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

Assassination of Animals for Acting Naturally

1356

Comments

  • #62
    **Vai**
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,302 ✭✭✭**Vai**


    There is no comparison of course but they are 2 of the more likely examples of animals attacking humans.


  • #63
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Once a predatory animal discovers it can easily kill humans they have to go.


  • #64
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Once a predatory animal discovers it can easily kill humans they have to go.


    Scumlord that's a blatant misunderstanding of animal behaviour.


  • #65
    **Vai**
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,302 ✭✭✭**Vai**


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Once a predatory animal discovers it can easily kill humans they have to go.

    You're assuming that animals think rationally. They don't.


  • #66
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Scumlord that's a blatant misunderstanding of animal behaviour.
    All other animals on the planet are scared of us. That fear generally doesn't disappear with wild animals, even if you raise them as pets. Of course a lion doesn't need to be scared of one human, they don't know where our powers come from but once they discover humans are pretty easy to kill they will go for that easy food source again.
    **Vai** wrote: »
    You're assuming that animals think rationally. They don't.
    I don't see why animals wouldn't think rationally? Especially a predatory animal that has to learn other animals behaviour so they can effectively kill them.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    ScumLord wrote: »
    All other animals on the planet are scared of us. That fear generally doesn't disappear with wild animals, even if you raise them as pets. Of course a lion doesn't need to be scared of one human, they don't know where our powers come from but once they discover humans are pretty easy to kill they will go for that easy food source again.

    I don't see why animals wouldn't think rationally? Especially a predatory animal that has to learn other animals behaviour so they can effectively kill them.

    Having been in Africa I can tell you plenty of animals are not scared of us! Hippos for instance.


  • #68
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Having been in Africa I can tell you plenty of animals are not scared of us! Hippos for instance.
    Hippos will attack anything, they're eyesight is so poor I'd wonder if they know what they're attacking half the time.

    They will avoid human contact as much as they can though. All you have to do is look at how animals are disappearing as human civilization spreads. The animals flee into unsuitable territory and die. You don't see hippos holding their ground as bulldozers pass through. Humanity is scary and god like to all other species.


  • #69
    Cody Pomeray
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,648 ✭✭✭Cody Pomeray


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    I'm referring to cases, which we've all heard at some stage, where an animal acts according to its own nature by attacking a human, be it a dog or tiger, and then becomes a disgraceful scapegoat that needs to be 'blamed'. The punishment is, of course, death.

    Am I the only one who finds this morally reprehensible?

    No, I agree with you.

    It's an old tradition. Animals and objects that cause an individual's death are called deodands, and may be subject to destruction, this was once a feature of our legal system.

    Where there was a very valuable object or animal that had caused an individual's death (especially a horse, or an ox), there was a convention in some parts for a coroner's jury to order that the deodand be destroyed, and the sale value would be given to the deceased person's family. The benefit here was that some compensation could be provided even where no liability could be proven.

    But that is not the origin of the deodand in itself. Who knows where it comes from. Personally I think it is just an instinctive human response to retaliate to something that injures us. I remember as a kid being encouraged to slap a door which I had banged into. I suppose it just helps to satisfy our sense of injustice.


  • #70
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Hippos will attack anything, they're eyesight is so poor I'd wonder if they know what they're attacking half the time.

    They will avoid human contact as much as they can though. All you have to do is look at how animals are disappearing as human civilization spreads. The animals flee into unsuitable territory and die. You don't see hippos holding their ground as bulldozers pass through. Humanity is scary and god like to all other species.

    We are certainly not godlike to other creatures. Tell that to someone who's being ravaged by an Ebola virus or mycobacterium tuberculosis.


  • #71
    **Vai**
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,302 ✭✭✭**Vai**


    ScumLord wrote: »
    I don't see why animals wouldn't think rationally? Especially a predatory animal that has to learn other animals behaviour so they can effectively kill them.

    That might go for tigers but it doesn't for domesticated dogs. It would make no sense for them to kill or repeatedly kill humans. Neither of them think in the same rational way that we do though. The hunting can be put down to instinct.
    ScumLord wrote: »
    Hippos will attack anything, they're eyesight is so poor I'd wonder if they know what they're attacking half the time.

    They will avoid human contact as much as they can though. All you have to do is look at how animals are disappearing as human civilization spreads. The animals flee into unsuitable territory and die. You don't see hippos holding their ground as bulldozers pass through. Humanity is scary and god like to all other species.

