imported_Debbie Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Seijun']IMO, if an owner wants to get a Big cat and risk getting hurt or killed by it, that's their own choice to make, not ours. [color=red]Should we ban skydiving because it kills people? No, because we understand that it is their choice to participate in a potentially dangerous activity. It is no different with wild animals.[/color] ~Seij[/quote] :-? You're only hurting yourself when you choose to skydive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drjeffrock Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Seijun']IMO, if an owner wants to get a Big cat and risk getting hurt or killed by it, that's their own choice to make, not ours. Should we ban skydiving because it kills people? No, because we understand that it is their choice to participate in a potentially dangerous activity. It is no different with wild animals. ~Seij[/quote] But is it their neighbor's choice as well if one were to escape its pen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Jessashelony']Hmmm, you really should start reading from page 4... It will be fun I assure you! :wink:[/quote] I will... Im just taking a lunch break. I gotta get back out to my dogs. Ill catch up with it later though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_Millie Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 don't get me talking about zoo retired tigers! as long as the tiger is able to exhibit, they make money off ot it. But once the tiger is too old to exhibit, then it is the private sancutaries that gets the call about taking them in. I have two tigers here that are from zoos, and one serval that is from another zoo. And of course the zoos are going to say they are wild, why? They are for display, "wild" is a selling technic. But you donot see what happens after hours, or behind the scenes. [quote name='"rotten_two"'][quote]My cats are not wild, they were born and raised here in the states. [/quote] oh right the american domesticated tiger! with ya now! so because your cats are born in captivity they are no longer wild? well that might be the stoopidest thing i have heard today -- wait maybe all week! the zoos breed in captivity and the first thing any of those handlers tell you is that they are still wild animals as in not tame! trained maybe but not tame![/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 The point Mil is trying to make, cleared up once and for all: I think we all recognise that wild animals still have wild instincts. What she is trying to say is that [i]technically[/i], they are not "wild." A wild animal is an animal living in its natural habitat without the aid of humans. Since a captive tiger isn't in its natural habitat, and it needs humans to survive, then it is not "wild" by the deffinition of "wild animal." Therefore, we could call it exotic. Again, this is not saying that a tiger is domestic. This is all squabaling over deffinitions though. We are getting nowhere with it. Who cares, wild, exotic, whatever you want to call it, WHO CARES, the point is that we, the "wild" animal owner, feel we have just as much right to "own" and enjoy these animals as you have to own domestics. ~Seij Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_Debbie Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Seijun']The point Mil is trying to make, cleared up once and for all: I think we all recognise that wild animals still have wild instincts. What she is trying to say is that [i]technically[/i], they are not "wild." A wild animal is an animal living in its natural habitat without the aid of humans. Since a captive tiger isn't in its natural habitat, and it needs humans to survive, then it is not "wild" by the deffinition of "wild animal." Therefore, we could call it exotic. Again, this is not saying that a tiger is domestic. This is all squabaling over deffinitions though. We are getting nowhere with it. Who cares, wild, exotic, whatever you want to call it, WHO CARES, the point is that we, the "wild" animal owner, feel we have just as much right to "own" and enjoy these animals as you have to own domestics. ~Seij[/quote] If that's the case then why are you here argueing on a Dog site ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackieMaya Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Millie, I appreciate the fact that you have what appears to be a sanctuary where WILD animals who have been discarded can live out their lives. But the fact that you say they aren't wild really disappoints me. And the fact that you say that the big cats can be kept as pets really disappoints me. Any PROFESSIONAL wild/exotic animal handler will tell you that they are wild animals and will ALWAYS be wild animals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Ravyn, I LOVED your post! Especially what you said about instincts knowing no boundries. I would love to see someone try to define a "wild instinct." Is it hunting for food? Dog do this too. Is it running far distances? Anyone who has ever owned a sib knows they like to roam too. Is it attacking in self defence? Again, dogs will do this too. There is no line between wild and domestic behaviors. They are all instinct, plain and simple. Dogs have instinct. Tigers have instincts. Spiders have instincts. [quote]If that's the case then why are you here argueing on a Dog site ??