Should animals being put to sleep for violence?

[AurAByrooN]

so what do you think, should an animal be put down (put to sleep) if they hurt someone (cause in most cases thats what happens) heres my views:
if an animal bit a human they would deem the animal violent and capable to seriously hurt someone so they put it down, however if a human punched someone they would be put in a cell for a night and let go the next day, so why is it different for humans than it is for animals, i'm an animal lover (NO im not a furry) so i think they shouldnt be put down.

[Ricky]

From what we know of animals it is very unlikely that it came to a rational decision of hurting someone, so we can't really blame it. Then again by the law if someone kills another person, even by accident, it is still man slaughter, which is not as bad as first/second degree murder, but in some states it is still punishable by death... Overall I think I do agree with you, I don't think it should be put down.

[noobsensei]

It depends on what kind of animal and the circumstances. Someone's pet dog randomly going crazy and attacking someone? Yeah, it should probably be put down. A tiger in a zoo attacking someone? No, that's just a tiger being a tiger. It shouldn't be put down unless it's caught during the act and shooting it can save the human's life.

[Ryan]

As much as I would hate to put down an animal, I find that if an animal has violent tendencies then it should be put down.

Logic is not something innately found in any animal, it is something learned (this includes us humans) So making the rational decision to change after a violent episode is rare. Though typically there is a reason for an animal committing violent acts, and it is typically not their fault, if an animal continues to commit violent acts then chances are that the instinctual nature of the animal is violent.

This would be why I agree with noobsensei here, obviously tigers are violent, thus the cage. If you're a human and you're dumb and give the tiger reason to attack you and it does, then it shouldn't be put down...it's not the tiger's fault. If its a dog and it randomly attacks someone for no reason other than the fact that they were doing nothing, then chances are it was trained or raised violently and is probably a violent animal and isn't safe. If an animal bites or scratches someone, even if it is a serious injury, but the reaction was remotely prompted, then the poor animal is probably not to blame and shouldn't be punished.

Perhaps it should be made that domestic animals have to reach a certain amount of attacks over a certain period of time before they are considered dangerous or violent and be punished via euthanization.

[Camoon]

Mar 6, 2010 16:15:11 GMT -5 noobsensei said:

It depends on what kind of animal and the circumstances. Someone's pet dog randomly going crazy and attacking someone? Yeah, it should probably be put down. A tiger in a zoo attacking someone? No, that's just a tiger being a tiger. It shouldn't be put down unless it's caught during the act and shooting it can save the human's life.

What's the difference between a tiger and a dog attacking someone? When you treat a dog like a human, most of the time, carefully bred/raised/trained dogs will act fine because they know if they misbehave they won't get food, however sometimes it doesn't happen like that. A dog may misinterpret a baby pulling it's ear, and tail, and pinching and grabbing it, as the baby being aggressive, and since a dog doesn't have the ability to ask politely for the baby to stop, it's only defense is attack.

A dog doesn't know the laws. When he attacks someone he doesn't think, or even consider that it might result in the death penalty. That's the difference between dogs and humans.

An eye for an eye hardly works for humans, but an eye for a life, on a being that has no way of understanding the rules? If you bring an animal capable of attacking you (or others) into the home environment you should be held completely responsible of it's actions.



My friends dog (a yapper of some sort) bit HER friend on the back, and yeah... it was kinda bad, I mean it probably hurt, but it was nothing serious. But she provoked it by pretending to kick it. The result? Dog gets put down.

Now I cried for days when my dog died of old age, so I could understand totally what my friend was going through when her dog was put down unjustly.

So I've expressed my views on dogs being put down for biting or maybe even killing a human once provoked.

Dogs don't always kill because they are provoked. Sometimes, dogs are raised to believe they are the leader of the 'pack' (family). This happens when the dog constantly jumps up at you, licks your face, and generally gets what it wants when it wants. Then, say a baby comes into the equation. Dog rejects newcomer and slaughters it.

That's a pretty gory and horrible thought, but does it constitute to have the animal put down? The part inside me that looks for revenge tells me yes, but then I think about it a bit, and think from the dogs perspective. They are completely oblivious to how the human world works, killing is natural for dogs. (In fact it's natural to humans too, just not other humans, but we won't go into that)

So if we don't kill them, what shall we do? Put them in a freaking SHELTER! Rant over.

[AurAByrooN]

i think if you have a dog that you know you cant control, why bother getting it, i think if a dog but a human it shouldnt get put down but should just have a muzzle for a while.
i think a dog, although the most common pet, is the hardest pet to keep as they require alot more time than you think and get soo many illnesses, they cos you quite a bit in money and cost alot to get themselfes, so my input is only get a dog if you have enough time and money, cats aswell but not as much as cats are more free roaming animals

[zAkAtAk]

I love animals. I would love to when I can get my own place to have a dog or two. They are adorable. However, if I got a dog that was acting up, I wouldn't put him or her to sleep. I would find another home for him or her.

[americanarchon]

Well, I'm certain that we could condition the animal or try to change it through some means. However, if the animal is irreversibly violent and cannot be re-programmed, for the general safety he or she must be killed.

[AurAByrooN]

Mar 7, 2010 10:34:57 GMT -5 americanarchon said:

Well, I'm certain that we could condition the animal or try to change it through some means. However, if the animal is irreversibly violent and cannot be re-programmed, for the general safety he or she must be killed.

yes i understand your thoughts but surely theres a dog trainer that is good enough to stop the dog from being violent, i mean if the dog has attacked someone they should get a animal trainer to train the pet.
edit: what im trying to say is no animal is irreversible, im sure you could always chainge an animal, it might be hard but someone must be able to do it

[Camoon]

Mar 7, 2010 10:34:57 GMT -5 americanarchon said:

Well, I'm certain that we could condition the animal or try to change it through some means. However, if the animal is irreversibly violent and cannot be re-programmed, for the general safety he or she must be killed.

