Thread: A Literal Killer Whale

It's the creature's fault through-and-through.

Wait.. how again is it a the creatures fault that it was held in captivity? Killing its "TRAINER"? Humans are so stupid... we think we should just get free reign over wildlife.

Since when do you get to say what is instinctual for this orca? Maybe his instinct is telling him... he needs to be in a larger body of water. That he needs to get out. That these "people" are a barrier.

Ive always thought Siegfried and Roy should be mauled to death by tigers. It would be a fitting death.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy zoos and such... Just as much as the next person. Especially if holding a creature captive and breeding it is helping preserve the species (like in the case of endangered). But, if you cage a beast... be prepared for its confusion, and discomfort.. Wrath... Instinct... Whatever... The argument that it should be tamed or trained, should be voided. According to the law of nature, it shouldn't be there. Perhaps even endangered species should be allowed to go extinct.

Maybe after 2012... when there's only hundreds of us left. some aliens will come, and put us in a cage.. O.o

Whats putrid... is that they are not killing the animal... not because they realize its their fault because they're the ones who crossed the line on nature. But because they want to continue being his pimp. Its deplorable.

*Edit*
Yes, I did catch the part where the orca is not endangered. Which makes it's captivity all the more rediculous.

That's not exactly instinctual to kill someone because you "need to get out".
Seeing something as a barrier and getting rid of it is more of an intelligent thought than an instinctual one (instincts tell you to "go the other way", but I suppose "heeding the call of the wild" could be considered as this orca's instinctual action), as it shows curiosity of the outside (the debate of curiosity as abstractvsinstinctual is a whole different argument).

...in one way, us humans have the right to hold reign over "wildlife". Earning our way to the top of the foodchain (even if we can't handle most carnivores bare-handed, we still got up to the point where we are one of the most successful animals in surviving) and all. Those who go to the top of the foodchain creates the territories of where they hunt and rest, they can do whatever they wish in those areas. Us humans worked our way to the point where we claimed practically almost all of the Earth, and used our wit to do so (I agree that most of us aren't responsible or intelligent enough to do such, but for humans to step down would mean a large population extinction, which most of us don't like the idea of). ...we even learned to partner ourselves with some animals, which grew into domestication after they "became less necessary to our survival as a separate group".


Look, I don't like how they treat animals in most zoos either, but it's ridiculous that we're trying to defend something that's killed more than one person -- yet we easily kill things that have HURT only one person, and most times - in that situation, the human was the abusive/threatening one, yet we kill them anyway. It's hypocritical for the most part.
And heck, we keep seeing animals as instinctual beasts. We admire their majesty and intelligence. And yet, we discount most of their unique actions to "instinctual reactions" --which is funny, because us humans show the same "instinctual reactions" but are held against them because we're supposed to be more "intelligent". An animal shows intelligence, and people choose to see them as "mimicking" and "strange instinctual actions", and hence, we keep babying most of these animals that they stay dull in the head. Many animals can go beyond their instincts, but when a group shows a negative reaction to it, we see it as a problem for the species and take away the "trouble-maker" so that they can return to their "natural ways". ...which is also hypocritical, because many of us humans encourage our children to be unique and different, to ignore the crowd that prefers them to stay the way "they should be".

Call me stupid, but I'm being quite logical about this. I'm not biased against animals, I think they should be treated equally to us humans in their own unique fashions (as each react differently to different situations), but seriously? This isn't even equal! We jail people for self-defense kills (which is as "instinctual" as instincts get for most humans), but this thing doesn't get ANY punishment? A bear gets hunted down once it gets a taste for humans, a lion gets put down after breaking out of its cage and severely injuring a photographer, an elephant must be closed off from the rest of the reservation when it shows an extra-aggressive nature towards the other animals, but when an orca starts getting a better grip at killing people it's A-OK? BS!
A friggin' dog is put to sleep for biting a child that's throwing stuff at it! That's unfair! Yet is this any better? Hell no! It's worse!

Who am I to judge the instinctual actions of an orca? Someone who has cared enough to learn about the animals and their actions in the wild and in captivity! I'm not judging, I'm stating. Orcas are mostly fine in captivity as long as they're rewarded for their actions and get lots of activities to keep its brain invigorated. Though I will agree the orcas need a lot more room to swim... This one, even if it was different from the usual orca, has gotten away with murder. Even if it doesn't see it as a problem, the family of the killed people obviously see it as a problem! It's like letting the questionably-accidental murderer of your child keep going on with his/her life as a popstar! RIDICULOUS!!!