    I think the bulldozers and guns are the scary, godlike part. Most animals would have no reason to be scared of us if it wasn't for the help of those kind of tools.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    We are certainly not godlike to other creatures. Tell that to someone who's being ravaged by an Ebola virus or mycobacterium tuberculosis.
    We are the only creature on the planet that can actually combat bacteria and viruses though. If they had the capacity to be scared of us they would be.
    **Vai** wrote: »
    That might go for tigers but it doesn't for domesticated dogs. It would make no sense for them to kill or repeatedly kill humans. Neither of them think in the same rational way that we do though. The hunting can be put down to instinct.
    Dogs are probably more sociable than most humans. If a dog bites a person it's more than likely been driven to it, it's more than likely mentally abused and there isn't much in the way of dog therapy. Unless someones prepared to put the work into rehabilitating the dog then the only option is to put it down to prevent the risk of it attacking someone else that doesn't know the dogs disposition.


    I think the bulldozers and guns are the scary, godlike part. Most animals would have no reason to be scared of us if it wasn't for the help of those kind of tools.
    Remember that humans caused a huge extinction event in the US when we first went there with stone tools. Animals learned to be scared of humans long before we had anything more than a stone in our hands. Being scared of humans is probably instinctive at this stage, the same way many animals are scared of poisonous animals.

    If you ever encounter a lion in the wild you're supposed to stand your ground as this confuses the lion (most things run away from them), they don't know what to do and just walk off again.


  • #73
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    ScumLord wrote: »
    We are the only creature on the planet that can actually combat bacteria and viruses though. If they had the capacity to be scared of us they would be.

    Dogs are probably more sociable than most humans. If a dog bites a person it's more than likely been driven to it, it's more than likely mentally abused and there isn't much in the way of dog therapy. Unless someones prepared to put the work into rehabilitating the dog then the only option is to put it down to prevent the risk of it attacking someone else that doesn't know the dogs disposition.



    Remember that humans caused a huge extinction event in the US when we first went there with stone tools. Animals learned to be scared of humans long before we had anything more than a stone in our hands. Being scared of humans is probably instinctive at this stage, the same way many animals are scared of poisonous animals.

    If you ever encounter a lion in the wild you're supposed to stand your ground as this confuses the lion (most things run away from them), they don't know what to do and just walk off again.


    If bacteria had the capacity to be scared of us it wouldn't to be honest. In the nex few years we're going to see the emergence of superbugs resistant to treatments.

    Edit: that's already happened by the way


  • #74
    **Vai**
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,302 ✭✭✭**Vai**


    ScumLord wrote: »
    If a dog bites a person it's more than likely been driven to it, it's more than likely mentally abused and there isn't much in the way of dog therapy. Unless someones prepared to put the work into rehabilitating the dog then the only option is to put it down to prevent the risk of it attacking someone else that doesn't know the dogs disposition.

    That is the general consensus alright, doesn't make it right though. There is plenty in the way of animal therapy, and if people knew that and learned about it more, we might not have to put down these abused dogs.
    ScumLord wrote: »
    Remember that humans caused a huge extinction event in the US when we first went there with stone tools. Animals learned to be scared of humans long before we had anything more than a stone in our hands. Being scared of humans is probably instinctive at this stage, the same way many animals are scared of poisonous animals.

    If you ever encounter a lion in the wild you're supposed to stand your ground as this confuses the lion (most things run away from them), they don't know what to do and just walk off again.

    You may be right about that, my knowledge of the stone age is about the same as your average dog. The bulldozers, guns etc certainly help our cause though.

    That's a nice anecdote about lions but would any of us do it? I'd do it with any dog but with a lion my legs might well take over.


  • #75
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    If bacteria had the capacity to be scared of us it wouldn't to be honest. In the nex few years we're going to see the emergence of superbugs resistant to treatments.

    Edit: that's already happened by the way
    Yes they're out evolving our medicine but we are already working on alternatives that will completely usurp all their defences.
    **Vai** wrote: »
    That is the general consensus alright, doesn't make it right though. There is plenty in the way of animal therapy, and if people knew that and learned about it more, we might not have to put down these abused dogs.
    Nobodies willing to put in the time and money to do it though. I would be of the opinion that just because a dog bites someone it doesn't mean they're dangerous. If a dog is being abused it's right to bite to defend itself. It's just there is no effort to investigate. It's easier and cheaper to put the dog down and just get another one.


    That's a nice anecdote about lions but would any of us do it? I'd do it with any dog but with a lion my legs might well take over.
    You really have no choice but to stand your ground. It's a certainty the lion would catch you if you ran, so it's pointless running. You'll find it in some breeds of dog too, if you run away from the dog it will chase you down instinctively.


  • #76
    Plastic Sheeting
    Site Banned Posts: 51 ✭✭Plastic Sheeting


    Animals who attack need be thought who the real alphas are. That's us acting according to our natural behaviour.


