nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Escaped animals shot in Ohio, USA

gurramok

Ohio police kill 48 exotic animals
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/19/ohio-police-exotic-animals-freed

Part of this that is disturbing is that they shot dead the majority of animals, why couldn't they tranquilise them? And yes it can be done in the dark.

This is a very weak defence

Hanna defended the sheriff against criticism that the animals should have been captured alive.

"What was he to do at night time with tigers, lions and leopards, going out there?" Hanna said. "In the wild, this would be a different situation.

This is a very rural area(think of Leitrim!), me thinks either the sheriff didn't have the resources at hand(perhaps cutbacks) or it was just laziness in that the bullet was a better solution rather than animal welfare.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Jeboa Safari

gurramok wrote: »

Yes, a lazy excuse saying tranquilising one animal would affect many behaving in the same way. Those cops didn't fancy hunting in the dark, lazy way out.

This is gun toting America enforcing the quickest solution at the end of a gun. FFS, animals held in captivity will escape at the earliest opportunity.

Better than having the possibility of having a childs death on their hands, after being mauled to death by one of the tigers

LighterGuy

Birdnuts wrote: »

Do you think these endangered species wanted to be kept in some wacko's back garden thanx to inadequate laws in Ohio?? - they were massacared thanx to the same type of human ignorance and stupidity that is that hallmark of our species. Your contempt should be reserved for the idiots who allowed this situation to develope in the first place:mad:

So the cops should of tranquilized the animals in your opinion. Fair enough.
So getting the situation under control ASAP (using lethal ways) before someone gets hurt takes a back seat to the animals welfare.

What you are saying is "Lets think of the animals safety first, before the safety of the general public" .. So let the animals run over the place while the Sheriff's department loads up on tranquilizer weapons. And if someone got killed in the mean time ... so be it, right? :rolleyes:

See this is what I hate about animal welfare topics. Its "terrible" that the animal got killed ... but what, its alright to kill when we eat them? .. what because we dont eat bear or lion its "terrible" :rolleyes:

Overheal

gurramok wrote: »

Yes, a lazy excuse saying tranquilising one animal would affect many behaving in the same way. Those cops didn't fancy hunting in the dark, lazy way out.

This is gun toting America enforcing the quickest solution at the end of a gun. FFS, animals held in captivity will escape at the earliest opportunity.

Oh cop on. What a lazy post. Speaking of lazy ways out.

Shall we do some math?

We have 48 animals, 18 of which are bengal tigers. Roaming Ohio, in the dark. The local environment is populated. You have hours to contain the situation before someone is attacked or killed.

48 tranq darts, multiplied by how many officers would have needed to be armed with tranq rounds? how many cops does it take? You're probably looking at at least 200 tranq rounds, and two dozen tranq rifles. Do you happen to have that lying around an Ohio precinct?

Couple that with what others have already said about how animals can react to tranquilizing.

No it wouldn't have been very practical at all to do the bleeding heart hippy PETA approach. We would have all loved for the animals to live but not at the expense of human lives, sorry.

I'm just thinking about most stories that come out of the West Coast in recent years: when you have just one bear, for example, strolling around a californian suburbia, it's not that quick to find them, much less tranq them or indeed keep people from being attacked. Let alone 48 animals, 18 of which are mother****ing tigers and there are still bears and lions in there to boot.

But no I'm sure they were just thinking about taking the lazy way out. I'm sure if it were a video game you'd get an achievement for tranquing them all safely but in reality you wouldn't give it that much thought if this was your backyard. Just saying.

archer22

Looks like a pack of dangerous Pigs got loose.

LighterGuy

Overheal wrote: »

....Do you happen to have that lying around an Ohio precinct? ....

Exactly.
They would have the odd tranquilizer weapon to take out the odd animal. But not readily equipped to take out 48!

