Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Killing animals that attack humans

2

Comments

  • #32
    Hoop66
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,273 ✭✭✭Hoop66


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Had to be done, shark had developed a taste for human meat.
    Have you seen how a shark, especially a large shark, eats? They don't really bother to savour the gamey deliciousness all that much.

    You could even feed them horse and they wouldn't know the difference.

    Hang on...


  • #33
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,484 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    Like on a nature show when a lion kills a gazelle and the camera crew don't step in, "that's just nature". Wonder would they say the same if the lion caught a hold of Attenborough.


  • #34
    brokenarms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,387 ✭✭✭brokenarms


    Da Shins Kelly wrote: »
    I was just reading an article this morning about a man who was killed in a great white shark attack off the coast of New Zealand. After the guy had been killed, police went into the water and shot the shark. It's a very rare attack on a popular beach, but it got me thinking. We seem to do this with any animal attack against humans. In the documentary Grizzly Man, the bear that attacked and killed Timothy Treadwell was shot later on. It seems with alligator or crocodile attacks, it's the same thing. In pretty much any wild animal attack against humans, someone is sent out to find and kill the culprit.

    I'm just wondering why this is. Humans are probably the most invasive creatures on the face of the planet, and it does seem as though a lot of the people who get killed in these attacks are people who are just asking for trouble and don't really have any respect for boundaries. After all, grizzly bears and alligators and great white sharks are predators, and if you think you can just trespass on the territories of dangerous wild animals, then you should expect some bad consequences. As sad as it all may be for the people involved, the animals seem to be just doing what is natural for them in their own habitat and it tends to be, for the most part, arrogance that gets these people killed.

    Unless I'm missing something here. Is there some other possibly valid reason for this?

    Really. You really need to ask this question???



    Because we own the planet and we cant allow animals to go around eating us. Simples.


  • #35
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,745 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    AFAIK it's because once an animal realises that humans are slow, weak, and defenceless they're more likely to start actively hunting people.

    I'm all for not killing the animals though. Bears are bears, sharks are sharks; you can't expect them to act like anything other than what they are - animals that kill to survive.


  • #36
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Plazaman wrote: »
    I'm all for putting down dogs that attack people and more than likely sharks that are encroaching on a public beach.

    Im pretty sure the shark didnt attack anyone on the sand...


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Frolick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 144 ✭✭Frolick


    Firstly, i'd say its his own fault for going into shark infested waters. you should know the risk regardless

    An animal that kills, will more then like attempt it again considering it got a nice tasty meal the last time.

    On those nets, alot of marine get caught in it needless and die because of it and its very hard to get them out in time / safely


  • #38
    nucker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 790 ✭✭✭nucker


    Ush1 wrote: »
    Like on a nature show when a lion kills a gazelle and the camera crew don't step in, "that's just nature". Wonder would they say the same if the lion caught a hold of Attenborough.


    I'm sure that they would have guns on with them to kill any animals that attack any of the crew


  • #39
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,484 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    nucker wrote: »
    I'm sure that they would have guns on with them to kill any animals that attack any of the crew

    Exactly, so it's nothing about leaving it happen because it's just nature, it's people covering our own arses.


  • #40
    SV
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,533 ✭✭✭SV


    Ush1 wrote: »
    Exactly, so it's nothing about leaving it happen because it's just nature, it's people covering our own arses.

    Yes but it's not natural for Attenborough and the likes to actually be there so that only makes sense.


    I highly doubt they'd be stepping in for the tribes that actively go in to steal food off Lions, as that's part of the habitat and the way it is.


  • #41
    stateofflux
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,563 ✭✭✭stateofflux


    hoodwinked wrote: »
    he'll need a lawyer who's a shark if he's going to win....

    most lawyers are sharks


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    flanders1979
    Closed Accounts Posts: 638 ✭✭✭flanders1979


    Seems fair enough. I'm sure the family of the deceased wanted it.


  • #43
    Shzm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 947 ✭✭✭Shzm


    Frolick wrote: »
    Firstly, i'd say its his own fault for going into shark infested waters. you should know the risk regardless

    An animal that kills, will more then like attempt it again considering it got a nice tasty meal the last time.

