Copenhagen Zoo and Marius the Giraffe

Was the Copenhagen Zoo right to kill the giraffe and perform a public dissection?

  • Yes

    Votes: 47 67.1%
  • Yes, but not to perform a public dissection

    Votes: 3 4.3%
  • Yes, but not to allow children to watch the dissection and feeding

    Votes: 4 5.7%
  • No

    Votes: 8 11.4%
  • No, in fact traditional zoos in general are cruel

    Votes: 8 11.4%

  • Total voters
    70

Users who are viewing this thread

When you mentioned the hunting of ostriches, I was reminded of a video I watched in which dudes were shooting hogs from helicopters. I laughed when I watched it. I guess i'm just not used to eating giraffe bacon. Upon reflection, I suppose it isn't too bad, what they did. Just the fact that I have a vision in my head of zoos being hyper-protective of their inhabitants kind of threw me off when I read this thread.

@Rallix

I never did understand why people say firing squads are inhumane. I think I'd rather be shot than pumped full of some weird lethal chemicals. But then, i'm deathly afraid of needles.

So much ninja.
 
Rallix said:
Personally, I don't see much purpose for killing it in this manner, or at all, since so many other zoos had said they would take the animal
Wut? As far as I know, Copenhagen Zoo said the only offers they had were from England and that the genetic similarities there were still too close for comfort.
 
Mage246 said:
If we euthanized pets with a shotgun to the head, you don't think people would have a problem with that?
I'm sure they would. Doesn't make it a painful experience for the animal.
Wellenbrecher said:
Rallix said:
Personally, I don't see much purpose for killing it in this manner, or at all, since so many other zoos had said they would take the animal
Wut? As far as I know, Copenhagen Zoo said the only offers they had were from England and that the genetic similarities there were still too close for comfort.
I think I read that Zoos in the Netherlands and Canada also offered. But if you're right, I guess my point is moot there.
kurczak said:
hopefully did learn there is that eating meat is disgusting
Fibrous Fleshy Filling protein. Yum.
 
kurczak said:
Yikes. The only lesson the kids could have and hopefully did learn there is that eating meat is disgusting
Oh come on...
Per se there's nothing wrong about eating meat. Perfectly natural for humans to do so.
If you want to argue against the way it's "produced" these days, sure go ahead. But everything else is choice and opinion.
 
Wellenbrecher said:
kurczak said:
Yikes. The only lesson the kids could have and hopefully did learn there is that eating meat is disgusting
Oh come on...
Per se there's nothing wrong about eating meat. Perfectly natural for humans to do so.
If you want to argue against the way it's "produced" these days, sure go ahead. But everything else is choice and opinion.

Sounds like an appeal to nature fallacy. No, I'm against eating meat per se. At best, you can argue that this or that animal is not self-conscious. But they can still feel pain and pleasure (obviously talking about "regular" animals that are most often used as food like chicken, pig or cow, not insects for example). Even if you kill an animal in a completely painless way (fat chance) then you are still destroying any future potential pleasure or happiness it may experience. In order to reach a goal you can at zero additional cost achieve in other ways. You are just destroying feeling entities because...they are delicious?

Again, I'm obviously talking about modern contemporary humans in civilized conditions. I would of course eat meat if my survival depended on it.

Swissky said:
kurczak said:
You can coat a carcass in sugar, but it's still just a carcass :razz:
You can coat a lettuce in sugar, but it's still just a lettuce :razz:

You can coat missing the point in a semblance of a witty comeback, but you're still just missing the point :razz:

 
Wellenbrecher said:
Oh come on...
Per se there's nothing wrong about eating meat. Perfectly natural for humans to do so.

Is it natural for humans to wear clothes? Travel by any other means than their own legs? Or live in an apartment block? Whatever it was that humans where originally destined to do naturally, it's safe to say we passed that point a while ago.
 
One thing about this is certain, that giraffe was hanging out in the long neck of the woods.


Thank you thank you! I'll be hear all week!
 
If they properly warned the parents, I see no problem with the exhibition. About killing the giraffe, I guess it was that, or spending a lot of money in sterilization.
Leifr Eiríksson said:
I ate an intact fish during New Years.
What do you mean with intact? How do you usually eat your fish?  :neutral:
 
Danath said:
About killing the giraffe, I guess it was that, or spending a lot of money in sterilization.

I don't know about giraffes, but at least castration of livestock is rather simple procedure. Assuming that the giraffe was male, as the name Marius implies.
 
Depends on the species, available surgeons and medical history; it could've been very expensive quite easily.

I find it a little hilarious people are complaining about the fact the giraffe was put down. Like every other zoo, exhibit, wild-life preserve, ranch, farm, kennel, animal control pound, even PetCo just magicks the animals away rather than kills them.
 
I immediately thought of how happy those lions must have been eating something different for a change.

Giraffes should be free to run on the open plains and be killed and eaten instead being kept in such confining quarters anyway. I do think I'd rather be killed by a shotgun than a lion though.
 
I may have missed but does it actually say shotgun anywhere? It works but it's an awfully messy way to kill an animal, I'd imagine they'd use a bolt gun instead.
 
Back
Top Bottom