"Dangerously Devoted" On Animal Planet

[WingedWolfPsion]

I have to agree with BAM.

I stopped watching Animal Planet some time back. Fortunately Nat Geo Wild seems to be reasonable, if you can get it in your area. (We just moved to an area where it's not carried--I was bummed).

[BAMReptiles]

AP is nothing but a hsus propaganda machine now, nothing worth wasting your time to watch on there in recent memory anyhow

[JLC]

AP is nothing but a hsus propaganda machine now, nothing worth wasting your time to watch on there in recent memory anyhow

That does seem to be the case.

[redstormlax12]

Ill also have to agree with BAM about the another person being killed. That one person should be punished as if he killed the person. So then those people are not part of the community anymore.

After awhile people may get the message, and even then there will always be stupid people. Alot of people raise extremely aggressive dogs and promote this behavior. These dogs can be dangerous, just like any other animal. Though I do not think anyone should control the dogs we keep either.

[jefrow]

I have to agree with BAM.

I stopped watching Animal Planet some time back. Fortunately Nat Geo Wild seems to be reasonable, if you can get it in your area. (We just moved to an area where it's not carried--I was bummed).

yea nat geo wild is pretty good thats what i have been watching lately

[Bellabob]

I have to agree with BAM.

I stopped watching Animal Planet some time back. Fortunately Nat Geo Wild seems to be reasonable, if you can get it in your area. (We just moved to an area where it's not carried--I was bummed).

I watch nat geo wild religiously.

[mommanessy247]

i've watched animal planet pretty much my entire life so i'm usually able to find something to watch. one show i got into this year is fatal attractions. for those who havent seen it its about ppl who own dangerous animals that end up seriously hurting them but most often those people are killed. its never about dogs and cats though. its been like tigers, bears, reptiles (including venomous snakes) those kinds of animals. one episode really moved me and angered me at the same time. an old lady lived alone in the mountains somewhere, sorry cant remember exactly where, and she was feeding the bears outside her home. her friends and fellow oldies, no pun intended for you oldies here, knew and in their interviews repeatedly expressed a concern for this lady's safety. the lady always told them "oh the bears are like lambs they'll never hurt anyone or me."
but then in the same breath she'd casually mention "the big male" that was very aggressive and that she was afraid. the friends and fellow townsfolk felt their own concerns for her but did absolutely nothing. anyways long story short, the old lady, on the insistance of all her friends eventually stopped feeding the bears and they all went elsewhere...except for the big male. the night the lady was killed she heard a commotion outside, knew the big male was out there but was only thinking of the little bears safety so she went out to try to stop the big male from hurting the little ones as he'd apparently done before. sparing you all the horrific details, that bear needless to say ended her life. what upset and angered me was the neglect of the townsfolk who knew the old lady's life was in danger with that 1 bear around. if i'd been one of those townsfolk i'd have been all over the sheriffs to dispose of that aggressive bear to remove the risk to that lady's life. but no one did anything because the old lady expressed "trust" in that big male but in the same breath expressed fear for her life.
i would've been like "screw your trust in him! he's gonna get you!"
wild animals dont give a hoot & hollar about the trust you have in them, they only live by their instincts and if their instincts is saying you need to die for whatever reason, there aint a darn thing you can do to stop it, unless your quick with a shot gun.
i fail to understand people's need to own animals like that. almost all of these episodes mainly consist of friends/family of these people either having no clue that their friend/family member is in a dangerous situation or they just simply choose not to do anything to help the situation before it escalates to that persons demise and then when they die they always go "what went wrong?"
you failed is what went wrong!
if someone's judgement is clouded by their ego or "trust" in their animals then you step up and go "you know what? i'm not gonna sit back and watch this happen! I'm not gonna have to go to your funeral because you cant see reality until it bites you in the bum!"
ok now i'm ranting. sorry.
but yeah my point is, well, i've made my point, lol.
i watch alot of nat geo but i'm not sure if i've seen nat geo wild...maybe i have but just dont remember.
sorry for length of this post.

[kristan]

then that ONE person can be punished to the full extent of the law

I think that it is easy to say this about a bengal tiger, this would be a "high risk" pet, but what if your mild-mannered collie or well-trained horse got loose and killed someone. It has already been noted that any pet can be dangerous..so let's take that into account. How many of you would be okay with going to prison on a manslaughter charge if your horse ran in front of someone's car and that individual ended up dead. Or if your normally non-aggressive dog got out and killed a small child (maybe the child was even teasing the animal, who knows). Now, compared to a tiger, the risk involved with owning these types of animals is ridiculously low, but there is still a risk. Think about this example (it is true BTW) - my mom was once attacked by a very calm dog that she had owned for several years, this animal subsequently had to be put down. The vet noted a dramatic personality change which was found to be due to a brain tumor. Now what if the situation had been different and the dog would have attacked another person in a situation that did not allow his/her escape. I'm sure in the hypothetical situation that another person was attacked there would have been a law suit but I would hate to see an incident like this result in prison time.

[ER12]

if someone's judgement is clouded by their ego or "trust" in their animals then you step up and go "you know what? i'm not gonna sit back and watch this happen! I'm not gonna have to go to your funeral because you cant see reality until it bites you in the bum!

We voluntarily choose to put ourselves in dangerous or potentially dangerous situations daily. Crossing the street can be dangerous. Walking up or down the stairs can be dangerous. Using the hot tub can be dangerous. I for one do not need or want someone else meddling in the affairs of my personal life. If I so choose to keep a potentially dangerous animal such as a bear, a big cat, or a venomous snake, and understand and voluntarily accept the risks associated with keeping them, then what prerogative is it of anyone else say or influence otherwise? As adults, we have (and should have) the right to make our own choices in life...

[BAMReptiles]

then that ONE person can be punished to the full extent of the law.

it applies for any pet. if it gets loose and hurts someone it should be YOUR responsibility. i dont care if 5 other people around you own a tiger/dog/wolverine/whatever. you should be allowed to keep whatever you want, and only you should be punished accordingly if something bad happens, not any other person who keeps said animal

extenuating circumstances such as a brain tumor are not the issue here. its the perception of "dangerous" pets. a brain tumor is 150% out of the keepers control. keeping your pet that you know "could" harm others safely kept, is the issue