Dead tiger bigger victim than dead man?

[MindOverMatter]

Two points....

1. Are you sure the liberal media isn't just trying to justify the animal over the teenagers? :think:

Seeing that huge parts of the media have been compromised, we can say that that is always a possibility. It’s not really that hard to manipulate the media.

2. Even if true do you believe that is a justified reason to be killed?

If a tiger can escape from his cage because some teenagers with sling-shots fired at him "allegedly" he could also get out of his cage if a 3 year old threw his toy doll at him. Color me HIGHLY skeptical.

Then everyone who enters the zoo is at risk. Just imagine, that tiger could have escaped at any other time. How many other animals are able to escape from our zoos?

 

[MindOverMatter]

If you jump up, afterwards you land on the ground. Gravity makes sure you get what you deserve.

So in essence, are you saying that everyone gets what they deserve? Or is this only in reference to the Law of Gravity?

If animals become scarce, that's what should happen. The upper class rich and famous and the well-connected will still get to eat what they want and probably won't get criminalized. The capital crime part will just apply to the rest of us.

If animals become scarce then maybe all of US should sacrifice and cut back on consumption. That includes the rich too.

BTW, ever think it's not necessarily what the media reports, Eric? It's how that media is interpretated and spun. Admit it, part of your personal crusade is claiming victimhood whenever you feel oppressed by rules such as "Don't feed the animals," "Cruelty to animals is evil" or "Tigers should be a protected species" or even "Children should be raised to act kind and sensible."

Since a victim is described as “ one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent, ” then isn’t everyone a victim of the Laws that they do not agree with? Are you not a victim if you are forced to do something that is contrary to your interests or beliefs?

 

[MindOverMatter]

The information I'm referencing came from the interviews with the investigating officers. (I saw the video of the press conference.)

Tigers (and all wild animals) are unpredictable.

How are tigers and all wild animals unpredictable? Do you mean to tell MOM that no one could predict that tigers kill humans. Do you mean to tell MOM that no one could predict that if allowed to escape, and if humans are around, a wild tiger will try to kill or maul those humans? Are tigers and other wild animals so highly complex that we can’t predict their actions? Are tigers and other wild animals so highly complex that we can’t predict that they will kill or maul people? If we can’t predict those actions, then maybe we are the ones who are not as complex and intelligent as we believe ourselves to be.

Now how does this look and sound: The other lower animals of the jungle are smart enough to stay away from the tiger. This is because they themselves are able to predict the tiger’s actions. But at the same time, we who are supposed to be of greater intelligence, are of the mind that a tigers actions are unpredictable. So while we are not aware, even the other lower animals of the jungle are aware of what a tiger is capable of doing. No wonder we have chimps outsmarting our children. >>> Young Chimp Beats College Students We can’t even predict a tiger’s action. :rotfl:

This one, apparently, had had enough. Do I think it's a good thing the idiot is dead? No...but he was old enough to know the risk of his stupidity...just like someone who drives drunk.

Well, it was probably because he thought that there were no risks involved with going to the zoo. It’s a little something that is called a false sense of security. That tends to happen to you when you have grown up in an illusion that teaches you that you are free from suffering the consequences of your actions. But then reality has a funny way of knocking down those illusions when you least expect it.

 

[aikido7]

So in essence, are you saying that everyone gets what they deserve? Or is this only in reference to the Law of Gravity?

Hijacking this thread to theology, I say yes. God is in control and things happen here because of him--even when we don't yet understand why.

If animals become scarce then maybe all of US should sacrifice and cut back on consumption. That includes the rich too.

My usual arrogant and glib response: Only by transforming ourselves will the world be transformed. Plus it might help to have leadership in America that will tell us the real truth and inspire us to work together (and I don't mean Barack Obama (necessarily)

Since a victim is described as “ one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent, ” then isn’t everyone a victim of the Laws that they do not agree with? Are you not a victim if you are forced to do something that is contrary to your interests or beliefs?

Yes. I don't really know. Maybe yes, but....

 

[Adamhart]

The sad thing is,

some of these hippies feel more compassion for suicide bomb camels than a killed soldier

:vomit:

 

[MindOverMatter]

The zoo should be held responsible for not properly containing the tiger.