    On those nets, alot of marine get caught in it needless and die because of it and its very hard to get them out in time / safely

    'shark infested waters'? Lol, you make it sound as if there's daily shark attacks happening off the coast of Auckland. Fact is, there hasn't been a shark attack (or at least a fatal one) in that area, or anywhere near it since 1966. There's only been 14 fatal shark attacks in NZ waters since 1837..

    So no, it's not his fault, nor is it the sharks fault. Guy was in the wrong place at the wrong time and extremely unlucky. He was a local so has probably swum the same stretch of water 10s or 100s of times before, no problem. If he'd have played the lotto that week he'd probably have more chance of winning that than being killed by sharks.

    Please get your facts straight before you clog up the internet with useless drivel.


  • #44
    Ush1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,484 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    SV wrote: »
    Yes but it's not natural for Attenborough and the likes to actually be there so that only makes sense.


    I highly doubt they'd be stepping in for the tribes that actively go in to steal food off Lions, as that's part of the habitat and the way it is.

    How do mean not natural? Just because he isn't hunting the lions? He still part of the natural world and is meat to a lion.

    I think they would be stepping in to be honest. In fact, in the making of human planet they were dealing with a tribe doing this all their lives and the BBC crew didn't want them to do it and were hugely concerned about the tribesmen safety.


  • #45
    GetWithIt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭GetWithIt


    Da Shins Kelly wrote: »
    I'm just wondering why this is. Humans are probably the most invasive creatures on the face of the planet, and it does seem as though a lot of the people who get killed in these attacks are people who are just asking for trouble and don't really have any respect for boundaries. After all, grizzly bears and alligators and great white sharks are predators, and if you think you can just trespass on the territories of dangerous wild animals, then you should expect some bad consequences. As sad as it all may be for the people involved, the animals seem to be just doing what is natural for them in their own habitat and it tends to be, for the most part, arrogance that gets these people killed.
    There's a thread in the vids forum that bears this out. Very sad. Also, totally NSFW.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056890331


  • #46
    sesswhat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,173 ✭✭✭sesswhat


    When thousands of wild predators are killed every day for commercial reasons, in fishing nets, to protect farming interests or simply just for 'sport', is it worth even considering the miniscule numbers targeted for attacking humans?


  • #47
    SV
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,533 ✭✭✭SV


    Ush1 wrote: »
    How do mean not natural? Just because he isn't hunting the lions? He still part of the natural world and is meat to a lion.

    I think they would be stepping in to be honest. In fact, in the making of human planet they were dealing with a tribe doing this all their lives and the BBC crew didn't want them to do it and were hugely concerned about the tribesmen safety.

    He's not part of the natural habitat as the tribesmen are.

    Maybe they said they didn't want them to do it, they still liked it enough to film and show it on tv.


  • #48
    Wattle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭Wattle


    It happened in New Zealand right? There's no death penalty there. Maybe the shark would get sentenced to life in a tiny miserable tank. The guards could tease him by putting their bare arses in the water.


  • #49
    nucker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 790 ✭✭✭nucker


    Wattle wrote: »
    It happened in New Zealand right? There's no death penalty there. Maybe the shark would get sentenced to life in a tiny miserable tank. The guards could tease him by putting their bare arses in the water.


    I am against torturing animals :pac:


  • #50
    Wattle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭Wattle


    nucker wrote: »
    I am against torturing animals :pac:

    How do you rehabilitate a shark though? Turn him into that nice Free Willy?


  • #51
    anncoates
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,925 ✭✭✭✭anncoates


    If my mot got eaten by a shark, I'd want the thing killed and opened up so I could get the engagement ring and other jewelery back.

    I'm not forking out all that money again when I meet somebody else.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Standard human idiocy. We're about 2mm away from being complete savages so this kind of mindless nonsense never surprises me.


  • #53
    nucker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 790 ✭✭✭nucker


    seamus wrote: »
    Standard human idiocy. We're about 2mm away from being complete savages so this kind of mindless nonsense never surprises me.


