Guy really fucking hates seals, I have to admire the dedication towards rating the value of life based on how likely it is to kill a seal.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Polar bear shot and killed in self defense by cruise ship guard
- Thread starter FriskyCanuck
- Start date
Guy really fucking hates seals, I have to admire the dedication towards rating the value of life based on how likely it is to kill a seal.
Guess I fell for his shit. Really can't tell with some of the comments in this thread. :/
That's my read on it, they might be completely genuine for all I know.
THese threads always end up the same. Some people advocate for the death of an animal in every single circumstance, others disagree and are painted as psychopaths and sociopaths and we go around in circles.
I will always choose ethical tourism over hunting for conservation but we need to do a better job to make sure the animals aren't put in danger. I hope the people aren't traumatized for life and don't have a negative view of these beautiful animals. I hope this included dent doesn't negatively impact ethical tourism as well. We can do a better job of saving them and keeping the people safe. We have to. Just a very sad situation all around.
I will always choose ethical tourism over hunting for conservation but we need to do a better job to make sure the animals aren't put in danger. I hope the people aren't traumatized for life and don't have a negative view of these beautiful animals. I hope this included dent doesn't negatively impact ethical tourism as well. We can do a better job of saving them and keeping the people safe. We have to. Just a very sad situation all around.
Woah woah woah there buddy ...
I don't think a single person advocated a needless death for the animal. And the "others disagree" you are talking about that people are calling out, are people who are flat out saying that they would have rather seen the human die. Yes, that makes you sound like psychopath and a sociopath.
If you have a stance in this discussion, please feel free to state it, please don't come in and paint a completely biased narrative and try to justify it like "this always happens".
It doesn't take much paint when people literally say they would not save a stranger from a wild animal, or that humans, because of their high number, are inherently less valuable than polar bears, and there is no reason to care about them. Statements like this show a severe lack of empathy.
Also, who advocated for the death of an animal in every single circumstance? Because I didn't see anyone.
You two are proving my point right now. Anyone who doesn't agree with the narrative that human life is more valuable and precious is a psychopath. I personally would help a person in danger like that but I would do my level best to not kill the bear. But I'm not attacking someone if they won't or can't.
Both of you have been calling people that in this thread by the way.All you have been doing in this thread is making stupid hot takes to paint yourselves as more rational and altruistic.We can't have eco tourism with the possibility that the animal will end up dead. Otherwise what's the point? If that means the people can't gt off the boat then too bad.
As someone who loves camping in areas where bears live - I know I'm on nature's turf and that it's a calculated risk despite the precautions taken to avoid an encounter. I'm not saying tourists should be allowed to die, but it feels like these agencies have no respect.
Well that's disturbing.
Well that's disturbing.
That one video of the starving polar bear from a few months ago still haunts me. I can picture it in my head and cry.
We decimated thier ecosystem and now they starve. I hate this planet sometimes.
We decimated thier ecosystem and now they starve. I hate this planet sometimes.
You're blowing my mind if you can't see how these comments are literally sociopathic, lacking empathy and social conscience.
If someone posts
You think this is not disturbing, seeing humans as something that shouldn't be cared about, despite the very obvious bonds that exist between us?
Stupid hot takes to paint myself as more rational? What are you even on about. Feel free to directly tell me if I said something you disagree with, don't just vaguely point in the direction of my posts.
In any case, you're wrong. One dead polar bear in 7 years, with ~60.000 tourists per year, each one paying a fee which is used for nature conservation and research projects, is a literal net positive. What's the point? The point is that it helps. Of course this needs to be avoided, but you're acting like this death makes everything positive nonexistent.
There is no 'narrative' that human lives are more important than an attacking wild animal, especially if the animal is already in progress of attacking and killing a human, hunters and poachers notwithstanding. It should be common sense.
Definition of a sociopath:
I don't think it's a stretch to say the posters wishing death to those two guards openly are verging on the territory.
You're talking about the bear simply being aggressive because it's hungry etc etc, you can also point that the tourism industry puts food on a lot of families tables too. Shutting it down entirely will put hundreds of thousands of people out of jobs and a livelihood.
No one's feigning being altruistic here, but wishing death on your fellow human beings simply because they happened to be on an island (where 2700 other people live mind you) with bears is kinda fucked up.
Misanthropy is a favorite past time of internet edgelords still. Yes yes too many humans let the animals eat human flesh I don't see any negatives here. Mind if we start feeding them your relatives? I mean theres 7-8 billion humans so who cares if your kid is lion food right? /s
Y'all always go to the same place like "lol what if it was your kid" dude my kid ain't gunna be a polar bear guard for rich assholes who want to take a selfie on a glacier k thx
lol, so just because it's not your kid, it's not your problem. Fantastic.
