even though it was a tragedy the teenager died...did the tiger
really deserve to be killed? Reports are now saying the boys
may have been teasing the tiger.
Why should the tiger be killed for acting in its own
nature?
Look..if they are so worried about public safety...(the official reason why the tiger was killed) then DONT TAKE THE TIGER OUT OF ITS NATURAL HABITAT!!!!!!!!
2007-12-27 02:25:47 · 8 answers · asked by S i r i 1 in News & Events ➔ Other - News & Events
Sassy..I agree that the tiger should NOT have been in public.
It should have stayed in its real home...the jungle...to BEGIN WITH!!!!
2007-12-27 02:38:57 · update #1
No. It's not "fair". Zoos aren't "fair". I stopped going to them years ago, because it was too painful for me. I think it's really sad but that's what happens when an animal in captivity kills a human. The rationale is that it will do it again so they "have" to kill it.
2007-12-27 02:41:44 · answer #1 · answered by contrarycrow 4 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Grow up Siri - do you realize MAN is destroying the tiger's habitat at a ever-increasing rate? There's only 200 left in the wild, all the natural prey has been killed or driven off. Would you REALLY prefer all the captive tigers be release and have them starve to death within the next 20 years. The way things are going, the last wild tiger will DIE in your lifetime.
The tiger did not deserve to get shot but no animal is allowed to live if it kills a person on purpose. This is not the zoo's fault, it's not the animal's fault, it's the fault of these 3 ******* who got mauled. They provoked the animal, let it escape, and caused it to die.
Try doing a little research and thinking about the ramifications of your stupid ideas before you broadcast them.
2007-12-27 15:18:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe had you known the poor kid that was mauled and killed by the tiger you would have a little more compassion. I understand if the child taunted the tiger it was wrong, but that kind of punishment is also not right. What if the child that taunted the tiger had been a toddler? Would it still be okay that the tiger attacked and killed? If they are keeping the animal in captivity it should be able to be around humans. If this is a problem, (which it seemed to be with this tiger from a previous attack) they should not have it in the public.
2007-12-27 10:36:09 · answer #3 · answered by D's Mom 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yes, killing the tiger was justified.
Even granting that that some believe it should never have been taken out of its enviroment in the first place, at the time and place in question the tiger was THERE. It was in a public area, and it had already killed one and injured more.
It does not matter WHY it was there.
It does not matter that it may have been (or was) teased and provoked.
It is an animal, a deadly animal, that the police cannot talk to or reason with. I agree that it would have been preferable to have animal control tranquilize the animal, but circumstances are seldom that ideal.
The animal presented an immediate threat to public safetly, and they dealt with it with the means they had available to them at the time.
2007-12-27 10:36:55 · answer #4 · answered by Edward S 3 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Although I'm not sure, if that tiger was raised in human captivity, it would be unable to survive in its natural habitat. Also, if you were being mauled by a tiger, I doubt you would be thinking, "Oh, it's just acting on its nature." You would probably want the tiger dead as well.
2007-12-27 10:38:33 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. M 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nobody says the tiger was at fault for acting like a tiger.
The thing is, she was attacking humans, most of whom, if not all, were certainly innocent of bothering her. There was no time for a tranquilizer dart.
Of course I see it as tragic that the cat had to be killed; and I hope that anybody who had a part in releasing her is prosecuted to the full extent of the law. If somebody deliberately freed her or taunted her until she managed to get out, that person is guilty of murder.
Tigers that are endangered in the wild may survive only because members of their species are bred in zoos. Having tigers in zoos is risky, but so is having them in the wild.
It does trouble me that you are more concerned about an animal's death that the possible killing of innocent people.
2007-12-27 10:48:43 · answer #6 · answered by The First Dragon 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Oh, please. I hate armchair quarterbacking. The police didn't just come up to the tiger and kill it. If you listen to the press statements by the police, they tried to get the tiger away from the boy he killed, but it wouldn't back off. They couldn't know the kid was dead at that point. And I'm sorry, the kid's life trumps the tiger's.
2007-12-27 11:17:57 · answer #7 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
yes. It is justified.
2007-12-27 10:31:14 · answer #8 · answered by dk 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