From Idaho Preschooler Saved From Mountain Lion’s Jaws By Family, four-year-old girl was rescued by her family from a mountain lion attack during their family reunion camping in eastern Idaho yesterday. She was dragged off by the lion while she was napping in her tent and got minor injuries. The authority expressed appreciation and admiration to her mother and the rest of her family for their bravery. The mountain lion was later tracked down and killed by wildlife officers.
_______________________________________
My Yes/No question is:
Is it ok to kill animals to save a human life?
My answer is:
Yes, but in only inevitable circumstances.
Recently we have seen numbers of similar cases which resulted in the same consequences: the death of animals for the lives of people. If you remember Harambe, the gorilla in Cincinnati zoo that got shot by the a zoo keeper in order to save the boy who had fallen into the zoo enclosure. The incident created a very controversial issue whether or not the zookeeper should kill Harambe with a real gun. This controversy divided people into two sides. Some netizens support the idea of killing the gorilla since it had possibility to harm the boy, while the other think that the zookeeper can just shoot him with a tranquilizer. The zookeeper later gave explanation to support his decision that the drug would take too much time to immobilize him so he did what he could to stop the gorilla. I really feel terrible when I first saw the news. And I don't feel any better when I see this article.
Actually both perspectives are totally make sense to me. I really sympathize Harambe, the mountain lion and also other animals that got killed because of human's recklessness. However, when it comes to the point you need to take an action from the options you have; between killing the animal or killing the kids by just standing there and watch it. I'm not sure if his action was a total failure. I'm not supporting my idea by saying that human lives are more important. Instead, I feel like we are more equal. I think another important factor to be considered that if there's any sign of danger meaning to harm any living being, whether it's between human and human or human and animal, the victim should be protected.
This issue also leads me into thinking of another controversial topics: or should the zoo be banned? or shouldn't we invade animal habitats just for entertainment? I think if we can find the right answer to solve these two problems, then we can have fewer painful consequences just like the ones we are having these days. What do you think?
___________
Reference
Zuckerman, L. Idaho Preschooler Saved From Mountain Lion’s Jaws By Family. (August 15, 2016). The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/idaho-mountain-lion-attack_us_57b24ccce4b0863b02846ee0?section=&
Ellis, R&Rose, R.Cincinnati zoo kills gorilla to save child who slipped into enclosure. (May 29, 2016). CNN. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/28/us/zoo-kills-gorilla/
Your zoo example makes me think of a more severe case. It makes me think of how industrialization affects the well-being of livestocks. Human population skyrocketed after the cotton gin and modern agriculture were made. Acquiring food, and clothing became much more easier that people have excessive resources to have more children. To catch up with the exponentially growing population, the process of raising domesticated animals were modernized as well. For instance, growth hormone was introduced as a supplement to expedite the growing of animals. The livestocks were injected with antibiotic to ensure that they survive. The number of livestocks has been increased at the same rate, or even faster than human population, to keep up with consumption rate. However, the space is limited. Thus, they were raised in a tightly packed confined space. This is basically a torture! I wonder what's your idea on this topic. Remember that they are essential; we cannot completely stop raising animals for food. But it's worse than zoos. The living conditions of zoos is much better than in industrialized farms. At least, they have some space to walk. Also, if you agree that this shouldn't be banned, should the zoos be banned as well?
ReplyDeleteIn case of livestock, it is impossible to be banned as you said it is a necessary food source to meet the demand of skyrocketing population. What we can expect to alleviate this miserable life of livestock is that more supervision is provided by authority. Stricter requirements; for example, the limit on number of animals per specific area, have to be implemented to let those animals live in a better condition. Therefore, for me, neither livestock nor zoo should be banned.
DeleteI agree with you in term of providing better living condition and other requirements. But I feel that it's easier said than done, especially for the livestock. It's difficult to be controlled because most farmers and people in this industry want to gain as much profit as possible. More space for animal means less profit for them. They might have to increase the selling price to get the same level of income. Will the consumer, us, happy to pay more for that?
DeleteAs I'm writing the comment,it seems like this will only lead to more and more problems. I should stop here and turn the blind eye on these problem if I want to get enough sleep tonight.
In an earlier blog post, I got the impression that most people thought that we could live healthy lives without meat, but the comments here suggest that the writers think we need meat for some reason so cannot avoid raising animals to kill.
DeleteWhich idea is right? Do we need meat?
When I read the news about the gorilla shot by a zookeeper, I didn't blame the child nor a zookeeper. But actually the one who I blame is the child's parents. Bringing the little children to the zoo fulled of fierce animals, parents must be sure that they can properly take care of their kids. They must be sure that they will keep their children close to them. Because it is impossible that hundreds of children will be under close supervision of the zoo workers. Parents or caretakers have to be in charge of their children. That's the reason why I blame the parents.
ReplyDeleteHowever, if I were at the zoo as a zoo keeper, I would kill the Harembe too. Becasue the reason the zoo keeper gave also seems to make sense to me. But I hope that there will be fewer and fewer situation like this as I am so sure that no one wants to kill animals nor watching a boy die in front of them.
"Coincidentally", we are going to have a debate in Dan's class about similar topic("Animal for entertaining should be banned"). For me, I disagree because there is quite a big gap between us an animal. For us there is a clear structure of reasoning; however, in animal if they got treated in the same way as us they won't develop as far as human. Furthermore, I agree with Ken's answer about the livestock. We cannot just eat vegetable to get enough protein. Still at least animals have an feeling and should not be torture at all.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your response. However, killing animal to save lives and killing them for an entertainment are a big difference.
DeleteIn more primitive cultures, such as Greek and Roman, and England in the Middle Ages, the torture of animals for entertainment was considered perfectly OK. The Romans slaughtered thousands in their great public games, and the English loved sports like cat burning and bear baiting. Thankfully, we are a bit better than our ancestors. I wonder how the debate in Dan's class will go. Any updates?
DeleteI'm reminded now of Kitt's post suggesting a need to change our values. I can think of a lot of values in our cultures, certainly in mine, that would be better changed, the examples of the Western attitude towards animals being but one example where there has recently been some change for the better.
How about boxing and a bloody rooster fight? I always felt bad and could not find any good reason for the Thais who enjoy watching a bloody rooster fight.
DeleteFor your example "Harambe" I agree with Pun about take care of child's parents that is the first important thing of each family with their child. And for your question "Is it ok to kill animals to save a human life?" For me I think this topic is delicate story but I agree with you for some answer did you said about " but in only inevitable circumstances." I can't say Yes or No because I think people who deal with animal or organization should be meet together. Finally, I don't to see the killing of animal for save human life I think maybe effect to ecosystem in the future. The amount of animals will decrease and effect to other living thing in the natural.
ReplyDeleteI think it is better if no one were killed. When children and their parents go to any zoos, their parents should look after them every time. Their mistakes lead to killing some animals I think it's not reasonable because it's their responsibility. In addition, zoos or any wild parks I think they already have plan to split between dangerous animals and other animals to live other places to avoid fighting. Because these animals can earn money from people who visit their zoos so they have to protect their animals as safe as possible.
ReplyDeleteI agree that killing animals to save a human life is in only inevitable circumstances. Personally, animals feel fear, stress, exhaustion and pain just as we do. It is immoral to derive pleasure either from the suffering or forced performance of another living being, especially when that being is under one’s power and control.
ReplyDelete