And this is why I love Wiki. Here's the entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orca_attacks_on_humans#cite_note-0 The wiki entry states theres been 24 attacks on humans, but only highlights the ones involving captive Orcas. So that means there's been 18 recorded attacks on humans in the wild, three times in many as captivity. Not a single one is mentioned in wiki. Geez, I wonder who wrote this article? LOL. And, of course, this is the THIRD human that this particular Orca has killed, and it had attacked this particular trainer twice before unsuccessfully before it managed to kill her. Fuck the Orca. Kill it.
Heard this morning they're going to release back into Icelandic waters where it came from. Maybe that was its plan all along!
Come on, Demi, you can do better than that. How in the world do you go fom "almost exclusively perpetrated by captive animals" to "18 recorded attacks on humans in the wild"? You just assume that all the cases the article does not mention are "in the wild," without one single scrap of evidence for that. That is one of the weakest arguments there can possibly be.
Why? Because it's some kind of crazed man eater? This is the most lethal Orca in the world with 3 kills to it's credit. 3 kills and it swam with people every day of it's captivity. If it was inherently hostile, it's kill numbers would be in the dozens. The problem is that it's a big damn animal and deep water is a dangerous place for humans to interact with big damn animals.
Fuck EVERYONE! There Back near Seattle, the San Juan Straits have HUGE numbers of orcas. There are also HUGE numbers of attacks on boats by said orcas. They'll ram a boat over and over again til they sink it. They usually won't attack the foundering crew though.
Once an animal kills somebody, then it needs to be put down. Thems the rules. Too much chance of them doing it again. Perhaps it is the fault of how it was treated in captivity, but that does not remove the threat. Its a rogue, its gotta go.
Because I followed the link that claimed they were "almost exclusively perpetuated by captive animals" and guess what? The link said no such thing. It instead said there were 24 known attacks. Regardless of their relative lethality, this particular Orca has more kills than many Hells Angels or Taliban insurgents.
I don't care about that one way or the other. It has no rights, its not a person. Even if we did somehow drive it insane by its incarceration, that just means its a mad dog and has to be put down.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...24/AR2010022403508_2.html?sid=ST2010022405012 And I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for the fact I killed that last bitch in front of a crowd of 2000!
I hope they don't put it down. Whether the orca has rights or not, I'm sure the poor woman who was killed was well aware of the risks in her profession and still willingly put herself in that position. If it's a risk, just leave it alone and don't perform with it. No need to kill.
Ridiculous. Some animals are just too dangerous to treat like pets in general. If this orca was a "rogue" then it could have killed a LOT of people. It's not a rogue, it's just a big damn animal that people shouldn't go swimming with.
Nope. After it killed it's second human, trainers were no longer allowed to go in the water with it. Only the most experienced trainers are allowed to interact with it period. So we don't really know its intent. Why its treated any differently than a bear or a lion is beyond me. Its a mammalian carnivore that enjoys playing with smaller creatures in the same way that cats like playing with mice. Except in this case, the only thing it has to 'play' with is humans, and its killed three of them now.
Are you denying that the animal had ample opportunity to kill people on a regular basis? If you are, then you're just plain wrong. If the whale was a rogue, in the sense that a man eating tiger is a rogue, then it would have dozens of kills to it's credit. Period. Also, I think you are confusing your orcas. The ones you see at Seaworld are not the ones you see on NatGeo tossing seals through the air. The Sea World orcas come from resident pods that are almost exclusively fish eaters. They don't even communicate in the same way as the mammal eating pods. They are very culturally distinct.
Since 1999, yes. The WashPost article specifically stated that for the last 11 years, since the last death, no one was allowed to swim with Tilikum. It was considered too dangerous. LOL. Aren't using your noggin on this one. It would be isolated as soon as any pattern emerged, and that's exactly what happened. Yeah, my dog has been feed kibble all his life and was born by a bitch whelping in my basement. It still chases squirrels. Instinct is very strong. Personally I think the term instinct has incorrect connotations. Its genetic memory. And its strong in mammals, even us humans.
Well, here's a metacafe of one 'playing' with a seal: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/95633/killer_whale_attacks_seal/
Intent? Are you kidding me? You're applying human traits to a nonhuman. They may be smart for animals/mammals but they do not have the power to think like we do. What is gained by killing this Orca? He doesn't have any idea what he did wrong. It won't send a message to other Orca's. Nothing is gained. Putting him back in the ocean where he belongs and where there is a very minimal chance that he'll have any more interaction with humans is the only rational solution. The reason for killing animals that kill and eat humans is because there is some kind of notion floating around that now they have a taste for human flesh and therefore are more likely to start hunting us for food. In this case the Orca didn't taste a single human. Do you think it's dangerous to put him back in the ocean? Is he going to start stalking and killing people on a regular basis? That is ridiculous. (Dibs on the movie rights if it does happen though-- think Jaws but bigger!)
