This question again... People thinking that it's acceptable to abuse, murder, and eat animals.
That appears to be three separate things but I suppose a number was not specified, though I suppose it could be a singular course of action (murder, arson and jaywalking being individually OK but do all three at once and wow what the arsehole sort of thing)
Abuse is a wide ranging affair and ranges from your everyday beating to some hold keeping animals as pets, or others as using them as working animals or food producing animals, and can vary even within that (see fun with pedigree dogs, fun with the absolute lowest price industrial milk or egg production vs animal welfare concerned ones). To that end you might want to clarify there.
Murder. Technically speaking murder is unlawful killing and beyond that animals tend not to have the required level of sentience to rank there (most laws on the books there tending to be more destruction of property, or wildlife if relevant there). Though I suppose "murder" in the opening part is hyperbolic and you mean killing, unless you do mean you advocate for changing the laws there.
Eating. But animals are tasty, cheap and nutritious, grow in places where edible plants do not and have all sorts of other fringe benefits (there is a reason every civilisation ever uses them, and even today's finest industrial chemistry has not obviated them like they did the horse*). Equally if it is my concern for life that is a problem then if digging up plant necessarily kills it then are potatoes bad vs picking some apples**? Though that would potentially bring milk, eggs and honey back to the table vs vanilla veganism.
*
http://www.cowboyway.com/What/HorsePopulation.htm and
https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/MarinaStasenko.shtml being a fun one there.
**such considerations being widespread in practice in various long established and popular enough to be considered world religions.