[/quote] Because I like dogs too! I support the ownership of both wild and domestic animals. I am arguing here because this topic is in the "debates" section. It was meant to be debated, lol. [quote]Not only are other people put at risk.. But when the tiger kills you and is then put down.. When did the tiger get to make that choice?[/quote] It is not the choice of the dog either if it gets PTS for killing a baby who pulled its leg while the dog was hurt. The owner would be irresponsible for letting the hurt dog near the baby. If a tiger gets loose and kills someone, then it is the owner's irresponsiblity that is to blame. ~Seij Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotten_two Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 back up big apple bitch! if i even see a spider trying to be instinctful (is that a word) he gets it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drjeffrock Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 LOL, this is hilarious. Practically every single person that has advocated owning wild animals insist on comparing apples and oranges. Pitbulls vs. tigers and skydiving vs. owning a tiger. When that doesnt work, lets just argue about the definition of wild and exotic. :lol: Here, let me help you guys out with an argument. How about "I firmly believe that the government/state should have no right to tell me what kind of animal I can own. If they were to completely ban tiger-ownership they would be promoting a law that aims to stop an action (i.e. killing a human) before it has even happened.(Think BSL people.) You would in essence be punishing my tiger for something it has not done yet." Obviously I dont believe what I just wrote, but thats the best I could come up with while trying to do some book-keeping. :lol: :lol: Rayven, you have made the best points so far. But... with regards to your statement about should rabbits, iguanas, and parrots not be owned since they are "wild".. I must totally disagree. First of all, those animals do not have the propensity to maim or kill in the blink of an eye. Second of all, if one of those animals were to escape, would anyones life be in great danger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xavierandrea Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Hey there is so many people in here let's do the wave.... :laola: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESSlover Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 :laola: :biggrina: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotten_two Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 baby bitch wassup? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_Debbie Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 :laola: :laola: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote][quote]"Wild animal "pets" can live happy and fulfilled lives in responsible private hands. This is FACT." [/quote] That is an opinion, not a fact. If anything, there's more research suggesting quite the opposite. [/quote] It is a fact because I [b]can[/b] prove it. [url]http://www.exoticcatz.com/photoalbum/[/url] [url]http://www.konnections.com/wolf1/[/url] These are all animals in captivity. The wolves are "pets," as are most of the cats. Look at those pictures, and try to convince me that they are suffering. They all look very happy to me. [quote]They can't still be a pack provider if they are they are the only wolf. That's what I meant. What kind of solitary life is that for an animal that is so social? [/quote] Well, if they were solitary, there owner wouldn't be very responsibe now would he. Any responsible wolf owner knows wolves need to be in groups :roll: [quote]Listen you can justify it all you want but taking an animals true home away is cruel. Sure animals could probabl have some sort of hapiness as pets, but honestly their true home is in the wild, where there true hapiness does lie.[/quote] Then why don't they all run back to the wild when they get loose? They don't. Most stay near human habitation. Isn't that evidence that they don't want to be out in the wild? [quote]There are wild animals, period. And wild animals belong in the wild where they can support themselves. [/quote] What is your opinion on "domestic" cats? They can live, and even thrive on their own and without human intervention. Feral dog packs have been found living in the woods, in the wild. Could that be evidense that dogs and cats (cats especially), belong in the wild? Like wild animals, if they are born and raised in captivity, that is the only place they can live. But also like wild animals, if they are born and raised in the wild, they can live there too. ~Seij Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESSlover Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='rotten_two']baby bitch wassup?[/quote] On the phone with luvah boy. You? Havin fun at work? :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 drjeffrock, what do you think we have been trying to get at? Why do you think we talk so much about RESPONSIBLE wild animal owners vs IRresponsible owners?? I've said, what feels like a million times, that the reason wild animal ownership should not be banned is because there are also RESPONSIBLE owners of them! It is EXACTLY like BSL! ~Seij Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drjeffrock Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Seijun'][quote][quote]"Wild animal "pets" can live happy and fulfilled lives in responsible private hands. This is FACT." [/quote] That is an opinion, not a fact. If anything, there's more research suggesting quite the opposite. [/quote] It is a fact because I [b]can[/b] prove it. [url]http://www.exoticcatz.com/photoalbum/[/url] [url]http://www.konnections.com/wolf1/[/url] [/quote] Please tell me you are not serious. Geez, did nobody pay attention in school and learn about fallacies? Seijun, your link in no way makes that a fact. You are guilty of making a hasty generalization. This means that the size of the sample is too small to support the conclusion. Here's another hasty generalization: Fred, the Australian, stole my wallet. Thus, all Australians are thieves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote]They are the same thing... But owning and breeding wild animals for your own enjoyment is something totally different altogether...[/quote] But you guys do the SAME THING with domestics!! Unless every single one of you here has NEVER [i]bought[/i] a dog or other pet, then you have no argument! If you think about it, domestic dogs as a whole have no essential purpose, even those who were used for hunting and protection. Those tribes could have survived without dogs for hunting and protection. Other tribes have lives without dogs, and they did just fine. There is not a single pet in the world that is essential for our survival! ~Seij Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='drjeffrock'][quote name='Seijun'][quote][quote]"Wild animal "pets" can live happy and fulfilled lives in responsible private hands. This is FACT." [/quote] That is an opinion, not a fact. If anything, there's more research suggesting quite the opposite. [/quote] It is a fact because I [b]can[/b] prove it. [url]http://www.exoticcatz.com/photoalbum/[/url] [url]http://www.konnections.com/wolf1/[/url] [/quote] Please tell me you are not serious. Geez, did nobody pay attention in school and learn about fallacies? Seijun, your link in no way makes that a fact. You are guilty of making a hasty generalization. This means that the size of the sample is too small to support the conclusion. Here's another hasty generalization: Fred, the Australian, stole my wallet. Thus, all Australians are thieves.[/quote] Um, I never said all wild animals are happy in captivity. I just said they [i]can[/i] be. When I said wild animals in responsible private hands [b]can[/b] live happy lives, I was told this was only opinion, not fact. Thus, I go go out and find pics of wild animals in private hands who are happy. This automatically makes my original statement true, and not just opinion. Again, key word [i]can[/i]. I never said they always are, I am merely defending the statement that is is [i]possible[/i] for them to be happy as "pets." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__crazy_canine__ Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 Seijun, I agree with you aprtly, and Im amazed you debated as long as you did. :wink: Part of me agrees with you but part of me agrees with whats Shara said. [quote]Wolves are so gorgous, and precious and special to me BECAUSE of their wildness. And I respect that a great deal, which is why I don't go and try to have a captive one, that's why I have a dog and am into dogs. I can do everything with a dog that I'd love to do with a wolf, and still respect wolves and leave them in the wild where they should be. Wolves are so unique and awesome BECAUSE they are FREE.[/quote] I dont think wolves or hybrids should be banned! I dont think breeding them should be banned... I dont agree with it, but I dont want it banned. I dont think people who rescue wolves or hybrids should have to give up their pets. I do think wild animals can make good pets. If they are raised that way and are in responsible hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 I'm not trying to turn things around. I'm just tired of being told I can't have a wild animal for my enjoyment. You guys do it with domestic animals all the time, unless every pet you have ever owned was a rescue... ~Seij Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drjeffrock Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Seijun'][quote name='drjeffrock'][quote name='Seijun'][quote][quote]"Wild animal "pets" can live happy and fulfilled lives in responsible private hands. This is FACT." [/quote] That is an opinion, not a fact. If anything, there's more research suggesting quite the opposite. [/quote] It is a fact because I [b]can[/b] prove it. [url]http://www.exoticcatz.com/photoalbum/[/url] [url]http://www.konnections.com/wolf1/[/url] [/quote] Please tell me you are not serious. Geez, did nobody pay attention in school and learn about fallacies? Seijun, your link in no way makes that a fact. You are guilty of making a hasty generalization. This means that the size of the sample is too small to support the conclusion. Here's another hasty generalization: Fred, the Australian, stole my wallet. Thus, all Australians are thieves.[/quote] Um, I never said all wild animals are happy in captivity. I just said they [i]can[/i] be. When I said wild animals in responsible private hands [b]can[/b] live happy lives, I was told this was only opinion, not fact. Thus, I go go out and find pics of wild animals in private hands who are happy. This automatically makes my original statement true, and not just opinion. Again, key word [i]can[/i]. I never said they always are, I am merely defending the statement that is is [i]possible[/i] for them to be happy as "pets."[/quote] LOL, I stand corrected. I didnt see the word "can" in that statement. :wink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_raven Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Seijun']I'm not trying to turn things around. I'm just tired of being told I can't have a wild animal for my enjoyment. You guys do it with domestic animals all the time, unless every pet you have ever owned was a rescue... ~Seij[/quote] The difference between DOMESTIC animals and WILD animals is: DOMESTIC animals are meant to be in the companionship with human (and yes, every animal I've ever owned is a rescue and always will be...) Furthermore: Just because a wolf looks happy (?) how can we really tell, it is unless we studied them for years in the wild personally? They may get used to being in the situation where they are - but does that make them happy? A bunch of pictures of supposedly happy looking wolves are not going to convince me, that this is a fact that wolves can be happy in human companionship. [quote name='Seijun'] What is your opinion on "domestic" cats? They can live, and even thrive on their own and without human intervention. Feral dog packs have been found living in the woods, in the wild. Could that be evidense that dogs and cats (cats especially), belong in the wild? Like wild animals, if they are born and raised in captivity, that is the only place they can live. But also like wild animals, if they are born and raised in the wild, they can live there too. [/quote] Just because it works one way, doesn't mean it works the other way as well. When I say that wild animals belong in the wild where they can support themselves I am not saying that domestic animals cannot support themselves in the wild. But even packs of street dogs look for a friendly human touch and they will not move away from your side when you once pet them. I doubt that would happen with a wild animal. Jack London's stories are great - and to imagine, that a wild animal would respect and love us, is a great feeling - but fictional non the less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seijun Posted October 13, 2005 Share Posted October 13, 2005 [quote name='Michele'][quote name='Seijun'][quote]They are the same thing... But owning and breeding wild animals for your own enjoyment is something totally different altogether...[/quote] But you guys do the SAME THING with domestics!! Unless every single one of you here has NEVER [i]bought[/i] a dog or other pet, then you have no argument! If you think about it, domestic dogs as a whole have no essential purpose, even those who were used for hunting and protection. Those tribes could have survived without dogs for hunting and protection. Other tribes have lives without dogs, and they did just fine. There is not a single pet in the world that is essential for our survival! ~Seij[/quote] someone just shoot me now....please[/quote] Well, um.. It's true though, unless you can give me a reason that domestic animals are essential to our survival. [quote]I mean, if you bred a wild mustang, and took the baby and raised it like you would any other baby horse, would it grow up the same? Would it still have wild instincts that might cause it to kill someone?[/quote] A horse doesn't have to be wild to kill someone. The stat I read was something like 100+ people killed every year by domestic horses. [quote]How do you prove happiness if you have implied I can't prove unhappiness? Besides, whatever they are feeling is the result of their only experience...it's not like they had a choice and picked captivity.[/quote] I never said it was impossible to prove unhappiness. I only said you couldn't, because so far, that has been proven true. People here are implying that ALL wild animals suffer in captivity. I am still looking for evidence from you guys to support this. So far, you have only been able to prove that wild animals in IRresponsible hands suffer. ~Seij Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.