    It never surprises me that the claim that they get a taste for humans is pure speculation, sharks apparently don't like the taste of humans, so why the police in NZ killed the shark I would never know.

    We also share the same space as animals and expect them not to attack us. It's incredible that we kill animals for food, not that I'm a vegetarian, and expect animals not to attack us, not that I would put myself into that enviroment


  • #54
    IvySlayer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,194 ✭✭✭✭IvySlayer


    Ush1 wrote: »
    Like on a nature show when a lion kills a gazelle and the camera crew don't step in, "that's just nature". Wonder would they say the same if the lion caught a hold of Attenborough.

    He'd probably narrate it :P

    'As the lion rips my arm off and eats it, look at the power of this magnificent beast...'


  • #55
    Shzm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 947 ✭✭✭Shzm


    nucker wrote: »
    It never surprises me that the claim that they get a taste for humans is pure speculation, sharks apparently don't like the taste of humans, so why the police in NZ killed the shark I would never know.

    Where does it say they killed the shark(s)?


  • #56
    gobnaitolunacy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭gobnaitolunacy


    nucker wrote: »
    It never surprises me that the claim that they get a taste for humans is pure speculation, sharks apparently don't like the taste of humans, so why the police in NZ killed the shark I would never know.

    We also share the same space as animals and expect them not to attack us. It's incredible that we kill animals for food, not that I'm a vegetarian, and expect animals not to attack us, not that I would put myself into that enviroment

    They don't normally go for humans, but sharks have been known to attack surfers/bodyboarders in turbulant water where visibility is poor. A surfer of a board looks roughly like a seal to a shark.
    Sharks nose or bite to 'taste' unfamiliar objects first, unfortunately a 'taste' can be fatal.
    I'm not a fan of bait balling/shark cage diving, makes sharks associate the presence of humans with food. Not a good thing IMHO.


  • #57
    Xivilai
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 721 ✭✭✭Xivilai


    Where To wrote: »
    Sharks have no legs.

    Makes it even easier to shoot the treacherous sea freaks :cool:


  • #58
    Irishcrx
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,861 ✭✭✭Irishcrx




  • #59
    Son Of A Vidic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭Son Of A Vidic


    It would be nice to see a Great White walk into a restaurant and slaughter the customers for eating shark fin soup. We eat them, so it's only fair that they are entitled to eat us when we enter their domain.


  • #60
    RossPaws
    Closed Accounts Posts: 81 ✭✭RossPaws


    Though I don't agree with it, I'm pretty sure that as others have said, the animal is killed because it has discovered that hey, people are easy to kill!

    I'm a tree-hugging animal loving vegan but when an animal starts specifically targeting humans then it's understandable that it cannot be allowed to continue. This, however, is very rare. I can only think of one example, and that was the mountain lion in America that started specifically targeting bikers.

    Mostly the animals are just doing what they've done hundreds of times, but instead of the victim being another wild animal it's a human. They don't deserve to die for that.

    I really hate when they kill captive wild animals for attacking humans though. Some eejit has a tiger in a pen in his garden, goes to feed it one day and it kills him. What do we gain from shooting that animal? It lives in captivity anyway, it's not like it could start to hunt humans. It's supposed to be aggressive so they can't claim that it has suddenly started looking at people like dinner.

    Not to mention that tigers are in danger of becoming extinct, but we still shoot without hesitation when it acts like a tiger and attacks someone.

    That's not being logical, there's no justifiable reason for that. It's just human selfishness and revenge seeking.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Gbear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    Is there actually evidence that wild animals tend to attack people more if they've done it once?

    It makes sense with dogs because they're domesticated so if they can do it once that's demonstration of their behaviour.

    With wild animals we already know that they'd eat people given half a chance. If it was actually about protecting people it seems that we'd just kill all predators in contact with humans preemptively.

    It seems like it's about some insane notion of vengeance against an animal that has absolutely no ability to understand abstract thought.


Advertisement
Advertisement