I really do think its daft to think that what the police did was "wrong" - dangerous animals on the loose. In a populated area. Action had to be taken and it was.

archer22

LighterGuy wrote: »

Exactly.
They would have the odd tranquilizer weapon to take out the odd animal. But not readily equipped to take out 48!

I really do think its daft to think that what the police did was "wrong" - dangerous animals on the loose. In a populated area. Action had to be taken and it was.

They can fly around the world killing people..operate Drones over Afghanistan from bases in the USA..but they cant find a dozen or so tranquiliser guns to save a few endangered animals !!!

LighterGuy

archer22 wrote: »

They can fly around the world killing people..operate Drones over Afghanistan from bases in the USA..but they cant find a dozen or so tranquiliser guns to save a few endangered animals !!!

That is some stupid logic there.
Its called being equipped and not every department is suddenly equipped to handle every situation. We're not talking about 1 animal. We're talking about 48. Most of which, as we all know by now, were bears, lions etc.

OverHeal said it best. Do you think every single sheriffs office is equipped with a few dozen tranquilizer weapons off hand? .. also do you think every squad car is equipped with animal tranquilizer weapons too? ..

Its a sheriffs office. Not some major police department.

archer22

LighterGuy wrote: »

That is some stupid logic there.
Its called being equipped and not every department is suddenly equipped to handle every situation. We're not talking about 1 animal. We're talking about 48. Most of which, as we all know by now, were bears, lions etc.

OverHeal said it best. Do you think every single sheriffs office is equipped with a few dozen tranquilizer weapons off hand? .. also do you think every squad car is equipped with animal tranquilizer weapons too? ..

Its a sheriffs office. Not some major police department.

Well they could have bloody got them shipped in..Doh!!.Helicopters can move things fast from one location to another.What if it was a terrorist incident and they needed specialist equipment?.Anyhow the animals were only tame pets well used to humans and they attacked noboby did they.

LighterGuy

archer22 wrote: »

Well they could have bloody got them shipped in..Doh!!.Helicopters can move things fast from one location to another.What if it was a terrorist incident and they needed specialist equipment?.Anyhow the animals were only tame pets well used to humans and they attacked noboby did they.

Are you unfamiliar with Logic?

Ok, lets take what you say. They "fly" supplies in ( :rolleyes: ) So in the hour or so it takes to get them, let the animals wander off. If one runs out in front of a car and kills the driver in the crash ... sure, screw the driver right? :rolleyes:
or what if one of those bears or lions comes into contact with the nearby public... and a person is injured or killed. Screw them too right? :rolleyes:

So ... you value an animals life more than a humans life?
Sure they were all tamed right? i forgot you personally knew the animals. And its totally unheard of that animals attack when scared and confused. Its not like they were locked up and suddenly set free ... oh wait.

archer22

LighterGuy wrote: »

Are you unfamiliar with Logic?

Ok, lets take what you say. They "fly" supplies in ( :rolleyes: ) So in the hour or so it takes to get them, let the animals wander off. If one runs out in front of a car and kills the driver in the crash ... sure, screw the driver right? :rolleyes:
or what if one of those bears or lions comes into contact with the nearby public... and a person is injured or killed. Screw them too right? :rolleyes:

So ... you value an animals life more than a humans life?
Sure they were all tamed right? i forgot you personally knew the animals. And its totally unheard of that animals attack when scared and confused. Its not like they were locked up and suddenly set free ... oh wait.

Ah let me see...the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed...only 7 billion plus left in the world.Yeah see your point

.As for "animals attack when scared or confused" best way to scare and confuse them is to start goddamn chasing and shooting at them.BUT THEY STILL DID NOT ATTACK ANYBODY.And yes they were tame...if they were not they would not have waited around to be shot.

LighterGuy

archer22 wrote: »

Ah let me see...the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed...only 7 billion plus left in the world.Yeah see your point .As for "animals attack when scared or confused" best way to scare and confuse them is to start goddamn chasing and shooting at them.BUT THEY STILL DID NOT ATTACK ANYBODY.

just as long as that person isnt you right?

you havent a clue.

archer22

LighterGuy wrote: »

just as long as that person isnt you right?

you havent a clue.

