Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Tiger at S.F. zoo escapes, kills man

Tiger at S.F. zoo escapes, kills man (Page 2)
Thread Tools
wallinbl
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 03:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
That is not my claim... There is likely a balance between both that explains everything, as observationally speaking, most things known to us live in a balance. However, the dogmatic religious side generally swings in the favor of emotion far more so than reason, and vice versa for the staunch atheists.
That part was a joke. I thought that would be obvious.

Yes, I don't fault the cops. We have always favored our own species, and I would have likely done the same. I'm just saying that it isn't a given that human life is more valuable than animal life, philosophically speaking.
We seem content to put them in cages and use them for our entertainment. We have essentially collectively decided that they're not worth as much. As you'll note, you're not allowed to do those things with a human. Yes, some that live in academia will sit around and pontificate and all that, but pretty much everyone else will say that if the tiger is going to kill a human, the tiger should be killed. Run a poll if you'd like, but I'll bet you get 95+% in favor of human over tiger.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 03:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
It was probably sarcasm.

Having the human species taking precedence can be explained theologically or biologically by being a survival advantage. Either way, it's plain obvious.
Yes, that is what I meant when I said that we favor our own species, this is our biological instinct. However, when our own survival is not at stake, is human life really worth more, philosophically speaking?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 03:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by wallinbl View Post
That part was a joke. I thought that would be obvious.
Sorry, missed that!

We seem content to put them in cages and use them for our entertainment. We have essentially collectively decided that they're not worth as much. As you'll note, you're not allowed to do those things with a human. Yes, some that live in academia will sit around and pontificate and all that, but pretty much everyone else will say that if the tiger is going to kill a human, the tiger should be killed. Run a poll if you'd like, but I'll bet you get 95+% in favor of human over tiger.
I'm not claiming otherwise. Like I said, we tend to favor human life over animal life - this is our biological instinct. All I'm saying, again, to repeat myself, is that philosophically speaking it is not a given that human life is worth more than animal life. Whether 95% or 99.99% or even 100% of people would vote a particular way in a poll does not change this.
     
wallinbl
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 03:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Yes, that is what I meant when I said that we favor our own species, this is our biological instinct. However, when our own survival is not at stake, is human life really worth more, philosophically speaking?
You have to frame the discussion against something. Worth more in terms of what? In terms of survival of the planet, it's probably better if the tigers eat all of the humans. In terms of proliferation of the impala, it's probably better than the humans put the tigers in zoos.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 03:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by wallinbl View Post
You have to frame the discussion against something. Worth more in terms of what? In terms of survival of the planet, it's probably better if the tigers eat all of the humans. In terms of proliferation of the impala, it's probably better than the humans put the tigers in zoos.
That's a good question, and actually strengthens my point, since we all value things differently, and for most people this fluctuates. On many days, looking at all of the heinous **** that happens in the world, I might say that the survival of our planet is more important than the survival of our pitiful race. On other days, I might take a more optimistic pro-human approach. This is one of the central themes explored in many Sci-fi literature/media.

I remain agnostic about a lot of these things, I think it's good to keep an open mind to these things, and to the idea that it isn't an absolute given that human life is worth more than other forms of life, depending on what lens you use to examine the question. Obviously for me, a Christian lens is really not a lens I value, so using that argument with me doesn't accomplish much in the way of persuasion.
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 03:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
However, when our own survival is not at stake, is human life really worth more, philosophically speaking?
When I eat a cow my survival is not at stake. My gustatory pleasures are worth more than the life of that creature. Philosophically speaking.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 04:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
When I eat a cow my survival is not at stake. My gustatory pleasures are worth more than the life of that creature. Philosophically speaking.
Funny!
     
Rumor
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 04:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacosNerd View Post
Take the current issue, if human life was considered more precious, the cops that shot the animals would be arrested because they destroyed an endangered animal.
Give it some time. This did happen in SF after all.
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 04:47 PM
 
Yeah this is true, I expect that there will be some outcry over the destruction of the tiger even though it was getting ready to pounce on another person.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 05:23 PM
 
It was self defense. The Police were defending there own life. If wackos want to claim animal rights, fine. Along with rights come the responsibilty of respecting the life of others, including Human.
     
legacyb4
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Vancouver
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 27, 2007, 08:27 PM
 
I don't fault the cop either; he was doing his duty as required (forget the whole "where was the tranquilizer gun" debate).

