Killer Whale

serpentdove

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Should Sea World put the killer whale to death who killed a trainer? The whale has killed two people. A third man snuck into it's tank apparently to swim with the whale. He was also killed. That man actually died of hypothermia but the whale took his swimming trunks off and draped his dead body on his back (stated on Dennis Prager radio program, 25 Feb 10).

Also, what do you think of PETA's response? PETA said that the whale killed because it was enraged being cooped up. They called the animal "12,300 pounds of sheer rage.” They also stated that Sea World’s decision to remain open after the fatal attack was shameful.
 
serpentdove

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Granite said:
Leave the whale alone.
Click to expand...
Does it matter what God says:

“If an ox gores a man or a woman to death, then uthe ox shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be acquitted. But if the ox tended to thrust with its horn in times past, and it has been made known to his owner, and he has not kept it confined, so that it has killed a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned and its owner also shall be put to death (Ex 21:28-29)."
 
Granite

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
SD, why the world would you think that would matter? And why is killing something the only solution you propose?
 
MaryContrary

MaryContrary

New member
Hall of Fame
serpentdove said:
Does it matter what God says:

“If an ox gores a man or a woman to death, then uthe ox shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be acquitted. But if the ox tended to thrust with its horn in times past, and it has been made known to his owner, and he has not kept it confined, so that it has killed a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned and its owner also shall be put to death (Ex 21:28-29)."
Click to expand...

I understand that this was the third time this particular killer whale had been involved in a fatality like this. Not to mention this is hardly the first killer whale to attack its trainers. Why do you suppose that is? I would suggest it's because the people responsible for this whale and others aren't held accountable for their behavior. Certainly not when they kill.

So I would support this law. If you know the animal you are responsible for is dangerous and don't take reasonable steps to prevent it killing someone...you're at fault and you're responsible for that death. :idunno:
 
serpentdove

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
Granite said:
SD, why the world would you think that would matter?
Click to expand...
It matters because people are dead.

I don't think that people cared for this whale as they should have.

"Animal cruelty should not take place if men truly understand the command to be “caretakers” of the earth. We are to control the numbers of animals so disease and sickness do not kill them off; we are to use the animals for our needs; we are to control animals in a manner in which they are not harmful to humans;...we should protect [animals] from over-killing and abuse. The problem lies in the fact that many do not understand this balance and tend to over-protect or under-protect animals. Animals were created for us to enjoy, so protecting a remnant for others to enjoy is also proper. Proverbs 12:10 tells us, "A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal, but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel..." full text: What Does the Bible say About Animal Rights http://www.gotquestions.org/animal-rights.html
 
Granite

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
serpentdove said:
It matters because people are dead.

I don't think that people cared for this whale as they should have.

"Animal cruelty should not take place if men truly understand the command to be “caretakers” of the earth. We are to control the numbers of animals so disease and sickness do not kill them off; we are to use the animals for our needs; we are to control animals in a manner in which they are not harmful to humans;...we should protect [animals] from over-killing and abuse. The problem lies in the fact that many do not understand this balance and tend to over-protect or under-protect animals. Animals were created for us to enjoy, so protecting a remnant for others to enjoy is also proper. Proverbs 12:10 tells us, "A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal, but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel..." full text: What Does the Bible say About Animal Rights http://www.gotquestions.org/animal-rights.html
Click to expand...

They probably shouldn't have imprisoned it in the first place.
 
Real Sorceror

Real Sorceror

New member
I say they just release it. Its obviously a bit on the violent side, which is not surprising since Killer Whales generally eat things about our size in the wild.
 
serpentdove

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
MaryContrary said:
"I understand that this was the third time this particular killer whale had been involved in a fatality like this."
Click to expand...
The way I understand it is--in one death, the man died of hypothermia not an attack by this whale. He was attempting to swim in its tank.
MaryContrary said:
"[P]eople responsible for this whale and others aren't held accountable for their behavior."
Click to expand...
That's a good point. They were clearly warned by this particular whale and did nothing to prevent another death.
MaryContrary said:
"I would support this law [Ex 21:28-29]."
Click to expand...
I would too.
MaryContrary said:
"If you know the animal you are responsible for is dangerous and don't take reasonable steps to prevent it killing someone...you're at fault and you're responsible for that death."
Click to expand...
Yes, because after it killed the first time, it should never have been trusted again. We think that we know animal behavior, but we don't.

Did you ever hear of Timothy Treadwell who went to live with the bears in Alaska?

"He lived among the coastal grizzly bears of Katmai National Park in Alaska, USA, for approximately 13 seasons. At the end of his 13th season in the park in 2003, he and his girlfriend Amie Huguenard were killed and partially devoured by one or possibly two grizzly bears....An audio recording of the attack survived, but has not been released to the public." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Treadwell

In the recording, the author of a book about it, said that Timothy says that the bear is killing him. Amie, his girlfriend must have wanted to help but she was obviously terrified at what she was hearing so she stayed in the tent.

After it seemed that the bear had gone away, she went out to him. But bears often attack and then go off in the bushes but keep their eye on their pray to ensure it's dead. When she came out, the bear killed her, too.
 
Alate_One

Alate_One

Well-known member
Real Sorceror said:
I say they just release it. Its obviously a bit on the violent side, which is not surprising since Killer Whales generally eat things about our size in the wild.
Click to expand...

Releasing it is just a crueler way of killing it. If you want to do it properly you'll need to spend millions of dollars. See the Keiko story. I'd say either put it in a facility away from trainers or put it down.

I think Orcas probably shouldn't be kept in captivity at all, its simply impossibly expensive to care for their needs properly. However, I am torn on the subject since they do serve a powerful educational tool simply by being available for people to see.
 
noguru

noguru

Well-known member
There are risks involved when any wild animal is kept in captivity. The people who work near these animals should be aware of the risks. With that in mind, I have no preferrence one way or the other about killing this animal. It is obviously more problematic than other orcas.
 
serpentdove

serpentdove

BANNED
Banned
noguru said:
You do realize that fool is pro-life, anti-abortion?
Click to expand...

Right, but it reminded me of the bumper sticker.

I'm sure Fool has more passion for saving babies than saving whales--as any rational person of course would.

I was very curious to hear how PETA responded to all of this. I'm glad they were not hysterical this time.

They merely suggested that the whales may not prefer to be contained in this way. They may be right (and I'm no PETA fan).
 
Last edited:
D

Doug Wright

New member
serpentdove said:
Does it matter what God says:

“If an ox gores a man or a woman to death, then uthe ox shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be acquitted. But if the ox tended to thrust with its horn in times past, and it has been made known to his owner, and he has not kept it confined, so that it has killed a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned and its owner also shall be put to death (Ex 21:28-29)."
Click to expand...

...ever try to throw a stone undeerwater? ..let's get the owner and let the 'orca' go.

I mean, he might'a been late to pick up his kid from daycare and such; how else he gonna communicate with us dum ***** who can't even speak?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top