"Rich"? 4 days/3 nights is 1000€, I doubt that this cruise is full of rich people. In any case, guaranteed not exclusively rich people.
But that's not important anyway. I just find it odd that that's your answer. Are you saying you can't emphasize because your kid wouldn't be in that situation? And how can you be so sure anyway? Adults make choices that their parents approve of all the time. But even that shouldn't be important.
You should be able to understand the pain that the relatives go through, and be able to put yourself in their shoes.
LOL what your relatives doing touring dangerous wild lands in the first place?
The far north is more remote than the Savannah but you wouldn't go picnicking in the Savannah either.
Reminds of of those tourists in that safari in the Netherlands, deciding to exit their vehicle and endanger their child`s life stupidly because the parents are stupid.
*Safe For Work, nobody gets hurt but damn scary how people can be stupid.
Sucks but I've given up hope in saving endangered animals anymore especially Polar Bears. Its not a matter of if but when they go extinct. If we don't kill them all, global warming will. Sucks but humans will continue to grow and people will continue to encroach onto their land.
*Child getting mauled by grizzly bear*
"Yeah no, son this is ok. It's the natural way of things, I'd be a hypocrite to put your life as being more important than the bear. We shouldn't have been here anyhow. Oh well."
You know cruises aren't exclusively for rich people right? They're pretty affordable for a lot of people, it isn't like you need to own the ship.
I haven't seen anybody advocate for needless animal deaths but I think if it comes down to a charging bear or a human, the human wins every time.
You don't even know what you are talking about comparing Svalbard to walking out of a car right besides a pack of lions. Wearing ignorance like it's some badge of honor doesn't make you look cool anyway.
Ok, lets say a polar bear escaped from a zoo and is mauling your kid. Just let it go on or shoot it?
User Banned (2 Days): Trolling
Our zoo doesn't have polar bears.
While this is true, it looked like the cost for one of these trips is around $8500 for 10 days, from a quick search
I'm glad that I didn't have to see the picture.
I feel bad that a polar bear was killed and had to die, because they're endangered as far as I know, and I don't like seeing animals get hurt. However, the circumstances that led to it are 100% understandable and I have no ill thoughts against those who did it. They did what they needed to do and what was right.
It's good everyone was okay.
I feel bad that a polar bear was killed and had to die, because they're endangered as far as I know, and I don't like seeing animals get hurt. However, the circumstances that led to it are 100% understandable and I have no ill thoughts against those who did it. They did what they needed to do and what was right.
It's good everyone was okay.
Cheetahs, not lions. cheetahs.
If those were lions, everyone would be dead.
Yeah, but cruises in this area start at like 1000€ for 4 days. So talking about "polar bear guards for rich assholes" is obviously not right.
You are visiting somewhere where the local zoo does have a polar bear.
Imagine if someone's dog is mauling your kid.
Half expecting "I don't have a kid" as the reply.
Yeah for sure. But they ain't exactly cheap in that particular area (in the story) either.
If you need armed guards to clear the shore before tourists can step on land maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea not to have that excursion in the first place. You could just as well offer a trip into a Syrian war zone. The preperations wouldn't be that much different.
I'd shoot the shit out of that dog, owner should have been better at training and keeping a pet. Luckily dogs aren't exactly endangered animals and a dog mauling my kid in the street is in no way the same as someone going glacier touring on a cruise ship so your attempt to somehow catch me in a morally hypocritical moment is defeated.
And I happen to have a gun capable of killing a polar bear on me because...? Unfortunately in that scenario I'd be forced to rely on local law enforcement and animal control to control the bear :(
Your argument was already morally defeated the first time you expressed that it was OK for the guards to die just because there's 7 billion humans in the world.
This, and your responses in the last couple of pages, are just watching you spin circles.
It's clear most of the users doing the "the guards should have died" don't really have any valid argument other than their general hate for humanity, i guess, and after being called out are either resorting to trolling or half arsed replies.
That's about enough replies from me in this thread.
A shame the bear had to die, but I would save the humans over it a million times over.
So do I, but they still seem to want to hang around, so what am I to do?
No, I'm not. That's what you're saying. I think we need stricter rules. Sensitive areas (that includes areas where endangered animals live) should be off limits to tourism. And if not, I view it the same way as I view basejumping. It's stupid, reckless, and may very quickly end up endangering the lives of more people than just your selfish, well, self, just cause they have to try to save your ass. So it should be an "at your own risk" deal. Have a problem with that? Don't fucking basejump or walk into the territory of an animal that's known to attack humans. Camouflage is kind of the polar bears thing, so saying "oh I didn't see it" doesn't really cut it.
What a profoundly stupid thing to say. No of course I wouldn't say starving children deserve to die. They did nothing wrong.
