Only a selfish human would do something like this. "Exotic" animals belong in their own environment, not middle of Ohio. This kind of stuff always ends in tragedy in one way or another.
I guess they better close the Columbus zoo. Sorry Jack Hannah.
This kind of stuff always ends in tragedy in one way or another.
Always? Really? Just because you only hear about these places on the news when something bad happens doesn't mean there is eventually going to be some sort of tragedy.
the real tragedy is that they shot 48 of the 50 animals, including 18 rare tigers. Trap and release in the wild, transport to a zoo, or to a protected conservatory.
There is no need to shoot these animals, they did nothing wrong.
There is no need to shoot these animals
And your credentials are? Because the experts all seem to disagree with you.
Mmm - the only one to blame for the fact that these animals were shot is the d*uchebag who let them out of their cages. The police had the responsibility to protect the public and there were almost 50 of these very dangerous animals running loose at night, in the rain. They did the right thing. People's safety comes before the animals. Period.
Private Collections of animals such as Bengal Tigers should not be allowed. Zoos and conservatories serve a purpose, this BS served no purpose what so ever.
This guy had 18 Bengals for Gods sakes, WTF! They are endangered!
As for shooting them, I think we have to put ourselves into the shoes of that sheriff. Yes their were probably better options , but how many of us would not have reacted in the same way if 50 Tigers, Lions and Bears were let go in our neighborhoods!
Unbalanced Gun nut with his private collection of Deadly predators, what need for regulation was there!
A few yrs ago there was a Federal Bill that was on the table to prohibit the importing of these types of animals. Unfortunately the very people who profit from this trade screamed loud enough to lawmakers to have the Bill taken out of consideration. I wonder where these people are now???? We should have used their azzes in Ohio as bait for these creatures. So pathetic that these animals had to lose their life over one mans selfishness.
How sad that there were 18 tigers killed. There are only about 2000 left in the world.
It's a shame!
The main question to be asking is why didn't officials tranquilize the animals? The animals didn't hurt anyone and it would be more humane to treat them with dignity instead of shooting them in cold blood. Maybe the people involved in shooting the animals should face criminal charges of animal cruelty.
Undomesticated animals need special care, not the least of which is a proper diet. Did this guy buy several cows each week to feed his tigers? Also, just being in captivity is stressful for these creatures, never mind not having any sort of quality of life.
I'm not fond of zoos either, but at least they've been trained and have the facilities to care for exotic animals.
ceash lot of difference between a properly run zoo and some farmer with exotic animals. Sure didn't turn out well for the animals this time did it.
A perfect example of why the Tea Party is delusional about having "less government". When they find a solution for having less morons, we'll be able to have less government regulation.
They did try to tranquilize at least a few. But tranquilizing an animal in real life is not like the movies where they shoot the animal and it goes down in the next heartbeat. The drug has to get into the system; 10 minutes or so. In that time, you have a frightened animal that can do significant damage. It is a shame that this man was permitted to keep these rare and endangered animals with no regulations in place. According to the sheriff, the sun was going down and it was raining. Can you just imagine what might have happened with all these predators loose and quite possibly hungry? People and their pets might have been on the menu.
Ohio's governor needs to get that law back on the books. This should not have happened. With the complaints received in the past, these animals might have been seized and placed in facilities with the capability of proper care.
Very lame pole. People should be able to house any animal they can properly care for that they can house in a method safe to the general public.
A stupid person that should not been allowed to much less breath was allowed to own these animals that he obviously could not properly care for. (Hello, he was behind bars and convicted of animal cruelty.)
This should not be used as some HSUS method of taking more rights from the people.
Nice loaded question MSNBC. Why do we always have to have more & more restrictions placed on our freedoms because one person SCREWS up? I hated that crap in school, and won't tolerate it as an adult. They keep this &h!t up and we'll all end up being criminals! As long as it isn't endangering or infringing on another, not a problem. If it does, then restitution needs to be made.
AG999 - Since I live in central Ohio, I've had to hear every possible update imaginable. According to a plethora of reports, he had family next door who raised feed cattle, so when they had any die, he invariably had enough food available for the critters. Since they're being extraordinarily vague about his cause of death, and the fact that Ohio has a lousy record of LE screwing up crime scenes, I believe they'll feed us something that will be a half truth at best and cover up the rest.
