been done. Check out "Watership Down".

    --
    Karma: Food Fight (Mostly affected by Date Plate).
  5. Ugh. by be-fan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's nice to see technology being applied to making the food industry more humane. However, I must use this opportunity to bitch about the quality of meat in the US. The poultry here, at least the stuff you buy at Giant or Safeway, sucks. Totally bland and tasteless. My family lived in Bangladesh until I was 4 or so. There, it takes six months to get a chicken ready for sale. Here, thanks to all the growth hormones, it takes a few weeks. In the process, the chicken is robbed of all flavor. When we moved here, it took me months to get used to the chicken here. Even now, the only way I can stand it is to cook it in tons of spices or deep fry it in grease.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
  6. Re:Not very humane by Catnapster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What PETA seems to realize - and you don't - is that no matter how zealous they are, there's not going to be a widespread ban on animal food anytime soon, and chickens will continue to be "inhumanely kept and slaughtered".

    Activists like to make you think that the act of buying one brand of chicken over another is a strike against the huge, faceless, cruel chicken industry and its sadistic practices. It's not. They won't even know it happened, because the store already bought the chicken.

    Furthermore, it's "almighty buck". And what you imply to be obsession with profit is actually just being efficient with money. If you have two gas stations to patronize, and one is clean, has efficient service, high-quality gas and a lower price, and the other is expensive and has crap gas, are you going to go to the better, less-expensive one or the other?

    --
    The world can be wrong today for once.
  7. Re:pathetic by Thing+1 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You're very funny. Let me directly quote the great-grandparent which you wrote:

    Peta should be advocating the fact that animals are sentient beings, not a renewable resource. And for those pathetic scientists who even created such a device should deserve death at the least, using their own stupid machines.

    Where did you use the "=" sign there? You said scientists who create a technology should be put to death "at the least" (I'm wondering what your "most" would be...). You did not say the users of the machines should be put to death, you said the creators. That's like suing Ford for a drunk driver killing your relative. (Pssst... it's not equal.)

    I didn't insult your education, call you a fool, or discuss your drug use or lack thereof. I merely said you were being hypocritical, and you didn't answer my question: do you eat vegetables for which you must kill the organism in order to produce the food? (Carrots, potatoes, beets?)

    Unlike animals, if an apple is broken off the tree, first, it doesn't feel pain (no nervous system) and second, it can REGROW the apple i.e. regenerate.

    But carrots, potatoes and beets cannot regenerate; you kill them by harvesting them.

    And just because a plant doesn't have a nervous system doesn't mean that you're not removing a life force from the Earth when you kill plants. They have a Kirlian aura which you're snuffing out. And check out PEVA, who argue that plants and even single-celled organisms can feel pain ("Some single cell organisms are known to react and withdraw (run!) from heat. Is this not a single-cell pain reaction without a complex human-like nervous system? How can a single cell make this determination without having a 'brain'?")

    Oh, and as for religious references? Let's take Genesis:

    "26": And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

    Now, from Dictionary.com, dominion is:

    1. Sovereign or supreme authority; the power of governing and controlling; independent right of possession, use, and control; sovereignty; supremacy.

    Combining the two: God gave us supremacy over the animals. The power to govern, control, possess, and use them for our purposes.

    And if you follow a more scientific track, we evolved as omnivores and the few people who I have seen attempt a vegan lifestyle ended up emaciated, weak, pale, and short. (Yes, this is anecdotal evidence.)

    I'm not trying to pick a fight -- but you obviously are, given the wording in the great-grandparent post:

    Go ahead, FLAME ME. But it's the truth.
    Calling something the truth without providing references is a Fallacious Argument. There's lots on that page; take your pick. ;-) (My vote is for Burden of Proof, but several others fit.) Now, if you're willing to provide references, as I have above, and not resort to name-calling (that's an Ad Hominem attack, by the way) then we can have a discussion.
    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.