06 Aug 11
Originally posted by trev33Because if preventive measures fail (as they apparently did in this case), a warning shot might be necessary to drive the bear away; and yes, in the rare event that it comes to life or death, it is also considered acceptable to shoot the bear before it kills you. However, if you kill a polar bear without being in severe danger, you'll be in trouble.
and why is that?
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19047
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by Nordlysmaybe they should be looking into why the polar bear felt the need to attack. more importantly they should question the need for students to enter the polar bears habitat, i'm sorry but if you're going to ender a potentially dangerous environment voluntarily you should attempt the consequences if things go wrong. it's not the polar bears fault it felt either threatened or hungry and attacked. they should be punished just as heavily as a poacher who had killed the bear.
Because if preventive measures fail (as they apparently did in this case), a warning shot might be necessary to drive the bear away; and yes, in the rare event that it comes to life or death, it is also considered acceptable to shoot the bear before it kills you. However, if you kill a polar bear without being in severe danger, you'll be in trouble.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by trev33you're not making much sense. punish who? the students? for getting eaten? if the polar bear seeing humans as its prey isn't anybody's fault, how can getting eaten be?
maybe they should be looking into why the polar bear felt the need to attack. more importantly they should question the need for students to enter the polar bears habitat, i'm sorry but if you're going to ender a potentially dangerous environment voluntarily you should attempt the consequences if things go wrong. it's not the polar bears fault it felt either ...[text shortened]... y and attacked. they should be punished just as heavily as a poacher who had killed the bear.
or are you saying the students were RIGHT to ignore warnings? that they SHOULDN'T protect themselves but instead serve themselves as dinner willingly? and that the act of failing to getting eaten without fighting back should be punished?
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19047
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by wormwoodyes, punish the students for getting eaten, that's exactly what i said. jesus.
you're not making much sense. punish who? the students? for getting eaten? if the polar bear seeing humans as its prey isn't anybody's fault, how can getting eaten be?
or are you saying the students were RIGHT to ignore warnings? that they SHOULDN'T protect themselves but instead serve themselves as dinner willingly? and that the act of failing to getting eaten without fighting back should be punished?
they knew (or should have known) the risks going into the area, self defense or for the lulz the fact is they killed a member of a species that is in decline, bordering on becoming officially 'endangered'.
if you're going to throw yourself into a lions den accept the consequences when things go wrong. and no i'm not saying they should've allowed themselves to be eaten, i'm saying they should be punished for killing the polar bear. i'd expect the same if i had shot the bear in self defense...
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by trev33The people arguing that the bear should not have been killed are tools or dumbasses not aware of the facts. It could have killed everyone there.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14415592
humans have been killing animals and destroying their habitat for centuries, a polar bear kills one human and they kill it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8687292/Norway-polar-bear-attack-failings-that-left-Horatio-Chapple-at-bears-mercy.html
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19047
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by kopatovi'm not arguing that the bear shouldn't have been killed, i'm saying that the students knew the risks going into the area and who ever killed the bear should be prosecuted in the same manner a poacher would. no one forced these kids to ender a dangerous animals habitat, they should be facing the consequences when things went wrong.
The people arguing that the bear should not have been killed are tools or dumbasses not aware of the facts. It could have killed everyone there.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8687292/Norway-polar-bear-attack-failings-that-left-Horatio-Chapple-at-bears-mercy.html
a polar bear, one of about 20k on the planet was killed because these kids wanted to explore. i'd have preferred for them all to have died and the bear to be free but as it is someone needs to be accountable for the death of the polar bear.
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by trev33You need your head examined at the very least if you are still spouting BS after reading that article. THE DAMN BEAR KILLED ONE STUDENT, SERIOUSLY INJURED OTHERS AND THERE WAS NO TURNING BACK.
i'm not arguing that the bear shouldn't have been killed, i'm saying that the students knew the risks going into the area and who ever killed the bear should be prosecuted in the same manner a poacher would. no one forced these kids to ender a dangerous animals habitat, they should be facing the consequences when things went wrong.
a polar bear, one of ab ...[text shortened]... ear to be free but as it is someone needs to be accountable for the death of the polar bear.
GET THIS, THERE WAS NO TURNING BACK. LEAVE THAT TREE-HUGGING BS ASIDE. A 39-STONE BEAST JUST KILLED A HUMAN BEING AND SERIOUSLY INJURED OTHERS.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19047
07 Aug 11
Originally posted by kopatovabout 7 billion people on earth, around 20 thousand polar bears.
You need your head examined at the very least if you are still spouting BS after reading that article. THE DAMN BEAR KILLED ONE STUDENT, SERIOUSLY INJURED OTHERS AND THERE WAS NO TURNING BACK.
GET THIS, THERE WAS NO TURNING BACK. LEAVE THAT TREE-HUGGING BS ASIDE. A 39-STONE BEAST JUST KILLED A HUMAN BEING AND SERIOUSLY INJURED OTHERS.
i really don't care about the people killed, they knew the risks when entering the area, it's not the bears fault man thinks he can do whatever he wants.
look at it this way, you hear a noise in your home and go and see whats going on, you discover that you're being robbed. you get angry and attack the intruder, who in turn ends up killing you 'in self defense'. what should happen to the person who just killed you?