• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Will people never learn?

Motokid

New Member
So, exactly how long is it going to take for humans to learn not to screw with nature? No matter how tame and animal appears to be, why do people seem to forget that an animal is still an animal.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/18/tiger.attack.ap/index.html

I have two snakes. The head of one of them is no bigger than the tip of your finger. It looks almost impossible that this snake can swallow a full grown mouse, but it can. My other snake is a ball-python. Bigger head. Whenever I have these snakes out in public I always get asked the same question, "Does it bite?" My answer is always the same. "Uh, yeah. I bite too. Every time I eat." Of coarse they bite. What living animal doesn't? The bigger the animal the bigger the bite it can take. Especially an animal like a tiger.

I get upset when I read that an animal has been killed simply because the animal acted like an animal. In this case it's hard to tell if the tiger was killed in the effort to save the girl. That I can understand. But if the tiger was restrained, and then killed later I have no problem with activist groups like PETA stepping in and crying foul.

There are millions of years of instinct flowing through the souls of every living creature. Do not expect any animal regardless of how "tame" it is to not act like an animal every now and then. This story is very sad, and I just wonder why people think it's a good idea to tempt fate like this.

Do you think it's appropriate to kill an animal for simply being an animal?
 
That's killing it for food. That's a common part of Nature. That is nature.

I'm not sure I buy into the idea that once an animal, like a tiger, has tasted human, they will crave and desire humans as a food source. I think the killing of an animal that's attacked a human is simply done out of fear.
 
Ohhhhh, maaaaaan! Have I got a craving for tiger meat now! Juicy, succulent, tender tiger meat.....Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I'm off to 7-11...
 
Motokid said:
So, exactly how long is it going to take for humans to learn not to screw with nature? No matter how tame and animal appears to be, why do people seem to forget that an animal is still an animal.


Because people are stooooopid. It is sooooo not on killing an animal because it is acting in the only way it knows how. And while I feel sorry for the people involved, my immediate reaction is, after what I've just said, is that it's one less stupid person in the world.
 
CDA said:
Because people are stooooopid. It is sooooo not on killing an animal because it is acting in the only way it knows how. And while I feel sorry for the people involved, my immediate reaction is, after what I've just said, is that it's one less stupid person in the world.

That's kinda harsh considering she was a 17 year old girl. I wonder where the parents were? Were they encouraging her to get that close?
 
Motokid said:
Do you think it's appropriate to kill an animal for simply being an animal?
I don't think it is fair, but that doesn't mean it isn't appropriate. An animal that attacks a human will very possibly do it again. Not because it has "the taste for human blood" though. It's as you pointed out. The animal is acting out of instinct. If it attacked out of instinct once, it probably will again. So, an animal like this is obviously no longer safe in the situation the attack occured in. So, where to put it? Zoos probably aren't going to want an animal that has killed a human. An animal that has lived in captivity for seven years probably wouldn't survive if released back into it's natual habitat. Sometimes, putting the animal down is the most appropriate thing to do.
 
I saw that story Robert...pretty funny...didn't American's almost wipe out the wolves because they were eating sheep and stuff? I wonder what would happen with cheetahs?


mehastings, all animals have to potential to bite. Bigger animals have the potential to kill. Had the Siberian Tiger in this case not been in that situation it might never have killed anyone. It's not the Tigers fault for being a Tiger. It's man's fault for expecting a Tiger to behave like a circus ride.
 
Motokid said:
I saw that story Robert...pretty funny...didn't American's almost wipe out the wolves because they were eating sheep and stuff? I wonder what would happen with cheetahs?


mehastings, all animals have to potential to bite. Bigger animals have the potential to kill. Had the Siberian Tiger in this case not been in that situation it might never have killed anyone. It's not the Tigers fault for being a Tiger. It's man's fault for expecting a Tiger to behave like a circus ride.


It is funny. You hardly see Buffalo roam the great plains any more, and they're talking about elephants.

Have we ever had any cats bigger then a mountail lion in North America?
 
