Incident at Whangarei's Zion Wildlife Park

Hmm, i've never really cared for nature or its creatures. I only reguard them as food and something to observe for knowledge. However, once a predator learns how to kill humans and continues to do so it must be eliminated.

Should this tiger have been killed, maybe/maybe not, its not my place to make that decision, but if it was a member of family that was killed, that tiger would become my prey and would be hunted until i had its blood upon my hands. It all depends on how we, as people and member as species, view ourselves and our fellow man.

Frankly, i believe man comes before animals, for if our species regaurds animals on a higher plan then us we would all be eaten.

So in final words, Ave Humanatus and Dominatus Imperios! Let no xeno stand before the might of mankind and remember let none who oppose us survive!

 

Indeed, I believe there is nothing wrong with defending yourself against a creature that takes a hostile stance against you, despite the reason for it. It is just part of nature and the cycle of life. The animal is not gonna be treated any worse than if it was out in the wild where it is eat or be eaten for most species.

I highly doubt that most of you would say "oh its my fault for becoming its prey" if it attacked your family or children or was rending your flesh. I think it would be accurate to say you would be screaming for help or someone to shoot it when your in the moment.

 

The way i understand it, the man was already dead, the fact is that they shot a member of a species with around 120 members for killing a man who was in it's territory, the fault lies in whoever failed to keep the animal out of it's enclosure while it was being maintained, the animal acted the same as any non-domesticated animal would and such an endangered animal should not have been shot.

 

Pancake (in fact, everyone who blabbers about self-defence and what to do when attacked) you either refuse to comprehend the issue and situation here or you can't - either way, please don't post here anymore.

Exactly. That is the proper and civilised way of understanding this whole thing. Unfortunately the sensible will always be outnumbered by the herd of brainless freaks.

@Gforce: I hope you get abducted and brutally murdered by aliens. They're more advanced and intelligent, so they can, right?

QFT

This just proves that one can mourn without wanting revenge. The family deserves much respect for this and I hope they set an example to the dimwits around the world. I also hope that the popularity and traffic of the park plummets - I know that if I came to learn something like this about a zoo then I would not go there and support them with my money. If you happen to get hold of details or the things that followed, ovie, please don't hesitate to post them.

 

No need to be so disrespectful kuvasz, just because we have different opinions on the matter doesn't mean you need to insult them. That makes you no better than the people you call brainless freaks and dimwits.

I already explained that I understand your point and that it was unfortunate the tiger had to go but at the same time I was trying to make you understand the position of the people at the zoo and how they felt.

I'm sorry that you fail to realize this and insist on propagating the same behavior you so zealously seem to be against.

I hope that we can come to an understanding of both points of view and learn from them instead of arguing with each other over and over.

 

alright alright people. Time to clear things up, Kuvasz just because Jon said it dun make it law. The two beliefs to the story:

It should be killed: Because it was self defense. Just because you disagree doesn't mean calling people freaks, kuvasz. I don't agree it should have been because I understand this POV. and jsut because you don't doesn't mean bashing people who do. anyway from what I've seen people believe it should because once it killed someone, it could get into a habit of killing others. And no revenge wasn't right, but think about it. When a human kills another human don't we want revenge. They're just being human, for don't many of us say humans are greedy and selfish by nature? Anyway. yeah we 'know better' but it's proven animals can act out of instinct as well. And the article is also vague on when the later is. It doesn't specify if everyone was safe or not, or if the man was out of harms way. It also doesn't say how, it coulda been euthanized humanely instead of beaten to death as some members are getting heated about. so it's open to interpretation and THUS entirely different situations.

It doesn't deserve to die: What's done is done and this rare breed is already killed. I don't think it should have died, mainly because I don't think revenge is the answer. I think this more, though because the article makes it sound like the man was already dead and out of harm's way. To me it seems they killed it as revenge, and it wasn't the tiger's fault, either. We are the ones who started poaching and endangering them, we were the ones who caged them up. but the man was looking for a job, and it wasn't his fault, either. I don't think it was right the tiger was killed, because i don't believe humans are more valuable than the animals of this planet.

ON ANOTHER NOTE EVERYONE SHOULD READ EVEN IF YOU DON'T READ THE ABOVE:
If I start seeing more insults I'm going to start dishing some infractions or mineral deductions, or something. People are entitled to their OWN opinion, whether on here or any other thread. We should be mature, ALL OF US, to be able to debate and not throw trash talk into our arguments like three year olds. Come on, we're adults here and even if you're not man it up. If you're getting very heated about something just walk away and let some steam off before you let that rub into your post. I'm not just aiming that at you, Kuvasz, but for all people. We're all good forum members, let's just get along.

 

What are you two on about? I was referring to pancake and others who talk about self defence (how can a dead person defend themselves? I don't even see how that came in here) when the thread is about a dead person, a finished incident/attack, and the things that followed. Not what should be done during the attack (which is obviously trying to defend yourself - I never questioned that) but what should be done after the incident (suppressing the urge for revenge, etc.).

I never said anyone's opinion was worth less than mine. I said the people in this thread should be talking about the same thing, which is the aftermath of such an incident. What should be done in case of an attack should be discussed elsewhere.

 

Regardless the insults were there.

Anyway, i think Chef is using defense because once again, the article is very vague. You (as i do, too) see it as they killed it after the fact and people were safe. Chef thinks it could have been people were still not safe. Even if the man was dead.

And this could be true because they didn't specify how much later later was. The article is just too vague, so you can't really prove Chef wrong for defending what he believes is the case is what I'm saying.

 

The article doesn't specify the details of the incident. You can not say either way and I was arguing the other side.

I'm sorry but when you said I shouldn't post here anymore or that I can't comprehend the situation and that civilized and proper people would think your way, I found that to be kind of insulting, especially when you said you hope gforce would get killed. Also the thing about the brainless freaks etc.

If you didn't think less of anyones opinion there would be no reason to say those things.

Despite all of this, I think nothing ill of you kusvaz or the insults you said, I'm here to say we agree to disagree, shake hands and leave it at that. I will argue no further.

 

Ovie said the tiger was shot, and I highly doubt the staff strolls around with guns in their hands or that they'd shoot it in front of everyone, hence later is actually later (by the time they get the gun and get everyone out). Regardless of whether they did it to avoid further incidents, there would've been no incident if the rules were kept to or the fence out of the reach of visitors. To repeat myself: the rules are designed to avoid incidents, right? An incident happened. Conclusion: the rules were not kept to. Who didn't keep to the rules and thus made a mistake? A staff member. Who acted naturally and completely predictably? The tiger. Both are dead, and only the staff member's is justified, period.

As for the insults, firstly, I didn't get told off for the things in the smokers thread, so why here? Secondly, I never said any of the forum members were the people I targeted. In that post I was referring to the people Jon was talking about.

 

I'm cracking down on it here because it's about time someone did about all the insults. Directed at people or not, it's directed at people who believe a certain way which people here do and that's just as bad to say to someone you think people who think the same was they do are freaks instead of tell them you think they're a freak.

thios topic got its point across, both positions have been shown and now it's brought down to denial and misunderstanding of events. To avoid further conflict, locked.