Before this little incident, did anyone have a problem with the way that the tiger was contained?

The boys should not have been taunting the animal, but if it had been properly contained, the tiger could not have retaliated.

Vodka tastes awful.

How about the jungle? Wouldn’t the jungle be a proper container for the tiger? Has anybody ever thought about using the jungle?

 

[BillyBob]

Before this little incident, did anyone have a problem with the way that the tiger was contained?

According to the news reports that have come out since the incident, the cage was not properly built. It is the zoos responsibility to make sure their cages conform to whatever requirements are deemed the industry standard.

How about the jungle? Wouldn’t the jungle be a proper container for the tiger? Has anybody ever thought about using the jungle?

I have thought about leaving you stranded in the middle of a tiger infested jungle, yes.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Knight...your article is from the day of the attack, and contains information found later to be incorrect. the only people mauled were the young men suspected of taunting the tiger:

My point is still the same...the men were at fault...the zoo is at fault...the tiger is (was) a wild animal, and did not act out of the ordinary.

And let’s not forget that the tiger is also at fault. The last time that MOM checked, those men didn’t maul themselves. So whether we like it or not, the tiger is at fault for mauling the men.


Secondly, there seems to be a contradiction in your stance. This is because in Post 37 you said that the tiger was unpredictable. And now in this posting, you are saying that the tiger did not act out of the ordinary. So, if the tiger did not act out of the ordinary, then how was it unpredictable? If the tiger was acting in its regular or customary manner, then how were we not able to foretell that it would attack someone?

They are predators...they attack things...they are not cuddly pets.

And so are you saying that “cuddly” pets are not predators? Are you trying to say that “cuddly” pets do not attack things or people?

>>> Cat attacks toddler — so family shoots other cat

 

[cattyfan]

Please place MOM on ignore.

I find it fun to completely ignore MOM and just watch him/her/it spin as he/she/it gets more and more frantic for someone to respond. (Not that I could answer, anyway, since I'm not fluent in Crazy.)

Haven't you noticed MOM has a problem with almost every single response and poster on this thread?

 

[MindOverMatter]

Of course!!!

Animal rights activists cannot fathom that maybe, just maybe, this tiger was out of control! The tiger did in fact threaten other people at the zoo that day and the tiger did in fact eat the arm off a zoo employee last December.

A good question to ask animal rights activists is this: How much self-control does a tiger have?
Or is a tiger ever really under total control?

Read this quote carefully....
"In our heart of hearts, we all know something happened that day to provoke the tiger," San Francisco Deputy City Attorney Sean Connolly said in court"

TRANSLATION: We are going to make sure we exonerate this animal from any wrong doing and place all the blame on the evil, evil humans! Uh... they were drunk and they were taunting the tiger!!! How do we know? There was a bottle of alcohol in their car!! :doh:

That’s funny because the same people--on this board and otherwise, who are quick to defend the tiger, are the same people who are less apt to defend and exonerate less fortunate humans who wind up in comparable situations. That is always interesting to see.

 

[BillyBob]

Haven't you noticed MOM has a problem with almost every single response and poster on this thread at this forum?

Fixed.

 

[MindOverMatter]

How should the tiger behave around what it considers to be prey?

The way that it behaved.

Again: the idiots who were drunk and throwing things at the animal were out of line...and the zoo is at fault for not having a safe enclosure.

How many other times has a tiger escaped from that enclosure?

The animal behaved normally.

If the animal acted normally, and we are aware that that is the animal’s normal actions, then we can’t label its behavior as unpredictable.

 

[red77]

And let’s not forget that the tiger is also at fault. The last time that MOM checked, those men didn’t maul themselves. So whether we like it or not, the tiger is at fault for mauling the men.


Secondly, there seems to be a contradiction in your stance. This is because in Post 37 you said that the tiger was unpredictable. And now in this posting, you are saying that the tiger did not act out of the ordinary. So, if the tiger did not act out of the ordinary, then how was it unpredictable? If the tiger was acting in its regular or customary manner, then how were we not able to foretell that it would attack someone?