BTW - Big thumbs up on your avatar. ~_0
I can hardly stand it. This whole situation is revolting.
Definitely no! Why would you want to keep any exotic animals in captivity? Is it to satisfy some childhood depravity or to show off to your friends and neighbors? Poor man, he was obviously troubled by something deep inside. Shame, that no one saw the signs in time to prevent this tragedy.
I would add to this story the simple fact that these privately-owned animals are of no value to reputable captive-breeding programs. Lions and tigers especially that are recovered from these programs are usually euthanized. The issue is that when zoos breed animals in captivity, they use careful exchange programs that use long past histories and DNA analysis to make sure that they are strengthening the breed and not "institutionalizing" some breeding defect that will do more harm than good. This makes these animals from private breeders worse than worthless. That's a shame!
BTW, I own two parrots (an African Grey and a Conure.) Every time the subject of exotic animnals comes up, people always seem to want to ban the ownership of birds as well. Mine were captive-bred and we have owned them since they were hatched. They do not endanger wild populations, do not pose a danger to the environment if they escape, and are great companions.
If a person abides by the laws and regulations of his or her country, it is not just to take from them their passion. This man is an example of what can happen without regulation, but surely Laurie Marker should not be forced to part from the orphaned cheetah which she raised from its infancy (now deceased from natural causes), especially as she is a career conservationist, and not merely a hobbyist.
Just as some responsible gun owners accept the necessity of regulation, so too are there people who care for the welfare of a species and accept the need for strict regulation that such welfare demands.
It should be noted that the Florida police do not seem to find a reason to protect the Florida public - and exterminate the boas, pythons and monitor lizards.
fgh: we invaded their homes, not the reverse. The animals have every right to defend themselves and their habitat. Unfortunately, they are not succeeding.
To the poster that said the animals (that were shot) weren't doing anything and didn't hurt anyone, the reports here (in Columbus) were that there was a wolf and a diseased (Herpes B) monkey still loose. Then there was a report that one of the big cats had been gnawing on the owner's body and the monkey was no longer considered missing because they found bits and pieces of it in the house. These animals were dangerous before they even left the property.
Should humans be allowed to own wild animals?
NO NO and no...
If we, humans, had any semblance of decency (even divine remembrance..ie. Noah's Ark), a greater story would have been the preservation of each animal's life, exotic or not. Shoot to kill is the easy way out; but, that is this generation...nothing but weak.
#2 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:26 PM EDTamen, those poor animals did nothing wrong and did not deserve to be shot to death
Again, the only one to blame for the fact that these animals were shot is the irresponsible piece of crap that let them out of their cages in the first place. The police were doing their jobs under very difficult circumstance, including the fact that it was dark and raining when the situation was first brought to their attention. Their first responsibility is the safety of the public - NOT the safety of the animals.
The premise here is that everything here has a right to be on the earth.
And if one of these tigers had taken down some kids on their way back from the mall, would they still have a right to be in suburban America? They were shot because they were a danger. Not their fault, but they had to be dealt with nonetheless.
The other person to blame in this case, besides the owner, is Ohio's governor. He let the exotic animal ownership law lapse in April. The local authorities were aware of the animals, according to the article, and the owner was warned in the past about letting them loose. If the law had been in place, the authorities could have seized the animals and, hopefully, transferred them to sanctuaries. The law could have given protection to both animals and humans.
I wonder where someone recently out of prison would get the money to buy and feed all these animals. I didn't see an answer to that in the article.
This governor is a disgrace to Ohio and to humanity. He should be held accountable for this senseless slaughter that could have been avoided if he had been carrying out the responsibilites of his office. If a child had been killed, I imagine there would be an outcry for his resignation. Unfortunately the victims here have no advocates to avenge their deaths and prior mistreatment. One can only imagine the abuse. if nothing else, he should pay at the pollin booths next time he is up for re-election.
And when a Florida boa, python or monitor lizard 'take some kids down from the mall' which will eventually happen, will anything be done?
There are special rifles that shoot tranquilizing darts. Must be at least 10 zoos nearby with experts in this procedure.
#3 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:28 PM EDTThey were unable to tranquilize due to many factors, including the fact that it was dark and animal hit with a tranquilizer dart would run away & be difficult to find. Jack Hanna was brought in as well as many other animal experts and they all agreed that putting the animals down was, unfortunately, the best solution. Very sad situation, and hopefully this will result in better laws!!!
I agree with you. This was horrible. Can't these Ohio hillbillies use their brains more and use darts to help capture the animals. This is ridicous.
I live 2 miles from this farm. How are you going to get enough people, cages, and tranquilizer guns to sedate 48 animals. If there was a way to do it, I would support it. I could not leave my house last night because of the number of animals that were not accounted for. I think you should think twice about stereotyping the people in this community. It took courage for the Sheriff to make the decision to keep the animals from leaving the property. What would you have said about the "hillbillies" if children were killed by the animals because the Sheriff was trying to capture all of them.
You live 2 miles away and haven't been picketing your governor to extend the emergency order of the previous one that was keeping you safe?
Why not?
What speaks volumes is the fact that so many people keep ignoring the fact that the ONLY person responsible for the deaths of these animals is the one who let them out of their cages so that they could potentially harm or kill innocent people.
Well Beyond Annoyed I'll clear it up for you if you're confused .. the point would be that law enforcement's charge is to protect us (the humans), so as a result of one persons poor choice the animals had to be killed. What speaks volumes is your inability to understand that.
Try finding tranquilized animal in dark woods lately. They don't always drop neatly at your feet. First rule of owning an animal is to care for and train them not let 300 pound cats loose in a residential area. These animals in captivity have no hunting skills and will take down the easiest prey they encounter, like the kid going to school.
Actually, Beyond Annoyed, 6 were saved. Not a lot, but not none.
So, "ceash", says. Voting No would end all ability to save endangered species!
Answer this one question for me. How long have we "humans" survived without the Dinosaurs?
The endagered species act, EPA, peta and all others like groups should move to Russia!
Cindy.....sorry but not all of who live in Ohio are hillbillies. I take offense to your comment.
This man should've never been allowed to own these animals.....Period.
Really? So why doesn't the Florida law enforcement have a charge to protect?
sorry but not all of who live in Ohio are hillbillies
Actually, none of them are, since Ohio is actually rather flat. I think Cindy meant "rednecks."
Only an individual should be barred from owning an exotic animal. Groups, rescue and zoos for example are not reliant on one individual to maintain and care for the animals. A Group effort to preserve animals, especially those declining in the wild, is a noble effort. Apparently in this case tranquilizing darts were not effective in rounding-up these animals. Unfortunately the safety of humans in a 'settled' area outweighs the life of an animal.
#4 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:45 PM EDTI agree they could of used darts to take them down instead of shoot to kill. Why dont we just go around shooting one another. They have right just like we do. Just they cant speak for themselves.
#5 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:47 PM EDTWhy dont we just go around shooting one another.
If a person represents a deadly threat to other individuals they can be, and often are, shot by the police also. No different than what happened here.
The only human that was injured was the man who took his own life. There is zero evidence any of these animals attacked anyone, were aggressive towards anyone, represented a threat to anyone, or heck even came into contact with anyone. It was a quick way out plain and simple...."kill em they are just animals."
Mmm - and the REASON why they didn't hurt anyone was because they were shot before they could do so. What is so difficult ot understand?
... they just can't speak for themselves .. there is zero evidence any of these animals attacked anyone.. really???
We get that animals can't speak for themselves otherwise we would have text messaged them to return peacefully to their cages and asked them what happened to the nutjob that let them loose.
Dangerous animals are loose where people could get hurt and you want to wait for evidence that they might.. how about animals get hungry every so often?
Lordy use some common sense here people. Of course it's a shame that these animals had to be killed, but human life was the priority. And law enforcement everywhere would like a ban on owning exotic animals. But this guy owned them, let them go knowing the consequences. Thank god for the officers that protected the community.
Killing them all seems like, well, overkill. What danger, I ask, would a camel or a giraffe present? But people are forgetting here that not only human lives might have been risked, but there are lots of farms with livestock that would have been in peril, too. Such a shame.
While you're thanking god for the officers, where was she when the nutjob was turning all the critters loose? Why didn't god do something to protect the animals?
It does take 10 or so minutes for a tranquilizer to take effect. In the meantime, you have a stressed animal that has been stuck with a dart and that probably hurts at least a bit (I've never been shot with a tranquilizer dart, so I can't say for sure how much it hurts). So now the animal is stressed, quite likely frightened and angry. They had four (four, count them) tranquilizer rifles, it was getting dark and it was raining. What if you were coming back from the mall and unaware of these animals being loose? You might have been attacked. Sad as it is, the sheriff was in the right for protecting human life.
I wouldn't say there was no evidence these animals were going to hurt someone. I heard reports that the guy who shot himself was then chewed on by a big cat, and that the missing monkey was found - or at least part of it was (I am guessing the rest of it was in the belly of a cat).
the police have no training in managing wild animals. Experts might have been able to tranquilize and save them, but there were not enough available. This was a LOT of animals.
The animals are the ones that paid the price, through no fault of their own. So sad.
#6 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 3:57 PM EDTand having Wayne Pacelle of Humane Society of the US speaking out on their behalf is a joke. he is the same person who has declared (an unrepentant) Michael Vick 'rehabilitated' solely because said convicted dog-torturer and disgusting human being donated a large amount of money to HSUS (and thus Wayne Pacelle's retirement fund).
Other animal advocate groups exist that are much more credible, and also need support.
The problem with (and brilliance of) HSUS is that many people wrongly believe that they are affiliated with their 'local' humane society because of the words 'humane society' in their name. I just wish more was done to make the distinction to people. I think a lot of their supporters/donators would stop donating if they realized HSUS exists solely to lobby for laws that make it illegal to own and breed ANY animal, dogs and cats included.
I am just frustrated that the media keeps quoting H$U$ as if they are truly experts on animal care. They must really hate animals if they don't want anybody to be able to enjoy having animals in their lives. It's like asking somebody who hates babies about the best way to take care of a child.
Additionally, our court system allows litigants to harrass anyone they like for any reason so I imagine he was probably a little tired of paying attorney fees and dealing with the legal stonewalling of animal rights groups. It's ridiculous. We need reform in our court system and smaller government.
#8 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:07 PM EDTSo you think this convicted felon should have been allowed to keep lions, tigers, bears and wolves on his property?
Guess you'd also argue for his right to own assault weapons?
Lack of appropriate laws was the problem. A smaller government would make the situation even worse. Some people are nuts and can't be trusted, which is probably the source of all laws in mankind's history.
If there were a lot less stupidity, criminality, exploitation, etc we could have less laws and regulation. This is a prime example. You should know that having lions, tigers, and bears is bad. Stupidity makes us have a laws saying you can't. The same thing goes for say enviromental laws. If @ssholes didn't pollute we would not need a EPA. I know a guy who still dumps his used motor oil in the creek behind his house. Look at all the bank regulations that have been removed in the last 25 years. Now look at what the too big to fail banks did with all that freedom.
IT was near dark, storming, on the edge of town and smack next to the interstate- what would all you boo-hooing brainiacs have done? Darts LOL
#9 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:11 PM EDTDarts, cages, fencing, non-fatal traps, sand bag shot, stun gun, call up any one fo the 100's of Croc Hunter reincarnations on Animal Planet. Africans wrangle wild animals into traps everyday using nothing more than bed sheets. These are ideas that us "braniacs," or should I say, decent people, come up with. Better than "just shoot 'em" which takes no brain power at all.
And exactly how long do you think it would have taken to gather all of the man power and supplies you are suggesting? Zanesville is an hour from Columbus- so an hour travel time, plus let's say an hour to scramble the equipment and personnel. Two hours. And how many lions, bears, tigers, wolves would have made their way into someone's back yard in the meantime? The article states that one of the lions had already killed and eaten a monkey. Do you think that lion- or any of the other big cats, bears, wolves, etc- wouldn't have killed and eaten a child it came across in the two hours they were allowed to roam the area?
I am a huge supporter of animal rights, but have some common sense.
You know mmm - you're not such a brainiac yourself, as your stupid comments clearly show. And it is very easy to be such a hero as you type on your PC in your mother's dark basement.
Nets. Why didn't they just use nets? And sticks. Sticks and nets would have been just fine. And treats. Like dog biscuits. Biscuits, sticks and nets would have been just fine. And flashlights since it was dark. Flashlights, biscuits, sticks and nets.
Yep, that woulda been just fine.
Well guys even Jungle Jack disagrees with you. Public saftey comes first.
Why wasn't your governor mindful of "Public Safety" if it comes first, when he let the law against holding animals like this in captivity expire?
jdillydawg - Are you for real??? Nets and sticks. How would you like to be approached by a 300 pound lion or tiger in the dark on a rainy night and the only things you have available to protect yourself is a net and a stick. One - a net in a wooded area would be useless and I'm sure having a stick to protect yourself would make you feel real secure. Get a life.
Our governor here in Ohio is a big fail on many levels. I am not going to lie. I didn't vote for him, and I am not convinced he was legally elected. But it is what it is. We will vote him out as soon as we can.
MmmMmmBeer, maybe they should have just stood there with a few cans of tuna and say, "here kitty, kitty, kitty...". I'm sure that would have worked. /s
Don't like your gov, then vote him out. I am certain that all laws were followed in his/her election, they only didn't agree with your views.
We will be soon doing the same with the President.
I think that if folks want to keep such animals, they should first prove they have the means to properly care for them and the means to properly protect the public from harm in the event of an escape or an unauthorized entry into their property. This would mean both that they have adequate space for housing the animals properly, with plenty of room to roam, adequate staff to care for and control them, and money to provide for the animals' needs as well as appropriate security to protect the public. Keeping such animals carries a huge responsibility, and should not be allowed to happen merely to satisfy someone's uneducated and irresponsible romantic whim, or to feed someone's paranoia or misguided notion that such animals will either protect them or make them seem tough. It someone really loves these animals, they should take the proper steps to ensure thier care and welfare.
#10 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:12 PM EDTNo, folks should not be allowed to keep these animals when something else becomes a greater public concern. And at this time, a greater public concern does exist. It is greater because of the incredulity of the high numbers. That is, shelters killing thousands of dogs and cats, and some other unfortunate creatures - every week. Get a grip on that problem - then discuss the ownership of everything else.
Your tax dollars hard at work verifying whether or not people are qualified to keep exotic animals...
Your tax dollars at work controlling owners of wild animals? What about your tax dollars at work after there are wild animals on the loose, possibly killing people, causing car accidents. eating livestock, utilizing law enforcement ,at great expense, to capture or kill, and most of all brutality against innocent and rare species. My mother always said "A stitch in time saves nine." EMPLOYING people to prevent such disasters is far more prudent than cleaning up such tragedies.
I would rather have my tax dollars spent on preventing individuals from having exotic animals instead of having the tax dollars spent on killing exotic animals roaming the streets
I don't think it should involve tax dollars. People should need permits to house these types of animals. Its probably harder to get an extension on my house where I live than it is for me to go to Ohio and by a ferocious tiger. The proper gov't agencies should be able to pick & choose who qualifies to care for such animals. All of this should come out of the person's pocket. If they have the money to care for these animals; then they should have the money to afford any permits required and the fees that come along with them.
It should be set up the same way the Animal Welfare Act protects the lab animals. Housing requirements, feeding requirements, staff requirements.. I mean even down to the dimensions of the enclosures, the amount of light and darkness each animal receives, the type of food they eat, the number of staff members that are needed, the qualifications of each staff member, ventilation requirements, etc.. this list could go on forever.
Liz if people have permits, who do you think enforce those permits? The permit fairies? Who do you think pays the permit fairies? What pays the salaries of the "proper gov't agencies", along with all the expenses incurred to be able to pick and choose who qualifies, and then to enforce the rules???? How on earth would you set up any kind of fee schedule to cover it without taxes?
Why should any government agency be giving permits to anyone to own these animals. Of course, provisions should be made for owners of exotic animals prior to implementing new policies, if it can be shown that such owners were responsible.
No government needs to issue permits until the various municipal governments find a solution to the nations shelter problem. Pet shops should be shut down; breeders should be banned - for now.
Yes, they should be.
Why should any government agency be giving permits to anyone to own these animals. Of course, provisions should be made for owners of exotic animals prior to implementing new policies, if it can be shown that such owners were responsible.