Well other people pose an infintely greater threat to individuals so why not go around shooting them just in case they cause an accident or attack somebody...well going on your so called logic that would be justified.

Irish Guitarist

It sounds like Ohio is run by idiots. They let any idiot keep exotic animals in their back yard and then take it out on the animals when the idiot idiotically releases the animals.

Manic Moran

Exaggeration. This is rural America here not some densely populated city.

Which is a substantial part of the problem. To use the tranquilizer the cop has to find himself within effective range of the gun, in the event that a few cops canvassing a large area happens to meet the target.

Put bluntly, semi auto 5.56 mm will provide greater opportunities to deal with the problem, and take greater advantage of the fleeting encounters.

chickenbutt

archer22 wrote: »

Ah let me see...the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed...only 7 billion plus left in the world.Yeah see your point .As for "animals attack when scared or confused" best way to scare and confuse them is to start goddamn chasing and shooting at them.BUT THEY STILL DID NOT ATTACK ANYBODY. And yes they were tame...if they were not they would not have waited around to be shot.

Thank goodness for that, and it was because the local sheriff's department took care of the situation (shoot to kill) anyone was hurt/killed. If I was living in Zanesville, I'd be sh*tting myself and have stayed in doors until I was sure all the animals were accounted for, dead or alive. No one wanted to kill the animals, but given the limitations on resources and the dangerous situation, a shoot to kill policy was the best one considering the tranquilizers they had did hardly anything. Even the Human Society agrees was the best decision, despite how horrible it is to lose so many endangered animals! And is that really your logic for them being tame?? Hardly!

Perhaps you should read this article.

Hanna said tranquilizing wild animals is not as easy as many people believe.
“I’ve been out all over the world tranquilizing animals,” he said. “Can you imagine trying to tranquilize an animal in the dark. Fine, we have a spotlight. We hit it. You don’t know exactly: Did you hit a muscle? Did you hit a bone? If you hit the bone, the plunger might not work and put the medicine in. So what do we do? Then we send a veterinarian or the sheriff up there to see if the animal is down, right? What’s gonna happen if the animal is just sitting there not even asleep? You’re dead.”

shampoosuicide

"the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed."

am i being thick or is 1400 not a fairly respectable number?

chickenbutt

shampoosuicide wrote: »

"the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed."

am i being thick or is 1400 not a fairly respectable number?

Endangered is like a step away from being extinct.

Ellis Dee

Temptamperu wrote: »

Damn what was the guy thinking... before he blew his brains out.

Probably not much more than afterwards.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

pebbles21

BREAKING NEWS.......

Apparently there is still a Giraffe and a Penguin missing.......the Police are looking high and low for them....

The Ohio Zoo reopened earlier today and the only animal left in the Zoo unaffected was a small dog in a cage......Patrons have been heard saying its a $hitZoo .....

/gets coat

up for anything

shampoosuicide wrote: »

"the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed."

am i being thick or is 1400 not a fairly respectable number?

Hmmmm...

smurgen

Overheal wrote: »

Oh cop on. What a lazy post. Speaking of lazy ways out.

Shall we do some math?

We have 48 animals, 18 of which are bengal tigers. Roaming Ohio, in the dark. The local environment is populated. You have hours to contain the situation before someone is attacked or killed.

48 tranq darts, multiplied by how many officers would have needed to be armed with tranq rounds? how many cops does it take? You're probably looking at at least 200 tranq rounds, and two dozen tranq rifles. Do you happen to have that lying around an Ohio precinct?

Couple that with what others have already said about how animals can react to tranquilizing.

No it wouldn't have been very practical at all to do the bleeding heart hippy PETA approach. We would have all loved for the animals to live but not at the expense of human lives, sorry.

