Proposition 6 | Argument in Favor | Proposition 6 | Argument Against |
Criminal Law. Prohibition on Slaughter
of Horses and Sale of Horsemeat for
Human Consumption. Initiative Statute.
Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 6
Arguments on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.

This initiative shows how the ballot process can be abused by the idle rich. A wealthy heiress wants to foist her pet project--outlawing horsemeat for human consumption--on the rest of California.

Get a life! Hardworking Californians don't need to waste their time voting on measures that are of little concern to the average citizen. Only 10,000 California horses are slaughtered for consumption each year.

These champions of horse rights paint a picture of dangerous entities in our midst, ready to dismember Mr. Ed at a moment's notice, then gleefully eat the carcass ala Jeffrey Dahmer.

If the goal of Proposition 6 is to save horses, why would it only address killing them for human consumption? Horses are more often killed to make dog food or for industrial purposes.

If the goal is to change the method of slaughter, then the authors could propose regulations to that effect. Instead, Proposition 6 turns factory workers into felons.

Under Proposition 6, horse owners could not sell their animals as they see fit. Many horses would just be cruelly abandoned and die anyway. If horses are disposed of in landfills, will decomposing carcasses pose a risk of disease or groundwater contamination?

California's Legislative Counsel reviewed Proposition 6 and found that it partially violates the U.S. Constitution. Thus, if passed, it could face expensive legal challenges (to be paid by taxpayers).

Look this "gift horse" in the mouth, and see it for the lame nag it really is. Just say NEIGH to Proposition 6.

Past Chair, Libertarian Party of California


Horse Doctor

Proposition 6 | Argument in Favor | Proposition 6 | Argument Against |