The rest of this just sounds like some kumbaya shit to me, sorry. We're people. We're all similar, we're all alike, and we're all different. Hey, guess what, animals are the same way. Ever had pets? No two are alike. The mind is "unique" as you put it because every one and every single thing is different from the next. It's not some amazing thing that I need to admire. Every single straw of grass is amazing if you chew enough mushrooms to study it up close. It all depends on your perspective.
Yet it tends to do more harm than good, funny that.
I think you need to get out more. This is the internet, not a psych eval. If you think you can diagnose someone based on a short comment about what the life of a person is worth, then you need to go back to school.
Still, no one really answered me. I ask why it's important. I didn't actually say anything about what I'd do if I saw an animal attacking a person. I said I place more value on endangered life, than I do on the life that endangers it. Why is a human life so important that it needs to be saved in every case? You (plural) like to draw absurd comparisons, so I'll do the same. What if you were faced with a choice. 1. you lose your house and end up living on the street, no job, rest of your life. 2. a prisoner sentenced for repeated rapes and who will be released in a few months dies, you keep job and house.
If you pick number 2. why?
I'd pick number one, and I'd feel like shit for doing it. But I'd rather be able to take care of my family, you know? And if you think I'm just making up absurd shit right now, yes I am, exactly the way you guys are. Anyone can cook up a moral conundrum, that doesn't mean they actually reveal much about the person in question.
But that's what your statement amounted to.
Humans have little worth because there are many. It's obviously nonsense, and I'm sure you know that.
Having billions of humans does not mean that they are worth less when it comes to the individual.
I didn't call you a sociopath. Your comment, however, was sociopathic in nature. Huge difference. I'm (almost) certain you're not a sociopath. But in this moment, you reduced a human life to "one among billions", showing no empathy for the person themselves.
To answer your question:
I value humans more because they are (usually) part of a much denser network of connections. In my opinion, a human death causes more suffering. That alone is probably the biggest motivation between my hypothetical choice to save the human.
We are much more socially connected than most animals, with much more complex thought and society.
EDIT:
I also think we shouldn't disregard the context:
I agree with this.
It was the first polar bear shot in 7 years. I mean it was certainly an unfortunate event and all, but it seems to be a rare occurrence. If this happened every week or than I would absolutely agree that something would need to change but I'm guessing that the money from the tourism is doing more good for the polar bears than bad.
Guard is a hero, and I'm willing to bet most here would agree if it was their loved one who was about to be mauled to death.
I wouldn't go that far. It's sad that the animal died, which obviously was not evil in any way, and it should have been prevented.
Also, the guy was doing his job. I'm sure he gets paid well, and this situation, while rare, has to be expected. We should always we very careful when calling people heroes, I think.
Man this thread is depressing. It's horrible that this polar bear was killed, but it's even more horrible that apparently so many people dont give a shit about the value of human life.
I love animals, I've taken care of animals my entire life, my pets are part of my family. The suffering of animals is horrible and we should prevent it if possible. I still believe human life is more important. If we stop valuing human life, that's what allows us to commit atrocities against each other. Everyone saying "they should've just been mauled by the bear" is dehumanizing those people. You are humanizing the bear but dehumanizing the actual people who almost died and had no choice but to shoot the bear.
I love animals, I've taken care of animals my entire life, my pets are part of my family. The suffering of animals is horrible and we should prevent it if possible. I still believe human life is more important. If we stop valuing human life, that's what allows us to commit atrocities against each other. Everyone saying "they should've just been mauled by the bear" is dehumanizing those people. You are humanizing the bear but dehumanizing the actual people who almost died and had no choice but to shoot the bear.
It's certainly eye opening and provides a baseline for how much weight I'll give those members' posts in the future (though several of them post like this as a habit and already got my internal whacko stamp). I don't use the ignore list as a general rule because sometimes it's healthy to sense check yourself against opposing viewpoints, and other times it's just amusing to marvel at how disconnected from common sense some people are.
Bruvs, we gotta be real here. The polar bear had to be shot. Otherwise, it was going to maul a whole lot of folk. It sucky the sucky how that had to happened, but it had to be that way. We can still acknowledge the intrusive nature of humankind and just how much it has damaged the habitats of these animals, to the point of endangering their very existence. But that does not mean we should assume the attitude of "YES, EAT THEM POLAR BEAR. THEY DESERVE IT".
Luckily, I am just echoing what others have said in this thread, and it's good y'all have enough sense to recognize why things had to happen the way they happened. No one deserves to get eaten by a bear. Except for me when I choose to go out that way, as a true son of Odin should.
Luckily, I am just echoing what others have said in this thread, and it's good y'all have enough sense to recognize why things had to happen the way they happened. No one deserves to get eaten by a bear. Except for me when I choose to go out that way, as a true son of Odin should.
