cherise's Avatar
cherise 3
192 Asked
492 Answered
301 Best
0
No one has voted on this question yet :(
2 years, 3 months ago via

Shouldn't Sea World Have Put the Killer Whale to Death?

It has killed three trainers now. I would have killed that whale after it killed the first trainer, or at least let it out to sea and quit putting people in danger from it.
Tip for best answer: M$1.00
Separate topics with commas, or by pressing return. Use the delete or backspace key to edit or remove existing topics.

You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.

M$

What is Your Answer?

0
0
0

4 Answers

0
dtvrivera's Avatar
dtvrivera | 2 years, 3 months ago
6
No I do not think the whale should be put to death. Yes, it was not the first time that it killed a human, however, I think most of the responsibility and liability here lies with the individuals who have allowed to keep this animal at Sea World after its violent past. Clearly it was a lack of analysis of potential dangers towards anyone coming in close contact with the animal, as well as a disregard for the safety of the trainers as well as the general public who was present at Sea World to watch the Killer Whale’s show each day. After having killed others in the past, this animal should have no longer been performing at Sea World. It should certainly now be removed from its stadium as well as from Sea World overall. There is no sense in trying to continue to train this animal and expose more talented trainers to the potential threats posed by this whale. Retaining it just to continue putting on a good show would be way beyond irresponsible. However, since the incident likely occurred mainly due to human error (the failure to remove the animal from close contact with humans after it became known that the whale had killed/harmed humans before), the animal should not be put to death, since it was likely only acting upon animal instinct.

You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.

M$

Report Abuse

Post Reply Cancel
0
troutshoe's Avatar
troutshoe | 2 years, 3 months ago
2
"Say sorry Charlie" and let him (or her) go. Free Willy.

You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.

M$
cherise's Avatar
cherise | 2 years, 3 months ago Report

Yes, I think letting the animal go back into the wild is the best alternative.

Report Abuse

Post Reply Cancel
0
bklynj's Avatar
bklynj | 2 years, 3 months ago
3
No the whale did not act out of anger. The whale was stressed due to it's enviorment. Killer whales are not really whales but are part of the dolphin family and are highly intelligent. How do you expect an animal to react that is kept in a small pool when it's natural habitat is to swim across the oceans of the world as it follows it's food. The whale did not eat it's kill as most captured animals that are well fed do not. It is the animals instinct to do what it has done. The whale could not distinquish between her and a toy that it is given to swim around with. An animal that size plays rough. To let it out to sea would probably be a long slow death for the creature as it's socialization skills are not up to par for living that way. It was the trainer who got lax and to comfortable with the creature. I feel sorry for her but these are not domesticated animals and you have to treat wild animals as such if they turn on eachother in their own group for status who are you. Wild animals are reactionary in their behavior and do not have that thought process to think it's actions through or to have regret. The animal acted as it was supposed to and someone put it in a cage now it's their moral responsibility to care for it.

You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.

M$
cherise's Avatar
cherise | 2 years, 3 months ago Report

So it is OK to kill people as long as it is not done out of anger?

bklynj's Avatar
bklynj | 2 years, 3 months ago Report

We are talking about animals here who have no idea of feelings of anger the animal acted out of instinct. It is the animals natural reaction to fear or disorientation and this is what people, who are supposed to have the higher intelligence, need to remember. The point was the animal could not feel anger. It is the trainers job to recognize the animals mood of the day. Animals never kill out of anger except chimpanzees or great apes.

Report Abuse

Post Reply Cancel
0
charray7's Avatar
charray7 | 2 years, 3 months ago
15
The trainers know the danger when they train these large animals. I don't believe it is the whale's fault that the trainer died. I do believe that the new rules at Sea World might help avoid any future occurrences. They are not allowing trainers in the water with the whales.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100226/ap_on_re_us/us_seaworld_death

You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.

M$

Report Abuse

Post Reply Cancel

Learn something new with our FREE educational apps!

Private lessons in the comfort of your own home. Get back in shape or finally pick up a guitar with our great experts guiding you the whole way!
Learn Guitar
Learn Hip Hop
Learn Pilates