And so are you saying that “cuddly” pets are not predators? Are you trying to say that “cuddly” pets do not attack things or people?

>>> Cat attacks toddler — so family shoots other cat

The tiger could only be 'at fault' in the eyes of those who like to anthropomorthise human characteristics onto animals :doh:

 

[cattyfan]

If the animal acted normally, and we are aware that that is the animal’s normal actions, then we can’t label its behavior as unpredictable.

MOM...I will indulge you this one last time, then put you back on ignore.

Something can behave in more than one way, and each of the responses still be considered normal.

For example, here at TOL, a new poster (unfamiliar with you and therefore actually paying attention to you) can see one of your ravings and can either A.) waste time by attempting to answer you with reason, B.) ignore you, or C.) respond that you are crazy. Any of the reactions are within normal responses, but you can't predict which of these responses you may get (making it "unpredictable.")

 

[BillyBob]

The tiger could only be 'at fault' in the eyes of those who like to anthropomorthise human characteristics onto animals :doh:

There is no need to anthropomorphize, it's pretty obvious the tiger escaped and killed a human, he didn't need any human characteristics to do so.

 

[koban]

The tiger could only be 'at fault' in the eyes of those who like to anthropomorthise human characteristics onto animals :doh:

Yep.

 

[red77]

There is no need to anthropomorphize, it's pretty obvious the tiger escaped and killed a human, he didn't need any human characteristics to do so.

Then there's no need for any talk of 'defending' this tiger for something that would only be immoral if it was capable of human moralistic thought

Oh, and please don't turn into the spelling police on me BB, in the UK we often use S as oppose to Z nowadays, and it hardly makes much difference one way or another.....

 

[BillyBob]

Then there's no need for any talk of 'defending' this tiger for something that would only be immoral if it was capable of human moralistic thought

I'm not defending the dead tiger or the dead drunk muslim with a slingshot. And I'm not anthropomorphizing the tiger, either. Higher mammals are not simple emotionless automatons.

Oh, and please don't turn into the spelling police on me BB, in the UK we often use S as oppose to Z nowadays, and it hardly makes much difference one way or another.....

Do you regularly use a 'th' in place of a 'ph'?

A lot of blacks in this country substitute 'f' for 'th', they end up saying dopey things like: 'Happy Birfday'.

But many of them are illiterate morons, I was just wondering what your excuse was.

 

[MindOverMatter]

Every visitor to the zoo is prey for a tiger.

True, every person who visit’s the zoo, increases their chances of becoming animal food.

It will be interesting to see if there is actually any real evidence that shows these guys were throwing things at this tiger.

To me it sounds like animal rights nut-balls trying to smear these kids so the tiger looks like the innocent victim.

Well, that’s why they are called animal rights activists. Their main concern is for the life or rights of lower animals. Or you can also say that they are lawyers who are trying to procure more rights for their clients the lower animals. Therefore, just like any other lawyer who is trying to gain rights for his client, the animal rights activists must justify or prove or show that their customer (the lower animal) is just, right, or reasonable.

Now, in order to justify or prove or show that the lower animal is just, right, or reasonable, the lawyers or animal rights activists, has to try to put their customer in the best possible light. In other words, they have to make sure that animals appear to be on the same level as humans. And in order to accomplish that feat, they oftentimes must paint the opposition in an even worse light. So you’ll see it happen all the time: The animal lovers will always try to make it seem as if the people who strongly oppose their warped and exaggerated views are crazy.

Do you know how hard it is to procure more rights for your clients if they are going around mindlessly killing people? :rotfl: So right now the animal rights activists and their cohorts are in the middle of damage control. Gotta boost the image of those lower animals. Can’t let this little incident destroy that image. You can see them all in the thread placing all the blame on the human while defending the tiger. Hey, who can blame them? After all, that is their job. That is what they were born to do.

 

[The Barbarian]

Too bad about the Tiger. But the fact remains. If these guys got drunk and taunted the tiger until it attacked them, I don't have much sympathy for them. Stupidity is one thing; cruelty to animals is quite another.

Given that people who kill and torture other people often have a history of mistreating animals, the tiger might have even done a service to the rest of us.