|
Should we always kill an animal that attacks a person?
|
http://people.com/pets/are-animals-payin...on-people/
Are Animals Paying Too High A Price For Attacks On People? POSTED ON JULY 6, 2016 AT 9:54PM EST 
Except Big cats these bear,elephants attacks are nothing but accidents. So,there is no need to kill them but US policies are different.
As an Indian i prefer transfer of big cats to zoo (or kill, if catching is not possible) after eating or killing 2 persons.(For Tiger 3) 
This will sound harsh, but here I go:
Let the animals kill without consequence, I mean we killed most of them off with barely any consequences. There is also too great of an industry that is supporting us as a whole population, and it would be slightly beneficial if our population was "lowered" by the carnivores instead of "lowering" their population. 
The protocol to remove maneaters is a very politically safe move. Rather lose one or two individuals rather than have public opinion sway against the populations have many more retaliatory killings. This alongside the emotional aspect of the situation leaves maneaters doomed in most societies.
Lot of animals are dead because of an human unrefined carelessness or a foolish action. Too often the animals pay the price of the human stupidity. The examples are very numerous in the zoos and wild preserves and parks. Particularly as concerns the big cats, tigers and lions... In these cases, I think the animals' life should be preserved.
Of course you could think that a big cat killing a man for the first time could realize that a man is a very weak being, and thus could become more dangerous. It would be our price to pay...
When a mother grizzly attacks someone simply because she believes her cubs to be threatened, I don't believe that this would cause in her any desire to seek out people to attack in the future. If a wolf or a cougar attempts to kill a cub, successful or not, this does not cause the grizzly to begin a life of hunting and killing the predators. -Just a thought.
I know I'm incredibly late to the party, but I actually asked this same question to some friends and family members. Got some yes and no's on both sides.
I think that it all depends. If the animal is a maneater and is strictly hunting human beings as a food source, it should be destroyed. The other less harmful option would be to put it in a zoo if possible, but I wouldn't mind either one in that case. However if a hunter (any hunter) is killed, then no. Especially if the hunter was killed by the very animal it tried to kill. For humans, we call that self defense. Same should apply to an animal. That person went after the animal with the intention to end it's life for whatever purpose. The animal isn't going to stand by and just let it happen... |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |