Animals that attack

What do you think should be done with an animal that attacks and/or kills a human? Do you think it should be shot afterwards? Or tested for rabies?

In my opinion, if a human is interacting with a wild animal in it's own habitat, the human is fair game and the animal should NOT be harmed in any way for doing what wild animals do. Humans should not bring a tiger into their home and kill it if it bites them.

Seems humans have an over grown ego, thinking we're more important than any other animal.

Sure if it breaks into your home/property and is litterally about to kill you, you do what you have to do. But if the damage is already done, there's nothing you can do.

Killing it afterwards is like taking revenge, not defending yourself.

Any opinions?

i've had an old english sheepdog hanging off my a** while my best friend stood there laughing hysterically ...so i'm not that sympathetic really

*snickers* Sorry dude, that must've sucked.

i could have dealt with a suck this bugger used it's teeth

It depends. If the animal was provoked while in its habitat, then nothing should be done.

If it's coming into neighborhoods and cities and attacking people, that is an ENTIRELY different matter. I mean if we have laws that protect humans from dangerous humans why shouldn't we try to protect humans from dangerous animals?

No, we're not better than them... which is why we can kill them when necessary. Have you seen animals in the wild? A lot of them kinda have this tendency to kill other animals. Ya know, for food and stuff. It's not like carnivores go "Oh, that's another animal, I can't kill that, guess it's grass and leaves again." If we're animals as well then hell, I'll kill something if it's trying to kill me.

Not to mention I eat meat so if I would kill an animal that's lived in captivity, I would be a moron to not kill one that is likely to attack people.


Edit: To clarify, no I don't WANT any animals to be killed, but sometimes safety takes a priority over what we want.

Exac-atively

NO! Why should they? they have been here way before us it is us who have destroyed there planet there upset and they have every right to be.

Honestly, I don't think animals take revenge on other species. Even if a lion's cub gets crushed by the herd of buffalo it's preying on, it probably won't go looking for the buffalo that killed it's offspring. They move on and keep going with the remaining members of it's pride.

But yes, if it's actually attacking you, you defend yourself in anyway possible.

Only kill for food and protection. Not revenge.

Just my opinion though. Everytime humans track down and kill a bear that killed and ate a hiker, it makes me mad. It was the animal's instinct, and was probably defending her cubs.

So what if someone I know was attacked by a bear down the street from me and people went out to shoot that bear because it's dangerous? That's not revenge, if it was revenge it would be that the bear wasn't dangerous anymore but someone had to kill it anyway, just because.

In my opinion, trying to keep people safe by killing that bear IS killing for protection.
I don't see how that could be confused with revenge.

Oh, and read my post properly please.

I said if the human is in the animal's habitat, then NOTHING SHOULD BE DONE.

If it comes into a city and starts attacking people without reason, than something should probably be done. I wouldn't like to see the animal killed but oh well, I'd rather that than know people are being attacked and nothing is being done to protect them.

Don't switch my words around please.

I didn't, Okay? I understood your post.

Obviously not because you brought up a different issue that I already addressed and was not arguing against..

My opinion is this:

If a dog or cat (yes even small little domesticated cats can attack) savagely (as in they loose sanity and attack) attack a human, especially a child, in order to prevent another attack, it is a good idea to have the animal put down.

If, like what happened to someone I know, you get a slight nip from an animal, and the animal is not diseased (ie responsible owner, animal has all it's shots and such) it should not be put down. And in this case it was not.

I've known of 3 different bites where the person who was bit did not petition to have the animal put down. Once was our meter reader, and our dog bit him, and he admitted fault. He knew that he did something to provoke our dog, and his only stipulation was that we move our meter to where our dog couldn't get to it. Other wise, he was fine. The other was another dog of ours who bit my dad after he hit me in front of her. My dad deserved it. Dog lived long enough to get hit by a van in the street, but it was not put down. The other was the person I work with. She felt that the dog was not attacking, but got out of hand playing and she refused to let the family to put the dog down even though they offered.

As many such animals as possible should be gathered up, and brought into Washington DC, and let loose. What follows will be non-discrimanatory acts of violence, perpetrated on deserving self-serving usurpers of political power. Afterwards, the entire area should be declared a wild-life sanctuary....

If it's a domestic animal that attacked and didn't just bite, then maybe it should be put down. Not because it has turned into a bad animal, but because now it is around people and people tend to freak out when they're put in danger and next thing you know an entire breed is hated (ie; pit bulls).
You can't test an animal for rabies live it has to die to be tested for rabies (or so I've been told).
Even the nicest of domesticated animals still have some primal instinct and can turn.

In zoo situations, the animal should be put into an animal sanctuary and NOT a zoo, but it really should be released into the wild (if plausible).

In the wild, wtf were you doing f***ing with an animal in the wild? If it's attacking you and you kill it, it's self defense. But don't go looking to kill it after it's all done.