The point being that the three idiots who did provoke an attack (in lieu of the dead one, his family) should be held liable for whatever penalty would be imposed for killing the tiger in cold blood. It's about time that responsibility be taken for actions done.
Macbook (Black) C2D/250GB/3GB | G5/1.6 250GBx2/2.0GB
Free Mobile Ringtone & Games Uploader | Flickr | Twitter
     
Tiresias
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Korea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2007, 03:22 AM
 
Check out this freaking amazing video of a tiger attack!



YouTube - Tiger attacks guy on elephant full video
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2007, 01:46 PM
 
Looks like the kid died a hero trying to save his friends from the tiger.msnbc
     
wallinbl
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2007, 02:04 PM
 
Brothers Paul Dhaliwal, 19, and Kulbir Dhaliwal, 23, were at San Francisco General Hospital with severe bite and claw wounds. Their names were provided by hospital and law enforcement sources who spoke on condition of anonymity because the family had not yet given permission to release their names.
So, the families had not given permission, but you as a reporter just had to go and dig it up just to be an asshole?
     
Person Man
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northwest Ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 28, 2007, 08:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by wallinbl View Post
So, the families had not given permission, but you as a reporter just had to go and dig it up just to be an asshole?
Seems to me that the families can go after the hospital for a HIPAA violation. The hospital can NOT claim they did not have any responsibility for their anonymous employee's actions.

Hospital gets fined, and if the employees ever get found out, then they get fired or worse, sued.

The honorable thing to do would be for the news media to censor themselves once they found out the family did not want that info released. For example, CNN finds out the names of the people, and publishes that info. As soon as they find out the family did not want that info released, they should have retracted the information. None of this, "their names are A & B, but the family doesn't want that information released" bullsh*t.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 12:40 AM
 
I don't have much to say about the story, but tigers are absolutely beautiful animals.

And they happen to make excellent mascots.



Geaux Tigers.
     
Cipher13
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 03:42 AM
 
Tigers are awesome.

Most humans are worthless.

Assuming the particular individuals involved were worthless assholes (and if they were taunting it, chances are they were), then the loss of the tiger is a far greater shame than the loss of the humans.
     
Rumor
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 03:45 AM
 
Sadly, it is looking like the zoo will be sued for neglect.

Police, fire logs in S.F. tiger mauling show scene of chaos, delay
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
pooka
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: type 13 planet
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 02:32 PM
 
Can't wait for the TV movie.

New, Improved and Legal in 50 States
     
keekeeree
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Moved from Ohio's first capital to its current capital
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 02:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by Rumor View Post
Sadly, it is looking like the zoo will be sued for neglect.

Police, fire logs in S.F. tiger mauling show scene of chaos, delay
From the story:

Just minutes later, the tiger was viciously biting and clawing one of its victims at a cafe...


Sorry...I know this is tragic but that's just too funny and should probably have been rewritten before published.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 03:32 PM
 
Had to stop for condiments.
I might go to Hell for that.
     
ajprice
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 05:12 PM
 
The second one needed more ketchup.

It'll be much easier if you just comply.
     
Jawbone54
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Louisiana
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 05:24 PM
 
On a serious note, shouldn't we expect an animal to escape from a zoo every few years? No matter what precautions people might take, we're dealing with dangerous, unpredictable animals; at some point, something is going to happen. This is a horrible tragedy, of course, but it's something that was going to eventually happen.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating the abolishment of zoos around the world. I love going to a good zoo and spending a few hours seeing animals that I would likely never get the chance to see in the wild.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 05:26 PM
 
One animal I've never seen in the wild is a unicorn. I would like to see one, I'm starting to think that they are simply a myth.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 29, 2007, 06:37 PM
 
I think I'm going out for some Mongolian BBQ.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:28 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,