Robert said:
You got me curious. What happened in Australia?

That article about moving large african animals to N. America is one of the most insane ideas I have ever heard.

As I understand the Australia issue, the country is chock-full of animals that have no business being there. They were introduced by the English (as I understand it) and became "ferral". I guess the pigs and goats really tear up the land? Dingos aren't even truly Australian.

Back to the tiger mauling - I have noticed that no one is pointing any fingers at the opportunistic owners of the tiger. They have the responsibility to know the dangers, and to keep these kinds of things from happening. From what I heard on the news this morning, several students from this school had had their pictures taken with this animal without incident. This tells me that these people were "renting out" their tiger to make a buck without employing common sense. Who on God's Green Earth would think there is nothing wrong with putting a 17-year old girl within striking range of a 1000 lb Siberian Tiger? I normally take the "victims are stupid" side of arguments like this, but I don't think it is the responsibility of the parents or even the student to know that an animal that has been raised in captivity can be as dangerous as this. Just like Moto said, people ask him if his snakes bite. People think that animals can be domesticated and trained to be perfectly safe with humans. They don't understand the instinct. The owners of the tiger should understand this. They are at fault here, but you don't see anyone putting a bullet in their stupid brains, do you? I am sure MotoKid would not let a toddler play with his python. (that just don't sound right! :eek: )

It is a great shame that this tiger was killed. I hope, like Moto, it was killed in an attempt to save the girl, and not butchered after the fact so that its owners could say "see, we care." That's like a father punching his son in the mouth to save face because the boy embarrassed him in public. Stupid and meaningless.
 
Reminds me of the chapter in Life Of Pi when Pi's father wanted to teach him about "life" and then went about feeding the animals, saving feeding the tiger for last. The fury and power of the tigers feeding instinct was part of the lesson, regardless of how often the tiger was fed, and how docile the cat appeared.

Yes, the business owners should be held accountable, which I'm sure will probably mean lawsuits and other such non-sence.

Rgardless of how many times a flash-bulb goes off in front of a slightly-less-than-wild animal, there's never any indication that the next one will not set off a chain of horrific events.

Still not a good reason to kill the animal. I believe you're right leckert, the animal killing is done in a shallow effort to cover up stupidity, and to show some form of higher caring for the human casualty.
 
Yes a large number of species has been introduced to australia. Some succesful, some far from it. Its a prime example of the problems connected to introducing new species. One of the worst examples is wild rabbits. One guy brought with him 24 rabbits that he released on his farm for hunting purposes. About 5-10 years later they were shooting something like 15000 rabbits a year. In the 1950s, about 100 years after the species was introduced they tried to stop the growth by introducing a disease to kill them. At that time the rabbit population was estimated at about 600 million. And Australia is still having rabbit problems.

Not that i think the Elephants will spread like that, but its hard to determine the impact a new species will have on the environment. Its better to work to save the species in its natural environment.
 
Zolipara said:
Yes a large number of species has been introduced to australia. Some succesful, some far from it. Its a prime example of the problems connected to introducing new species. One of the worst examples is wild rabbits. One guy brought with him 24 rabbits that he released on his farm for hunting purposes. About 5-10 years later they were shooting something like 15000 rabbits a year. In the 1950s, about 100 years after the species was introduced they tried to stop the growth by introducing a disease to kill them. At that time the rabbit population was estimated at about 600 million. And Australia is still having rabbit problems.

Not that i think the Elephants will spread like that, but its hard to determine the impact a new species will have on the environment. Its better to work to save the species in its natural environment.

15000 rabitts, that's amazing. No natural enemies to keep the rabbits under control.
 
Motokid said:
Reminds me of the chapter in Life Of Pi when Pi's father wanted to teach him about "life" and then went about feeding the animals, saving feeding the tiger for last. The fury and power of the tigers feeding instinct was part of the lesson, regardless of how often the tiger was fed, and how docile the cat appeared.

.

MOTO READ A BOOK!!
 
Back
Top