And, yes:
All species should be allowed to go extinct, as there needs to be an natural balance in all things - and we screwed it up. But some of us really don't want to see these creatures die, and most of that is our own selfish curiosities -- but that can be the same kind of selfish curiosities that keep most of us alive. And heck, most animals wouldn't mind outliving their extinction.

Oh, don't get me wrong... I think they should kill the beast.

Lion King talks about the circle of life? Well... this should be the circle of death. If the "whale" were out at sea (in its rightful place), and killed a human... I'd still hope it was killed. I'm just saying, being that it killed a captor. A person co-conspiring his imprisonment. I wouldn't BLAME the orca for this whole mess.

Ask Steve Irwin (Crocodile Hunter)... You swim with a stingray.... you get stung to death.

... that just sucked for Steve Irwin. Respectable man.
He knew the dangers of being out there, but he did it so that people and children would keep interested and respect the wildlife out there.
Any expert would tell you what happened was a freak-accident. Stingrays aren't normally aggressive, and are only somewhat defensive.
I honestly feel horrible when people always bring up his death. ...and pissed off when people watch the video.

Orcas do get a bit... "too friendly" (they are known to drag people deep underwater for fun). That's the only thing I would see that it couldn't be blamed for. But I would think a trained one would be aware enough of its surroundings and trainers that it would be held responsible for its actions towards the audience and trainers.

But I would think a trained one would be aware enough of its surroundings and trainers that it would be held responsible for its actions towards the audience and trainers.

*faceplam...

It shouldn't have to know that environment. It shouldn't have to perform for an audience. Im sure they trained using possitive reinforcement and all that good stuff... sure... who cares.
If we are so "high up on the food chain" that we think we've earned the right to capture these wild animals for the purpose of entertainment and money making... then we should humbly accept when that plan backfires.... Can you really tame something that is wild by nature? Should you even try? Well we do it (or try to) and its A RISK WE TAKE.

I'm sure that woman thought her pet Chimp was great... until it ripped off her friends face. (Did you see that episode of Oprah?)

It is the way of the beast.. period. No matter how much we try to domesticate or train it. And with our intelligence (that you mentioned we attained earlier). We should already know this. Dogs bite, Cats scratch. Stingrays sting. Orcas play with stuff until it dies underwater.

So... we take our place as humans. And strike back. But don't sit and act like this "Killer Whale" is out of pocket for not playing nice and enjoying its captivity.

Can we tame something that is wild by nature?
We humans were wild by nature as well, we "tamed ourselves".
In that sense, we thought we could tame others.
However, all that we really could do is help tame them, as they won't be tamed unless they really wish to be.

I honestly haven't seen that chimp episode of Oprah, but I know chimps... devils, I say.
There have been more sudden aggressive nature turns from those things than any animal I've learned about. ...hell, a great white shark is tame compared to them.
Not exactly the prime example you want to use, since they're an "extreme" example... borderline as intelligent as us, yet always anxious and agitated.

Way of the beast? There's nothing to "the beast" other than what anyone, anything, and everyone else wants: To do as they please. How they were raised into this world, interacted with other creatures, and generations of breeding has taught them to act how they act now - which is why each creature has different "instincts". We all seem to have the basic instinct to SURVIVE, but that's as far as we go in similarity. Many learned to run, many learned to attack, many learned to hide.
We got to the top, learned more abstract thinking the less we had to struggle for, and then we looked at all that didn't get here and used our abstract thinking on them.

...dogs bite, cats scratch, and stingrays sting all for one reason: Communication.
Not like "talking", but more of signals to other creatures to "stop", "go away", or "this is how I get to eat you".
An orca playing with other animals to death is much like a child playing with a living thing: They either don't fully realize what they're doing, or they don't care, or both.
How we deal with that child as it grows and what it thought in the beginning will shape a large part with how it will end up interacting with other living things.

In the same fashion, we based most of our forms of domestication with how we raised our children. And for one species, it has worked: Wolves, who turned to different dogs depending how we breeded them.

Problem is, wolves were the only ones that partnered with us. Other animals didn't care to partner with us, so domestication didn't work the same way for them since they didn't care to be a part of us in the first place.

Generations of breeding has integrated specific instinctual traits into every animal - including us humans. Not all will agree with these instincts inside them, but many will. And most animals have an instinctual "gene" in them that tells them that they don't want to be with us and they want to do their own thing. They aren't like dogs, who agreed to how we raised them (not very many cases where dogs/wolves out-right disagreed with taking their pups... many of them are bred to understand it as a way of life), and they aren't like cats, who like co-existance with us mainly for the comfortable life we give them... most aren't impressed with what we can give them, but most are also unsure how we keep them alive (reservations, special breeding programs, laws, etc) -- and for the most part: many of us know "what's best for them" (not all of us agree on how to do it, however), because if we just let them go and let them be, most of them would die off in the world we created.

However, that doesn't mean all of them will be opposed to us. Some of them are actually curious enough to understand us. Many respond well to the way we raise them, but only so few care to understand why we do these things, perhaps they get the wrong idea about us (much like how many people react to the government).

Those who are curious enough about us and react willingly, we sometimes give special treatment. And when we do, we look forward to their children, and to raise them the same way. There are generations of several animals (from deer to cows to even crocodiles) that are more willing to be around humans than in the wild (and though people are against that, we seem to not be against people who don't want to be around their original culture). ...many think they shouldn't exist because they wouldn't be able to live in the wild, but hell, we can't even live in the wild like we used to. Why not domesticate them much like our dogs and cats?
And sometimes, we do. Pets that don't show any unpredictable forms of aggression (only showing it when they should be --- you know, like when they're being threatened), and find comfort with the jobs we humans intentionally/unintentionally give them. Even animals need a purpose. Without instincts, they're going to find a job for themselves, whether we like the title they gave themselves or not (much like when a fox sees himself as the designated "closet protector" despite him not having any affinity with the closet other than that its owner uses it).

It needs to know the environment because that's its home now, it needs to get used to the sights and sounds...
The trainers, for the most part, do the best they could to make sure it's comfortable, that it's safe, and that it's happy. ...the only way they know it's happy is if it gives the same signals its parents or relatives gave when they were satisfied.
Should it perform for the audience? Though most of the funding goes to the park/zoo itself, the funding is also going to several wildlife programs that honestly should be funded. ...the trainers know the orca will never figure out that it's helping thousands of animals out there, but they sure hope it did so it might find some pride in it.

Us refusing to understand animal "nature" is much like us refusing to understand other people. We think we all think alike, and that some are just "off". And a lot of us think animals are just wild things... we tend to forget we were too, that dogs were too. And just because we can't understand them (since no animal has yet shown a full comprehension of the human language), we get scared of them... and start assuming things about them... like we "can't control them"...
Psh, we can't control children. The difference?
Not much. We're just too scared that we stay ignorant of animals.

Animals aren't wild, crazy things that follow the spirit of the earth.
If they are, then so were we, then so are we.
And if we ended up this way, they could get pretty close to that state as well.
If we don't want them to end up close to our situation (closer to our lives, co-existance with the world we're building), then...

In all honesty, the best solution it seems your opinion can hope for is that we leave Earth, let it rebuild and let it live, and let us go crap ourselves on another planet.
........ which I'd agree is one of many good solutions out there.

Because honestly: we can't co-exist with animals if we just see them as "wild" and we can never understand them much like they can't understand us.



EDIT:
And what all that has to do with this is: Yes, the plan "backfires" because a good number of them don't want to be there. But we'd argue "we know what's best" (especially for things such as albino creatures). Not only that, but these places keep people interested in animals, helps grow fascination in children that might inspire them to help animals, and funds several programs.
... but that's looking at it from a far-away point of view. The big picture.

But this isn't about the big picture, this is about the small picture. The incident of an orca killing not one, but three (or was it two?) humans. An orca that was trained by humans through reward and ignoring (the most effective form of training when it comes to safety of the creature). Through the training it saw the humans much more like kin-folk, and knew their dislike of being underwater for long periods of time. Not only that, but seeing that it killed people, it knows that they die when underwater for too long. It KNOWS that it killed a kin-folk. If it didn't like them, it most likely wouldn't be a Shamu-candidate (they're very picky about who should be a Shamu).
...when a man is suddenly put in a jail for no reason and learns to be aggressive from the other inmates, he can still be charged for killing a guard despite that the guards knew what they were getting themselves into. If a different man got out of the jail with good behavior, why couldn't this man? You can blame him no matter how frustrated or how unfairly he was treated. Afterall: the different man got out just fine.

lots of too much to read/.

however, can we allow ourselves to be shocked by an animal that is simply doing what it is made to do. killer whales are not herbivores or innocent thangs with toothpick teeth, they most certainly have the capacity to hunt and eat meat.

It's odd when an animal eats something it usually doesn't but it's also odd how animals in captivity will act different than an animal in the wild. this is tragic but still explainable.