Tiger in Florida zoo shot to death after grabbing man's arm

originally posted by: VierEyes
a reply to: TheRedneck

Animals should not pay for the stupidity of humans.

No, they shouldn't, but they do all the time. Heck, other humans pay for the stupidity of humans.

It's like I said - we can't have nice things because too many people are fools.

a reply to: andy06shake

You clearly don't understand what is being said.

The ability we have to work with animals in captivity is mostly based on their inability to perceive us as animals on their menu as potential prey. That relationship is maintained by people who understand their behaviors well enough to keep from triggering their predatory instincts to such a degree that they do something like what this tiger did.

Once that encounter happens, the animal learns that humans are really giant walking meatbags and can be on the menu. That power that was held in the relationship is altered and gone. Interactions from that point forward are much more dangerous as a result.

a reply to: ketsuko

Oh i understand just fine and clear enough.

Same with why the animal had to die.

I simply wish it was not the case.

You do the same with a dog if it attacks a kid.

In this instance however that walking meat bag deserved what he got, the Tiger not so much.

But needs must eh?

Problem is us putting beasts in cages imho.

They can take the Tiger out the wild, but they canny take the wild out the Tiger.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: VierEyes

No, animals should not have to pay for the stupidity of humans.

But you still aren't getting it. Are you willing to let a tiger eat you because some stupid human showed them how good you taste? Let me know how that works out for ya.

TheRedneck

Don't get so emotional.

Tigers are rare. People are not.

originally posted by: VierEyes

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: VierEyes

No, animals should not have to pay for the stupidity of humans.

But you still aren't getting it. Are you willing to let a tiger eat you because some stupid human showed them how good you taste? Let me know how that works out for ya.

TheRedneck

Don't get so emotional.

Tigers are rare. People are not.

They may be rare, but that doesn't change the fact that what happened made this tiger too much of a liability. About the only possible thing they could salvage out of this might have been some of his sperm to salvage some of the genetics via artificial insemination. As it was, he was too dangerous to keep, and even too dangerous to attempt to rehabilitate to the wild.

a reply to: ketsuko

Putting the wild animal in the cage made it a liability.

Then again the genius that decided to stick his paw in to say hello is also a liability.

And yet we wont put him down, even if he did somewhat try and put himself down.

Its good that its genetic line will prevail all the same, shame we cannot say the same where the other muppet is concerned.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: VierEyes

No, animals should not have to pay for the stupidity of humans.

But you still aren't getting it. Are you willing to let a tiger eat you because some stupid human showed them how good you taste? Let me know how that works out for ya.

TheRedneck

Humans are not high on the list my friend, taste or not, we are not good eating, not enough fat, and the tiger would be well fed anyway

originally posted by: vonclod

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: VierEyes

No, animals should not have to pay for the stupidity of humans.

But you still aren't getting it. Are you willing to let a tiger eat you because some stupid human showed them how good you taste? Let me know how that works out for ya.

TheRedneck

Humans are not high on the list my friend, taste or not, we are not good eating, not enough fat, and the tiger would be well fed anyway

Doesn't change the fact that it now knows and the power balance is forever altered. That makes it even more difficult and dangerous to work with.

a reply to: ketsuko

Well if we are crapping our breeches over mere Tigers that happen to learn the power balance is mutable.

No wonder Aliens don't pop down to say hello.

Bastard of a paradigm to follow but probably not far off the mark where us Humans are concerned.

Hell of a thing if it turns out to be us that are difficult and dangerous to work with all the same which is where i would place my bet.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: vonclod

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: VierEyes

No, animals should not have to pay for the stupidity of humans.

But you still aren't getting it. Are you willing to let a tiger eat you because some stupid human showed them how good you taste? Let me know how that works out for ya.

TheRedneck

Humans are not high on the list my friend, taste or not, we are not good eating, not enough fat, and the tiger would be well fed anyway

Doesn't change the fact that it now knows and the power balance is forever altered. That makes it even more difficult and dangerous to work with.