  • #77
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Isn't 'assassination' a politically motivated killing?!?

    Can't assassinate a tiger until it runs for office OP!


  • #78
    wretcheddomain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,094 ✭✭✭wretcheddomain


    endacl wrote: »
    Isn't 'assassination' a politically motivated killing?!?

    Can't assassinate a tiger until it runs for office OP!

    I'm really confused at this stage. First I'm told that After Hours isn't a place for serious or rational discussion, then I'm continuously asked to seriously justify the use of the word 'assassination'. It really can't be both! But, given that we all understand an 'assassination' to be a politically motivated killing, have you any literary reason as to why I've used that word? Maybe hyperbole? Maybe metaphor? Given that AH is not a place for 'serious discussion' as its members like to preach about, this shouldn't really be a concern, should it?

    I await the user to asks me to justify the use of the word 'preach' above. ;)


  • #79
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Ok. I'll bite. Please justify your use of the word 'preach'.

    :)


  • #80
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    I'm really confused at this stage. First I'm told that After Hours isn't a place for serious or rational discussion, then I'm continuously asked to seriously justify the use of the word 'assassination'.
    It's not that after hours isn't a place for rational discussion it's just that you also have to expect the irrational answers too.


  • #81
    Jester252
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    So an animal attacks a human is okay and part of their nature so why can a human attack an animal seen as we are animals?


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    Well, the delicious part reminds me of the Grindadrap, the 'tradition' they go through in the Faroe Islands that murders so many Pilot Whales. This is a serious argument in many circles, it just lies outside my orbit thankfully.

    Mmm. I've had whale in Norway, not once but three times and it was absolutely delicious. That said, I did feel guilty about it and I have satisfied my curiosity in that field.


  • #83
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Jester252 wrote: »
    So an animal attacks a human is okay and part of their nature so why can a human attack an animal seen as we are animals?

    We can reason and make the choice. We can understand how an animal would attack, because its what they have evolved to do, and that there was no malice in the attack? Because we're not driven by instinct alone? Because we can punctuate?


  • #84
    wretcheddomain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,094 ✭✭✭wretcheddomain


    old hippy wrote: »
    Mmm. I've had whale in Norway, not once but three times and it was absolutely delicious. That said, I did feel guilty about it and I have satisfied my curiosity in that field.

    I think it's now forbidden to consume it in the Faroes due to the high level of toxins inside it. But I'm sure it's tasty. :D


  • #85
    dodderangler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,204 ✭✭✭dodderangler


    Sorry I didn't reply to this earlier
    I was eating roast rabbit.
    What's all this then


  • #86
    wretcheddomain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,094 ✭✭✭wretcheddomain


    ScumLord wrote: »
    It's not that after hours isn't a place for rational discussion it's just that you also have to expect the irrational answers too.

    I do expect them only it's rather frustrating when people say it's not a place for serious discussion when serious discussion happens here all the time. What these people should really be saying is that you find non-serious trolls who want to divert the discussion but to say serious discussion doesn't happen on AH is laughable. Every day of the week, serious discussion, sometimes very heated serious discussions occur. Apart from saying a few idiots want to divert this serious discussion, I think it's mere thank whoring to repetitively say this in the middle of a thread. Anyhow, I won't divert the thread with this any more, I think my point is crystal clear at this stage. :)


  • #87
    3ndahalfof6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,184 ✭✭✭3ndahalfof6


    Tis the modern form of hunting, with all the tracking taken out.


  • #88
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    wretcheddomain wrote: »
    I think it's now forbidden to consume it in the Faroes due to the high level of toxins inside it. But I'm sure it's tasty. :D

    You'd better believe it!


  • #89
    Jester252
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    endacl wrote: »
    We can reason and make the choice. We can understand how an animal would attack, because its what they have evolved to do, and that there was no malice in the attack? Because we're not driven by instinct alone? Because we can punctuate?

    So you won't attack an animal that attacking another person or animal? You'll just understand why they did it. Animal make choices too, you do understand that? Like I said humans are animal so why is wrong for us to attack?


  • #90
    dodderangler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,204 ✭✭✭dodderangler


    Humans are animals. So we do what comes naturally and that is to eat.
    Whether its a 2lb rabbit or 4 ton elephant. Difference is we just evolved to use tools and tools turned to guns and now we choose what we want to hunt and kill.
    If a human is attacked and killed by a bear so be it. I personally wouldn't go out hunting for that bear then as it done what all animals are born to do. Aka kill to survive.
    Circle of life and a vicious one at that but it is


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    3ndahalfof6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,184 ✭✭✭3ndahalfof6


    I killed a box of frosties today does this count.


Advertisement
Advertisement