A diver has died after an attack by a suspected 4.5-meter shark near Michaelmas Island. It is the third fatal shark attack in Australia in three weeks.
Meanwhile, 2.700 people die DAILY from mosquito bites (from disease they transmit).
We desperately need to find a way to exterminate these wretched creatures from the face of the planet. If there was ever a reason to deliberately make something go extinct, this has got to be the one.
Mosquitoes are part of food chain. They causes harm to us, but making them extinct is not an option unless we know how to manage the gap in food chain it will leave behind.
The diver was spearfishing. Also, an Australian source, rather than a German one.
Spearfishing seems like stacking one risk on top of another.
He fuckin deserved it
Spear fishing, or any traditional fishing method, forr food, is about as ethical as it gets. It’s a pretty even field. You’re out of your element, and using muscle power, while exerting yourself, while running out of oxigen.
Trawling and other intensive methods are not.
Bow hunting large animals, especially boar, which can be dangerous as all fuck, is also fine by me. Shooting small game with fucking 12 gauge, is not.
How does a method being traditional make it more ethical? Aren’t more ethical methods of hunting about minimising agony of an animal when killed using all available technology? So a firearm shot would be more ethical than slow-to-kill arrow?
1st. I’m an omnivore. You are too. We are not hevibores. It’s a survival trait. Rats, bears, and a few other animals are too. There is the question of choice, of course. I choose to remain what evolution has made me. That said, I try to eat as much free range meat/fish (I’m still trying to figure out the problem of aquaculture vs intensive and destructive fishing) as I possibly can.
2nd. Animals are part of a freeding chain, except for a few, like us, Orcas, etc. who are apex predators.
3rd. I don’t hunt anymore, but I still fish. I feel better if the animal, my adversary, is in somewhat even terms. Call it some twisted atavic logic, but to me it makes it ethically acceptable.
BTW, I do get a pleasure from winning that fight, but I don’t derive pleasure from the death itself.
Also, if minimizing the agony means that the animal has no chance, I know what I’d choose, having a chance.
But that’s just me. However, just as I respect the choice of vegetarians and vegans, I do not acknowledge the rights of others judging me for being what evolution has made me. I do, however , try to be a “better” animal eater.
I consider your argument the more ethical one. If an animal is going to die, isn’t the most humane method the most ethical? However, I also see the other side, which is giving the animal the chance to kill the human first. It’s kinda twisted logic. If you’re going that route then the most humane method would be not kill them at all.
Fine by you does not mean fine by the animal. It’s not “about as ethical as it gets”. That’s completely delusional. Exercising and holding your breath does not factor into the ethics of needless killing.
Killing plants is unethical.
sure sweetie
What? They’re alive. It’s been shown they communicate. They’re a LOT more sophisticated than people think.
I’m sure this is a belief you seriously hold with great conviction. It just happens to only come up when you’re confronted with the cruelty of killing and eating sentient animals
Guess how many sharks Australians kill each year.
Personally Im still at none, but I haven’t seen anyone else’s numbers.
What is this comment supposed to mean old mate deserved it?
they were probably bringing attention to the fact that most sharks don’t want to attack people at all and rarely do it and hoping for no retaliation
He did deserve it. The shark attacked him as he was swimming around killing other animals
Is the shark like Superman for fish?
Oh man… you know what that means. Shark Party.
Context for those not in the know
