please keep this topic up for awhile, im not a peta fan, (i hate them) but this is wrong...
where peta when you need them!
#1
Posted 10 April 2006 - 10:16 AM
please keep this topic up for awhile, im not a peta fan, (i hate them) but this is wrong...
#2
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:45 AM
#3
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:49 AM
By killing the tiger though, in essence you are saying that the tiger has the same rights and obligations that a human being does. That is, to enforce an eye for an eye kind of policy with the tiger. If thats the case, why dont tigers have votes?the tiger deserved it. it killed a person, therefore it is a THREAT. NO im not saying tis alright to kill random animals, but if the other ones didnt kill her, and this one did, its considered vicious.
#4
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:51 AM
#5
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:51 AM
That depends actually - some get killed too .. see my above post for an answer to thisWhen a person kills another person they go to prison but when an animal kills a person they get killed?
#6
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:53 AM
#7
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:54 AM
Oh i see... never mind thenYeah in America they do but not over here >.>
Still my above post applies
#8
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:20 PM
#9
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:21 PM
How does that necessitate killing the animal? putting ourselves first would just mean securing safety and we can do that by moving it to a natural habitat in india or wherever it is from. The problem is much bigger than that. The problem is the ideology behind an eye for an eye type policy with animals that kill humans.no, animals DO have rights, it's just animals put themselves first, so should we.
#10
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:26 PM
It surely aint the tigers.
#11
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:28 PM
Im trying to figure out ... what do the CENSORED's stand for?No offence but when train big CENSORED off tigers, with big CENSORED off claws and big CENSORED off teeth, and you get mauled in the process, who's god damn fault is it?
It surely aint the tigers.
#12
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:30 PM
#13
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:30 PM
EDIT:fcuk? big... fcuk off claws? what?
Edited by trixx, 10 April 2006 - 12:31 PM.
#14
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:30 PM
But, I suppose it would be fair for an eye for an eye, but, that would seem extremly barbaric, no? Deal with it humainly.Transport it to it's natural habitat.
#15
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:31 PM
#16
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:31 PM
No offence but when train big CENSORED off tigers, with big CENSORED off claws and big CENSORED off teeth, and you get mauled in the process, who's god damn fault is it?
It surely aint the tigers.
Yeah, the owner should have given the tiger boxing gloves and a gumshield...
My philosophy is, "dont play with anything you cant kill especially if can kill you with big sharp bloody teeth and huge razor like claws"...stick to goldfish.
#17
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:33 PM
tigers = cool... but not murderous ones
#18
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:34 PM
no. kill it.
-cough- That will accomplish nothing.
'Play with fire, you'll get burned', after you get burned, my food fellow, do you chop up the candle stick?
#19
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:39 PM
#20
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:42 PM
actually, it takes a long time to burn me... like... about 5 seconds of touching flame? 5-10 at least.... and i've been playing with fire since i was like... 3 so fire = bad example...
I somehow doubt that.
Why can't people learn that you can't domesticate tigers? They just don't learn. Kind of like those circus dudes, where one of them got mauled by a white tiger.
#21
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:46 PM
#22
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:52 PM
#23
Posted 10 April 2006 - 02:52 PM
#24
Posted 10 April 2006 - 07:02 PM
no. kill it.
but.... goldfish = stupid... and gotta be contained
tigers = cool... but not murderous ones
All tigers act on the same impulses . She took the risk of training big ass deadly animals and it got her killed. Killing this tiger would be like hunting a bear that ate me because I was dumb enough to jump on it while it was hunting.
#25
Posted 10 April 2006 - 07:07 PM
but.... goldfish = stupid... and gotta be contained
tigers = cool... but not murderous ones
All tigers are "murderous" they're wild carnivorous animals.
I agree with putting down a dog/cat that mauls someone, but something like this...no.
And yes, PETA cannot be relied on for anything. I would go as far as to call them terrorists. Did you know that they burn down labs killing people and the animals they were "protecting" and that they adopt dogs from shelters to kill them, because its better than being kept as a pet. Yep.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users