The animals still had multiple opportunities to kill. Before the second incident, people were in the water with it every day. After the second incident, people still came well within it's sphere of influence, as is evidenced by this latest incident. It wasn't isolated. Trainers still interacted with it. Your dog is not an orca. The fact is, the different types of orca pods are drastically different from one another. They don't eat the same things, they don't hunt the same way, they don't live in the same places, they don't even speak the same language. They certainly have some level of instinct, but the behaviors you are referencing with the seals are learned behaviors. They teach their young to do that. Such behaviors are unknown outside of those pods. So why did this animal kill three people? Who knows? Maybe it's moody. Fits of temper can be horrifying in an animal that size. Maybe it just plays too rough. Humans are fragile and don't do well in water. It might be a little bit much to expect an animal, even a smart animal like an orca, to understand that. Personally, I think it's a combination of both. This particular animal is just not suited for being a captive. Let it go. It's not going to go all "Jaws" on us.
These aren't mutually exclusive terms. The power to think like we do is not necessary for an animal to have intent, explicitly mammals. The absolute secure knowledge that it won't kill again. And what is lost if we do kill it? Pigs are pretty smart too, and they are delicious. I've got no problem with the concept of legislating away cetaceans in captivity. I can see the argument there. I always distrust 'the only rational solution.' That's just the one you prefer. The movies already been done. As far as him stalking and killing humans on a regular basis, no, I don't think that. What I don't know is if he will 'play' with another human at some point, and I don't particularly value this Orcas life over the chance it could do so. Personally I think the best scenario would be put this one down - and let the rest of them return to the wild. But be that as it may, yes, I do think there's a risk for a creature that's killed multiple humans to be let go unsupervised.
Yes. Thus causing a second death of a human. Which either happened because it intentionally grabbed the woman or she slipped and fell, we don't know which. Either way, people weren't next to it on a daily basis since the second kill. This may have been its first chance to 'play'. And of course it may not have been play - it was acting oddly ahead of time, as was noted. It may very well have intentionally hurt the first trainer it could. IIRC an earlier story says it HAS hurt other trainers, but this is the first one it killed since 1999. Yet this one was observed to thrash the woman it killed around in the same behavior pattern as has been seen on attacks on seals. So either 1) you are wrong about this being a resident as opposed to transient or ocean going, 2) you are wrong about whether or not residents will ever engage in that behavior, or 3) there was intent specifically to harm or kill this woman. Looks like #2 is a virtual certitude - resident killer whales have been observed to kill seals and dolphins for no known reason. They don't eat them, but the kill them anyway. Yet its body count is already at 3. I'd say it has gone already gone 'Jaws' on us. If you can't account specifically for the reason for the attacks, you sure as hell can't account for the fact it won't happen again.
Man, this is the accumulation of decades of corporate greed! KILL IT! KILL IT! Puhleeze. That aside, let's not consider the hundreds of thousands of kids who have had a meaningful experience from these captives. The article clearly tells the tale of the woman killed being inspired to take up her line of work specifically due to a visit there when she was nine years old. Yea, lets just go ahead and banish any possability of a death by releasing all of the captive animals to wherever deemed fit by humans. There's another novel idea. What, you going to punish it, or is it revenge? It's a fucking Orka, a alpha class preditor, that there haven't been more instances only belies the intelligence of the animal. Sea World took on the responsability of this animal when it captured it long ago. "setting it freeee!" may be all warm and fuzzy but the shock of having to feed itself should really give some people a stiffy, hoping it will starve to death or be killed by an unresponsive pod. GooOOoo Karma! No, Sea World needs to continue to care for it. Put it in a tank that surrounds a restraurant or something to help pay the feeding bill. I'm thinking it didn't ask for this shit. Releasing it has a romantic appeal, but ultimately it may kill it.
There were 8 years between the first and second incidents. There were 10 years between the second and third incidents. The animal had a lot of other opportunities. Thousands. I've never heard of resident orcas killing other mammals for no reason, but if they do, then the behavior is actually "normal" and your entire justification for killing the animal disappears.
I disagree. We don't know how many opportunities it had after marine biologists were told they couldn't swim with the Orca after it killed its second human. Regardless, the number of chances is irrelevant. The number of times it did kill humans is not 0.000000000000000000%. And this is where I look at you like you are from mars. If the behavior of killing humans is "normal" that's exactly when it is justified to kill it. And that's exactly what we do to every other life form that kills humans. And this goes back to my earlier comment - we are valuing the life of the Orca more than the lives of the humans if we treat it that way. I find that categorically absurd.
OK, so why does this killer Orca life inherently have any more value than a lion, tiger, bear, or dog that kills humans? In most cases, those are routinely put down after they kill a person. I mean, other than the fact you have a big weeping mangina and want to hug the killer beastie.
