Photo of injured horse was sickening

Jamie, I don't understand the extremes some of you "animal lovers" are willing to go to protect the privacy of a dead race horse. Quite frankly, I find your sentiments hypocritical. Am I right in assuming you guys are confused as to what species you belong to? The public is rightfully entitled to know (and see for that matter) what is done to a horse in a situation like the filly's. If you truly believe that horses should be spared any form of pain, then don't even ride on one. Horses are insulted when their riders don't have any horse sense.

Animals are just like people, but different. (and I've never had a people steak with my mashed potatoes.)

4 legs good 2 legs bad!

I found it hard to watch on TV so after the first time. I left the room or used the clicker. I don't like to see a person or animal suffer..I can't help crying when I see the pain and think of the loss. The still photo, I ignored.

Julesedge, it's a shame that there are not more people like you. If you don't like to see something, you don't look at it!

I was part of the rescue squad crews who worked the Aiken Steeplechase the year those 2 horses had to be put down. It seemed to us that the people were more upset over the horses being put down there the people who were on the back of the horses. That was the feeling us EMS folks had back then. I have transported some badly injured riders from there but the hurt horses get most of the publicity.

curly123053, like I stated, some people have species-identity crises going on in their personal lives. Don't count on these same people to shed tears for victims of ethnic cleansing and genocide. I wish the world press would draw more attention to malnourished pets wandering on the streets of Kosovo. Never mind that their owners were annihilated. The welfare of these orphaned animals seem more important. Ugh, now I feel sick.

BigPix, why is it "extreme" not to want to see an animal in pain? Maybe the picture was hard to avoid, being on the front page and all. And what logic led you to that insightful opinion that people can't sympathize with animals and people?

world, try your best not to take my words out of context, and I assure you we'll be on the same page. Re your query, why are you so presumptuous to assume that ALL people who saw that picture knew firsthand that the filly was in excruciating pain? I don't know how your logic works. But the way I understand the human brain works, the image(s) seen by the human eye must first be processed via the axons and dendrites. One does not instantly produce a conclusion. The image processed is cross-referenced with stored knowledge and past experiences. Only then will the image acquires meaning and significance. (Perhaps you can explain how the one-track mind works.) The writer, if she had her self-serving way, wanted the media to exclude the image of the downed filly. I repeat, I find that going to the EXTREME for no other reason than to protect the privacy of the horse, the jockey, the trainer, the owner, the stable hand, the filly's vet, the groomer, so on and so forth. If I may, I find that beyond ABSURD. Pictures add dimension to the story. No law mandates anybody to see an undesirable picture. Also, people's sympathy must go first to their own species. This is not the animal planet.