I disagree. Just because an animal is no use to us humans doesn't mean that it should be executed.

[bleabot]

Animals always have a reason. Creatures don't just attack for no reason. They may have a territory in their heads, one that only their owners are allowed into (sometimes not even them). Once you step into that part of the house or yard, their instincts say "invasion" and "attack". This, if anything, is the owner's fault...although sometimes the animals are too much for an owner to handle. In that case, it's time to give it over to an expert. Sometimes they can be violent for no reason, I'm sure. I don't pretend to be an authority on animals at all; what I said is just based on what I've seen and read so far.

My stance is that we shouldn't put pets down for violence. Even the most violent animals can be trained to at least put up with other humans invading their territory or petting them. Execution is a little (way too) extreme.

Yes, I'm an animal lover. They're my weakness. =I

[Camoon]

Mar 7, 2010 18:43:31 GMT -5 bleabot said:

Animals always have a reason. Creatures don't just attack for no reason. They may have a territory in their heads, one that only their owners are allowed into (sometimes not even them). Once you step into that part of the house or yard, their instincts say "invasion" and "attack". This, if anything, is the owner's fault...although sometimes the animals are too much for an owner to handle. In that case, it's time to give it over to an expert. Sometimes they can be violent for no reason, I'm sure. I don't pretend to be an authority on animals at all; what I said is just based on what I've seen and read so far.

My stance is that we shouldn't put pets down for violence. Even the most violent animals can be trained to at least put up with other humans invading their territory or petting them. Execution is a little (way too) extreme.

Yes, I'm an animal lover. They're my weakness. =I

Vote NO then!! The YES answer is winning



EDIT: Oh you did. =]

[amanda]

In my opinion I don't think they should because when people kill other people all they get is time in jail, so if an animal harms someone they shouldn't get killed because of it. It's only an animal, it doesn't know the difference, at least people know its wrong.
anyways, the point is its a living being and it should be treated the same as any other living thing.

[seulf]

I personally think it depends on the dog. Some dogs are provoked or put in bad situations, some are conditioned over time to be aggressive. These things can be fixed or trained out. If someone has tried to rehabilitate the dog and it won't stop being vicious, then yes, it should probably be put down. You could try to give the dog a place to live where it wouldn't come into contact with humans or other dogs, to avoid any attacks, but what kind of life would that be for the animal?

I'm a believer in dog issues being human based, not dog based. Dogs are essentially animals, so they don't need to be treated like children - that's oftentimes the root of many issues that a dog has. But it would take lots of mistreatment for a dog to reach that vicious stage.

A dog can be rehabilitated if we give them some of our time, care, and effort. Aggressive animals aren't necessarily cold-blooded killers. Only two of the Michael Vick pit bulls were put down, and only one of those was due to aggressive behavior. (Story here) Unfortunately, over-population has filled pounds, sanctuaries, adoption agencies, and foster homes. There's often no room or no time for aggressive animals to be worked with. Just another reason to add to the growing list of why animals need to be spayed and neutered... *gets off soapbox*

[Dimstow]

Judging form personal experience I'd say that most domesticated animals are very non-violent, and while that statement is kind of obvious, the point is that , for an animal to BECOME violent towards humans shows that either they were put in a situation where Human Violence was their personal fight for survival, or that that particular animals has gone through a specific, very traumatic experience to make them react toward humans violently.
What I think need to happen is that we need to recognize which of these situations is/has happened/happening and make a decision based on the specific situation involved.
I think most importantly is that of the 2 situations the first results in the animal reacting violently towards humans In THAT situation, while the second results, more often than not, in the animal being consistently violent.
Sad as it may be, if an animal is an animal is consistently putting people in harms way, they need to be put down.
That however is my personal opinion and I'm completely open too being called 'Fake and Gay'

[zAkAtAk]

[Ferrrrrre]

I just want to add:

Can we desire of another living being to behave like we want...? Should we tame wild animals just because it is awesome to have one.. Why don't we just let 'em be.. Okay we can try to help 'em if they got hurt or something but let's take the example of the Orka who killed the trainster.. Everybody knew the risks of training the orka so are we capable to tell if an animal is tamed or not..

BTW I once read that most of the dogs attack are mostly probovoked by the victim, that's just their fault not the animals..

[RandiKthxxx]

At this time, I'd like to make a Katt Williams reference. I'd also like to point out that this clip is FULL of profanity including the "n-word". If such language offends you, do NOT watch this video

www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3_p8b2fwjk#t=1m5s

Now, I'd never use Katt Williams as a source, but I thought this was hilarious and he kinda sorta had a point

[darkless]

Domesticated animals are rarely violent unless they are threatened...just like humans, you dont put them down for doing what they are built to do.

Its the equivalent of executing a man for breaking another mans arm in self defense.

And wild animals are just doing what wild animals do, again like executing a man for doing his job.

[llluminati]

The solution for euthenasia is the most logical and practical form of action, compared to other alternatives:

1. Rehabilitation, the fact of the matter is that animals aren't as intelligent or sophisticated, while rehabilitating any animal is certainly possible, it is a long and laborious process that takes huge amounts of time and costs large amounts of money. While it's a shame that animals are being put down, I doubt many of us would shell out more money to keep violent animals that they will never meet alive.

2. Nothing, other people here have said that animals are acting in self defense. If that's really true, why do humans still murder, rape and harm other humans even though there's no logical reason? Violent crimes are crimes of passion and almost always have no logical thought, to some extent, this also extends towards animals. Furthermore, if animals attack others in "self defense", don't we also have the right to euthanize them to protect ourselves and others in "self defense"?