Exactly. The entirety of Svalbard is polar bear territory but people living there and businesses operating out of there are aware of this and take precautions. But occassionally, circumstances lead to adverse outcomes. Also, to put this into perspective: there are a lot of polar bears on Svalbard. 3000 of them. More bears than people, in fact.
https://en.visitsvalbard.com/visitor-information/copy-of-polar-bear-the-king-of-the-arctic
Polar bears are also highly aggressive and unafraid of humans - in fact, theyre ambush predators that will kill and eat you if given a chance. Despite their massive size, they blend in well with the environment and can absolutely sneak up on you. Check out this all-caps warning from the above link:
POLAR BEARS ATTACK EXTREMELY QUICKLY WITHOUT WARNING. BE ACCOMPANIED BY A GUIDE OR A LOCAL WITH A FIREARM WHEN LEAVING THE SETTLEMENTS.
Svalbard is not Yellowstone. It's one of few truly harsh, wild environments on earth and not under total human domination. Nature still rules there and the polar bears are kings. Obviously, this is also what draw tourists. And for the most part, they stay out of the way of the bears.
I hope we all can agree on that.
You ever heard of Timothy Treadwell?
Even that guy didn't deserve what he got, in my opinion, and he did everything but cover himself in sauce. Of course, to save him, a gun wouldn't have helped.
I believe polar bears aren't even the most dangerous bear we can encounter. xD
I we would focus our resources differently it might be possible. Just like better healthcare is possible in other countries outside the USA. Of course there are hard limit as science can't "will" things into existence.
Depends on the perspective that you want to take. I would not consider it a horrible take or think the person is not capable of empathy.
Going by your argument you should feel like shit every second of your life because each time you snap your fingers a child dies on this planet (had this stat way back in geography). If you feel for all of these children then your life would be miserable.
I mentioned this before, there is emotional distance and other factors at play. Therefore you can't just dismiss the notion of "there are billions", as there are billions of humans. Not many would be sad or even notice if I would die, seems quite obvious that only people that know me would care and you probably wouldn't bad an eye. Even if we all are unique, have unique possibilities, etc. , we are still one of the many.
Emotional distance is the factor here. The endangered animal looks more valuable than a human just by looking at this incident with the little info we have and a sense of statistics.
Probably the same notion that plays into:
Save 100 or save 1000, you can't save both and you have to make a choice. Obviously the higher number often wins but sometimes a few humans have a higher value that you would disregard the higher number. =/
I would consider this foolish if you disregard someones opinion just because of that. Seems quite blind to me, if I am honest.
Same goes for people saying they are sociopaths, etc. .
I can understand where some of these posters are coming from and I doubt any of them actively wish for people to die a brutal death.
Yet, this is contrary to everything else in life. The rarer something is, the more value it tends to have.
It is a little funny though. Why is that that almost every time creators and writers of all mediums cook up superior beings of awesome wisdom and intellect, they always want us to die, like the plague we are? And why do people gobble this up like candy? I'm definitely not the first one to have questioned our worth. Even though many have done it far more efficiently than me. Look, I don't care what you call me, or think I am, I just roll my eyes a bit when people use words like you just did. I've known sociopaths, and it... takes a bit more than some crude basement level philosophy to become one.
And we learn more and more every day about animals, plants and the world around us that basically boils down to this: we know so little, so making such statements are really just based on your emotional connection to the thing on this planet that you understand better. It's not rational, and we're not very rational creatures, so that makes sense, but still, I don't think it makes for very solid arguments. It's like the person above who said they'd fight a bear at the zoo with their fists. It would be understandable since it's an emotional reaction to a crisis, but unless someone with a gun made it there in time they too would die, in addition to the child. Now we are left with a parent that stands left with nothing. Family, friends etc, all grieving over two deaths instead of one. But at least the parent did everything they could, right? Which was nothing. So they died a hero. Hurray?
Its not EtcetERA if its not a deluge of horrible and depressing news. If its not Trump and his team shitting on everyone, its the racist of the day's new adventures or, if everything else fails, dead polar bears.
Sometimes I question myself if visiting this side of the site is affecting me.
I imagine other bears probably kill more people in total, purely because people are far more likely to run into them. Fatalities by other bears are usually down to feeling actively threatened, usually because someone's caught them by surprise or because people accidentally stumble too close to their cubs. They pretty much never go actively searching to hunt humans. There's different guidelines for dealing with different kinds of bears, but only for polar bears are people advised to watch out for active predation. I think someone linked a page discussing these guidelines earlier.
In an actual encounter with a bear, a polar bear is much bigger and stronger than every other bear, so in that regard they certainly are more dangerous. Not that it makes much of a difference if a bear decides to kill you, they're all pretty much going to succeed.