I'm just thinking about most stories that come out of the West Coast in recent years: when you have just one bear, for example, strolling around a californian suburbia, it's not that quick to find them, much less tranq them or indeed keep people from being attacked. Let alone 48 animals, 18 of which are mother****ing tigers and there are still bears and lions in there to boot.

But no I'm sure they were just thinking about taking the lazy way out. I'm sure if it were a video game you'd get an achievement for tranquing them all safely but in reality you wouldn't give it that much thought if this was your backyard. Just saying.

im my opinion it is your post which is lazy. This is the same argument that I had with you and MM in a thread about the hairdressers shooting recently where I said that gun laws in america needed to change and be tightened up . MM moaned that this would be an inconvenience for level headed gun owners like himself.

I'll make the same point I made in that thread - Americans think that they can simply shoot all their problems away. I just read on the fox website that there had been numerous complaints about these animals to the cops in the past and nothing was done. The man was allowed to keep these dangerous animals despite questionable mental health. Then when an incident happened, the cops come out all guns blazing. Problem solved!

Wouldn't it have been easier to have more restrictive laws and better enforced laws that don't allow idiots and lunatics owning dangerous things such as machine guns and tigers? or is this simply too much of an inconvenience for you level headed americans?

Also I agree with the shooting on the night but proper laws should have not allowed for such an incident in the first place

shampoosuicide

up for anything wrote: »

Hmmmm...

what's the desirable number? i'm not trying to be obtuse, i just never really was aware of how many of each type of animal there is in the world. surely 1400 aren't going to be wiped out overnight? as long as they keep procreating and so on. how endangered is 'endangered'? these are all genuine questions, feel free to educate me.

MagicMarker

Could they not have just plugged in one of those things that emits a high pitched noise that only the animals could hear?

Problem solved.

Dravokivich

archer22 wrote: »

one worthless human getting killed..

I'd be curious to know why you think the good folks of Muskingum County are worthless humans. Where would someone need to be from to be of any value?

stovelid

archer22 wrote: »

Ah let me see...the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed...only 7 billion plus left in the world.

You sound like a pretty worthless human yourself. Maybe you should get into a cage with a tiger and bond.

Dermighty

In my experience (as a human) the effects of most stimulants are quickly worn off if you're pumping adrenaline around your body.

An example of this would be a well known professional kickboxer injecting Lidocaine into his knees as they called his name out for the arena walk in. He said that the effects of the Lidocaine would be gone after 10-15 minutes. Lidocaine is an anaesthetic and also potentially lethal.

So if you have a tranquiliser (a strong one) but you also have a grizzly bear who wants to rip your head off then I would say it would take a lot to bring it down.

I think the important issue here is not why the animal were shot but why that crazy **** had them in the first place.

The guy set them all free then shot himself, thereby almost ensuring their demise too. What a ****.

Emiko

Here's a link to an image of some of the dead animals. Not nice viewing.

http://i.imgur.com/Wu2iu.jpg

DjFlin

You need to stop blaming the police. They had no choice but to shoot the animals. Fault lies with the owner who set those animals loose. It was his fault alone that all those animals are dead.

shampoosuicide

Emiko wrote: »

Here's a link to an image of some of the dead animals. Not nice viewing.

http://i.imgur.com/Wu2iu.jpg

that does not look nice at all. the thing about that is they look like they were all huddled in the same area, in which case they obviously weren't on the prowl for food and you have to wonder if they needed to be all slaughtered.

or maybe i'm wrong and they were all dragged to that area after being shot. that picture's pretty disturbing though

Birdnuts

shampoosuicide wrote: »

"the certain death of 18 Bengal Tigers..only 1400 left in the world versus the if- if- if- if- if remote possibility of one worthless human getting killed."

am i being thick or is 1400 not a fairly respectable number?

Are you joking

- there was 100,000 in 1900, how many do you think there will be in a few decades with the likes of India's human population of 1.2 billion growing by 20 million a year:rolleyes: