Comments on Killer Tiger

[Insert Brian Miller Zoo cheap-shot]

It's almost as if you're setting yourself up for more rips regarding animals.

Amen. "In particular, our sentimentality toward animals is a sure sign of the disdain in which we hold them. It is proportional to this disdain. It is in proportion to being relegated to irresponsibility, to the inhuman, that the animal becomes worthy of the human ritual of affection and protection, just as the child does in direct proportion to being relegated to a status of innocence and childishness. Sentimentality is nothing but the infinitely degraded form of bestiality, the racist commiseration, in which we ridiculously cloak animals to the point of rendering them sentimental themselves."

Obviously, if she was going to marry the guy, she must have had some affection for tigers herself. Would she have wanted it killed? If anyone should get to decide if the tiger lives or dies--and I agree with Charles, it's a joke that ANYONE gets to decide--shouldn't it be her?

The guy's own fiance was the one killed, and he doesn't want to kill the tiger. I wonder if parents or some other friends got involved? Or was the execution carried out completely at the whim of the authorities?

It's fucked up.

The animal's owner should be subject to the punishment of the crime perpetrated by the animal, as it it the owners responsibility. In this case, it's a shame they had to put the animal down.

This is sad all around. Tigers should not be kept in captivity. They are wild animals. Killing the tiger only makes this more tragic. The owner is the one who should be punished.

WTF? Private zoo? The guy should be in jail.

i cannot fathom how blame was attached to the tiger for being a tiger. this is what tigers DO. the animal didn't even BITE her.

and how the fuck do you even get ahold of a tiger? how can you afford to feed one? why don't you start off with a pixie bob & work your way up to tigers?

lastly, why couldn't they send this tiger to a tiger sanctuary or a zoo, where it won't have the opportunity to claw the fiances of fucking selfish idiots?

If any large predator that interacts with humans that either attacks, wounds or kills a human being that animal has to be put down.

That has nothing to do with punishing the tiger or any fault with the tiger. It is because the tiger (or any animal) has learned humans are a) weaker and b) food. The tiger is now a human killer and instead of fearing or submitting to humans it will spend most of it's time learning how to hunt them. Especially in captivity when that is all it has to do. Same problem if you send it to a sanctuary or zoo or any place where it can interact with people. Since it is a captive animal it is also unlikely to survive on it's own in the wild, unless it has a human population to feed on.

100% of the blame/fault etc. goes to this fucker with the private petting zoo of dangerous animals. The animal always looses. This guy killed the tiger the moment he bought him.

The only other thing I think is important to add is that the same fate as this tiger await any animal, captive or wild, that stops fearing people. Bears are what I am most familiar with but deer also suffer. Feeding animals or leaving crap in the wild brings bears closer to people, then it is just a matter of time, and deer can get hooked on the sugars and artificial junk in 'people food' and eventually can't eat anything natural.

When humans and animal interact, the animal always looses. Always. In every situation. If you care about wild animals, leave them alone.

[her fiance’s private zoo clawed first at her dress, then her legs.]
Umm, there should be some accepted risk here. A tragedy sure, but now it's twice so.

GDC @8, I've always wondered why the wild animal is punished for just 'doing what comes naturally'. Your explanation makes sense. Thanks. Very sad.

actually GDC, I'm wondering if you have any evidence to back up your assertions.

To me, your comment that the animal "is now a human killer and instead of fearing or submitting to humans it will spend most of it's time learning how to hunt them" reads like something out of Rudyard Kipling (The Jungle Book?).

And given that we so routinely immediately launch all out war on animals that kill humans, do we really know that they will do so again?

Many -- if not most -- bear attacks that I am familiar with are mothers w/young cubs. Remove the cubs from the picture and are they really human hunters?

gnossos
It is not absolutely black and white and every animal is different. For instance, I don't believe the white tiger that attacked 'Roy' was put down.
The best experience I have is with grizzly bears in National Parks. The National Park Service has a policy with bears (this may just be Yellow Stone but I think it is all NPS Parks). It is essentially 3-strikes-your-out. Now the main thing they do is keep people a way from bears to limit interaction. Bears, like most animals, usually prefer to stay away from people because they are scared of us. What happens is some bears get very bold and start getting closer to people. Basically it doesn't take much interaction between a bear and a person for a bear to realize a person isn't a threat. So if a bear is breaking into cars, tearing up tents, hanging around dumpsters, Park Rangers capture the bear, tag it, transport it deep into the park miles from people, release it into the wild with a pellet shot full of skunk musk or some powerful stink. Generally the bear is never seen amongst civilization. If the bear makes it back and is again behaving the same way, the same thing is done but the bear is taken to a more remote location. If it comes back a third time it is put down. It is pretty rare that they kill bears.

I have also heard and read some about lion tamers. They understand the nature of big cats. It is in their nature to be the alpha cat. The way an alpha cat stays an alpha cat is dominating the other cats and making them belive they can't kill him. As long as the cats think they can't hurt the lion tamer, he is safe. Once they think they can hurt him, they will. It is the nature of the cat and the lion tamer uses that for control. This is explained very well in the documentary film "Fast, Cheap and Out of Control".

I think you are right, there is no guarantee that any animal will become 'man hunter', but it does happen. The nature of a predator is to feed on the weak. I think what is sometimes difficult to recognize in any of these situations is that we are witnessing our only primal defense: our brains. It is safer to kill an animal likely to attack you than to wait for it to attack you. It is something very far removed from our civilized life that it is truely feral. There is no justice in nature and we decided whether the risk of one human life is worth that of something not human.

I honestly don't know about the mother and cubs. I suspect it would depend on the remotness of the attack. I should make it clear that no one wants to kill the bears, that is failure. Cats are a little different because they might simply wait until you turn your back.

lvigqxrhb pyctqv ovlmazpye ofetviqnw szwld xpjdvy decwqbil

lvigqxrhb pyctqv ovlmazpye ofetviqnw szwld xpjdvy decwqbil