It's a zoo, not a travelling circus. It's a moot point though, the animal is dead! I'm not a zookeeper, but I'm not convinced the Tiger would of been killed after, maybe is best I can say.

a reply to: andy06shake

I would bet good money that the fool who caused this tiger to have to be put down felt exactly the same way.

But, it's turning out to be a very bad day here, and I have no intention of continuing this inane conversation with anyone who just refuses to accept reality. So good day to you, sir, and I hope you aren't the next fool who wants to pet the pretty kitty cat because it simply could not actually be dangerous.

People like you are going to be responsible for a lot of actual extinctions before all this is over.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

That's a shame im having rather a nice January first.

As to conversations and reality, well the reality is/was that Tiger is far more precious than the fool that stuck his paw in the cage.

As to your daft arsed "People like you" comment well im not the one putting endangered species in a cage now am i.

Cant see how i will be responsible any extinctions, ""actual"" or otherwise. LoL

So good day to you as well, and a happy new year.

i found a pretty interesting BBC article about tigers.

In one village studied by conservationists, tigers were found to kill about 80 domestic animals a year - dogs, goats, buffalo and cows. As a result, villagers carried out several attacks on tigers in retribution. To stop this, in 2008 local conservation groups rolled out 49 Tiger Village response teams.

Each team of volunteers is responsible for dealing with tigers that stray into villages. Rather than kill the animal, villagers scare it back into the forest by brandishing flaming torches and setting off firecrackers. If this fails they have a number to call to get a swat team on the ground with a tranquillizer to sedate the tiger so that it can be taken back to the forest.

www.bbc.com...

i read somewhere years ago the workers wear human faced masks on the back of their head when working because tigers like to come up behind and attack. the tiger i guess seems to think they are seen and move on.

and it seems they don't kill that many people per year. apx 500 tigers vs 1.5mil people in the same area.

still a shame what happened.

a reply to: sarahvital

...wear human faced masks on the back of their head when working...

Reading your comment got me to wondering about the type of work being performed. For example, if they're bent over working in a garden, then a mask on the back of their head may not be good enough, so they might want to wear a mask on their butt too, as an extra precaution.

a reply to: BrokenCircles

I will be honest I don't like zoos, I think they are not necessary, man was stupid and the poor tiger was killed. How many times has this happenrd since we have zoos a ton. People think because they are encaged they won't attack. Wrong! I think they way more likely to attack because they don't want to be there.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: TheRedneck



As to conversations and reality, well the reality is/was that Tiger is far more precious than the fool that stuck his paw in the cage.

That is objectively false.
Your “reality” lacks humanity. As manifested by you placing more value on a beasts life than a humans.

But virtue signal away, the ones who think with their emotions are really getting turned on

a reply to: Whereistheflu

Thing is pal you and the tiger are both animals, me as well for that matter.

As to humanity, plenty of humans kicking around, Tigers not so much, who's fault is that again, humans per-chance?

Stuff your version of ""humanity"" i prefer logic and reason which is also part and parcel where the human condition is concerned, well for some of us any road.

Now halfwits that try and pet wild animals like a Tiger through bars on the other hand, they should take what they get aka bitten to the bone.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Whereistheflu


Stuff your version of ""humanity"" i prefer logic and reason

Again, that is objectively false.

originally posted by: Whereistheflu

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: TheRedneck



As to conversations and reality, well the reality is/was that Tiger is far more precious than the fool that stuck his paw in the cage.

That is objectively false.
Your “reality” lacks humanity. As manifested by you placing more value on a beasts life than a humans.

But virtue signal away, the ones who think with their emotions are really getting turned on

Please explain why you think a human life is objectively more valuable than the life of an animal.

a reply to: Whereistheflu

Well the math speaks for itself.

Pray-tell how is an endangered Tiger worth less that the genius that tried to pet the wild animal.

Let me guess he's one of gods special little creatures per-chance?

Ticks the ""Special"" part anyroad.