No government needs to issue permits until the various municipal governments find a solution to the nations shelter problem. Pet shops should be shut down; breeders should be banned - for now.
Yes, they should be.
If Noah could go to such great lengths to conserve all animal life, why not now (today)? All LIFE matters...plant, human, and animal.
#11 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:14 PM EDTAnimals were different then. They weren't exposed to the violent video games of today, or the billboards with sexy ads. Peer pressure was lower then, a tiger could just be a tiger and didn't have to worry about what others thought if he ate a caveman.
Yes, today's animals are far different. Noah had it easy.
Roshin I know they hunt mankillers in India. What do you think these would have become in a day or two with no hunting skills? You are free to chase them in the dark, in the woods and in the rain with your net next time.
I have one of the jerks who holds wild animals, hawks, owls, rattlers directly in my adjoining back yard. I also have grand kids and small dogs. What happens to my family and pets when this idiot makes a mistake and an animals is released? I can only imagine. I have complained to the local boro council and authorities with not even a flinch of attention. So , what am I supposed to do? Oh, by the way did I say the do gooders want my guns !
#12 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:16 PM EDTGuns kill more people than animals, so outlaw the ownership of them.
Well, that's your logic.
You're more likely to be harmed in a convenience store. By a gun.
Grow up.
Hahaha exactly my sentiment. The exact same argument that people should not keep "Exotic Animals" whatever that means albeit a lion, and a bear probably belong on the list, can be applied to guns which for some time have been generally accepted and for good reason as an inalienable right. I am not so quick to jump on the BANWAGON.
BANWAGON! I get it. A play on deodorant. Clean up your act kinda thing, huh?
Exotic animal any animal not native to the area. So all but the bear and the wolves are exotic. Therefore not only would they be a danger to the people but to the native wildlife of the area.
The hawks and owls I wouldn't worry about as much as the venomous snakes. You should definitely not be allowed to have them as pets in residential neighborhoods.
In general in the United States, people do not take care of their domestic animals let alone wild ones.. They should be in the wild, or at the least in a Zoo. A run of the mill joe citizen should not be allowed to own such animals.. Imagine living your own life in a cage, would you not run at the first chance?? Of course you would !!
#13 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:22 PM EDT"A run of the mill joe citizen"??
aren't most of them unemployed? This guy was no average citizen. 100 guns? I don't think the average citizen has the money for a farm, 18 bengal tigers, and 100 guns. They are lucky to own a house and a car and have a job. And someone had to be taking care of them for a year while he was in jail. If I, average citizen, went to jail for a year I wouldn't have a home left when I got out, let alone 50 exotic pets. Sorry, he's above average. There are a lot of hole's in this story.
Exotic animals belong in the wild. Private ownership (excluding rescue sanctuaries) should be outlawed period. Owning exotic animals cannot be considered a "hobby". That is ridiculous. The conditions that these poor animals are brought to these auctions or other markets are horrible. Allowing ownership of these animals only reinforces this practice. Outlawing ownership won't get rid of this practice altogether, but it is a good place to start.
#14 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:28 PM EDTThis is a tragic story and I'm sure there are a lot of knee jerk reactions going on, especially with photo's of animals lying dead. I was very aggrevated when this story first aired but what would I have done if one of these animals walked onto my property where my wife and daughter lived? It's a very hard decision to make and I'm sure those that had to pull the trigger feel the effects just as much as we do. I'm not going to go all religious but I will say that I'm I praying for those that had to make the decisions to pull the trigger, it couldn't of been easy, even with an order to shoot.
#15 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:35 PM EDTAnimal-welfare activists wanted the bear's owner, Sam Mazzola, charged with reckless homicide, but Kendra's death was ruled a workplace accident. The bear was later euthanized.
Mazzola was found dead in July, face-down on a water bed and restrained with handcuffs and chains, in his Columbia Station home. Authorities said he apparently choked on a sex toy.
What the heck does that have to do with exotic animalsin captivity??
#16 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:56 PM EDTI seriously doubt any of these animals were really "wild". My bet is they were all captive bred. Properly housed and cared for, it should be ok for people to own them. That being said, ownership should be carefully regulated and controlled. Also private breeding should be regulated and controlled. It is still easy to own and breed big cats for the cute cub photos. (FOLKS don't feed that industry by having your or your kids photos taken with cubs) Once the cub reaches a few months old, it is no longer allowed to interact with the public and becomes worthless. Those animals often wind up in private ownership as zoos will not take them and rescues already have their hands full
#17 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 5:01 PM EDTSorry, you're wrong. You can't breed the wild out of wild animals. They are not "domesticated" just by being raised around humans. There are a lot of kooks out there that think, for instance, that a raccoon would make a good pet — until it shreds their face with its claws. People need to have respect for the wildness in wild animals. We need to preserve their habitats so they can live according to their nature. That said, I'm ashamed of the police in Zanesville for killing all these beautiful creatures. There HAD to be some other course to take. Sounds like the sheriff and his deputies got themselves all worked up into a wild animal safari frenzy. What a shame. And it besmirches the good people of Ohio, who by and large are smart enough to know what happened today is wrong, and will hopefully rid themselves of these overreactive law enforcement agents.
When the animal experts say that there was no other course to take then I would have to say that they know that much better than you or I. I really wish it could have been different and I grieve for every one of those animals that had to be sacrificed after the owner committed them to a death sentence by opening the cages allowing them to escape. You said it yourself, you can't breed the wild out of wild animals and when there are so many roaming free you do what you have to do. No one but the owner who released them is responsible for the death of all those beautiful animals.
wesleyan - the sheriff's dept did NOT work itself into a frenzy. They had no tranquilizers in their squad cars, and only about 20 available to them at the station. Even if they did manage to tranquilize the animals, it takes 3 - 8 minutes for them to go down, and after being shot they would have bolted in all directions. This is according to a live interview with the sheriff, and a live interview with Jack Hannah this morning. It was 5pm and getting dark fast, the men were devastated having to kill them, also according to Jack Hannah who was a witness.
I love how people who know nothing about exotic ownership have such strong opinions and seem to know it all. And seem to want to "ban everything" because it doesn't affect them.
Remember when they did that with Alcohol?
And that stuff kills more people every year than this. By far.
Keep your nose in your own business. It's already against the law to do what this guy did. How much more government regulation do we need for cryin' out loud?
#18 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 5:09 PM EDTActually, I think because he was in Ohio, it wasn't against the law. The law had lapsed.
And if banning alcohol keeps it out of the paws of those rowdy tigers and bears, then maybe we need to revisit that.
You can't keep alcohol out of the paws of bears. Apples and the like often ferment naturally, and bears have been known to go out of their way to eat them. They then behave pretty much like drunk humans, but at least they don't have cars.
The animals that were shot and killed by the sheriff department and local police officers in Zanesville, Ohio, was a threat to the local community and travelers on I 70 nearby. Angela Mitchell on MSNBC made a very bizarre statement while interviewing zoologist Jack Hanna questioning the reasoning the sheriff department shot and killed these animals by saying she guess that they did the right thing. This is why the news media is a danger to public safety. When a journalist start guessing what is good for public safety with dangerous animals on the loose and could have attacked school kids going to school motorist who might stop on the nearby interstate and Zanesville citizens in their own homes. She questions the police. The action of the local sheriff department . This should tell every American citizen. Why the national news media is clearly out of sync with the citizenry of our nation. They can no longer be trusted with the public safety of our nation. Sensationalism is controlling the news media, not the facts of journalism. The sheriff department in Zanesville, Ohio should be commended for their quick actions and quick decision of public safety of the Zanesville community. These officers are clearly true, heroes to risk their lives by going into one of the deadliest situations that any human being could face to stop these deadly animals before more serious and deadly situation could have happen.
#19 - Wed Oct 19, 2011 5:16 PM EDTYou scare me more than the animals, absolutely no offence intended. I sincerely mean that regarding both statements.
Thank You
Agreed sghost. It is, however, a shame that a disturbed human being should have control of these creatures. To bring his own demise is his choice. To cause the deaths of others (animals who depended upon his care) is another. He is to be condemned as a selfish human being who cared little but for himself. I am not so important as to pass judgement in most cases, but this is pretty clear. Yet, if some odd evidence were to prove my opinion wrong, I will ask forgiveness. Best to all. And thanks to the authorities who sought protection for local life.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
it almost always ends in tragedy for the owners the animals or both