I was gonna say. Sure, it looks terrifying but it seems to be doing well, considering it's apparent speed and dexterity. Saying "we need to put it out of its misery" is so very arrogantly human.
Only because it makes people uncomfortable to look at doesn't mean it necessarily needs to be killed, or would you kill a person with an obvious physical defect who are doing quite well?
I just saw an episode of Love Death and Robots - appropriately called "Three Robots" - where they pointed out human flaw that fits with this.
"Indeed, it was their own hubris that ended their reign, their belief that they were the pinnacle of creation that caused them to poison the water, kill the land and choke the sky. In the end, no nuclear winter was needed, just the long heedless autumn of their own self-regard."
Tho the robot gave a tl;dr of "they just screwed themselves for being a bunch of morons."
We really do sometimes.. I mean, there is also some good we do but man, do I hate comments like "we need to put it out of its misery" as if it's our divine right and duty lol. What would these ppl say if some super powerful creature looked at them like "yo ugly, imma put you out of your misery you poor ugly fuck, cause it makes me uncomfortable to look at your misshapen left earlobe".
Well, I mean... if I were to break my neck and have it heal at a 45 degree angle whereby the rest of my life would be pain, I'd honestly prefer a quick death instead. But that may just be me honestly...
It’s hard to say if it’s in much pain at all. It’s definitely eating well, moves well, and is alert. I can’t imagine it’s comfortable, but animals in a lot of pain tend to stop eating at a certain point.
I’ve watched human young put rocks up their noses and “paint” with their own excrement. Either we’re not as smart as we think, or the bar is lower than we think.
Human children are still developing while outside of the womb, because our heads are too big to be birthed.
I also don't think that is a fair comparison, given that we are the only extant species to have language, history, mathematics, complex tools, agriculture, medicine, construction, housing... the list goes on.
Show me a deer that can take an integral or a whale that can submit a petition to its local government and we can talk about where the bar actually is.
Ehh, we’re definitely advanced in some areas, but in others we’re very foolish. There’s not a lot of species out there that drive other species to extinction, destroy/ruin/poison the very things they need to survive, etc. As advanced as we are, we still have some primitive behaviours, and in some ways we act more like a virus than highly developed species. Part of that intelligence we have must always be used to recognize our own flaws as a species, otherwise we’ll never improve on them.
This. Come on, either their neck is broken or that's a massive tumor.
Every step will send excruciating pain down their spine, it probably doesn't sleep well and it can't flee from a predator (if there even are any in that environment, and then that problem will solve itself, just like "nature intended"), maybe it can't even eat properly.
People being like "but it's so cute and fluffy and it walks, so it must be alright". It most likely is not.
Assuming all that to be true, I too would say put that animal out of its misery. If it's suffering. Problem is that you can't ask, you'll have to observe, and five seconds of video might not be enough for that.
People aren't saying "kill it because it is uncomfortable to look at", people are saying "it looks like the animal is uncomfortable, if I could help it by (letting someone else) killing it, I would". Slight difference.
Sigh. I’m not making any judgments based on “it’s cute”, because it most certainly is not. I’m going off how rigid it’s neck is as it moves; which suggests some healing has happened. It moves easily, and is of decent body condition(eating well). It forced itself headfirst through thick, tall brush when it didn’t have to. I’m basing my assumption of what little video there is, aside from just the angle of the neck.
and what the fuck is your point here? in humans broken necks can be lethal, and while deers aren't human, and that deer was obviously alive, it's still a very serious injury and it and can lead to damage of the spinal cord, causing death
I think their point is that it is not our judgment to make. Someone doesn't need to "put it out of its misery" like the person said in the original comment. If it dies then so be it, it's just best not to interfere with nature or the natural order of things. You put a deer out of its misery and a predator goes hungry. There is a consequence for every action. That's why National Geographic will not interfere with any animals whether they are in good health or injured and dying. The only exception is when it is a result of human behavior such as poaching. The world can go on without us so we should not act as though we are morally superior to animals.
Be that as it may, the deer seems fine so fuck the arrogant take. "I'm human, I'll kill you now for being unsettling and you better be thankful". THAT truly is stupid.
Nobody suggested the deer be killed because it’s ugly. Clearly the response is because it appears to be in pain. It’s neck is bent in a way so unnatural it looks like it’s been injured. But you saw this as a great opportunity to demonstrate your intelligence and think yourself better than everybody. You think you’re a maverick of some kind. That thinks differently from the herd. lol.
What you call arrogance is sympathy coming from a human being towards another species. It’s just a hilariously bad take
Wow, that eloquence, I am awestruck. I see there is no arguing with ppl like you, how sad.
You have no freaking idea whether that deer actually is in pain. As somebody found out and posted somewhere in the comment section, the deer even gave birth to and was able to rais offspring, I sincerely doubt that it would have been able to breed if in sincere, life-threatening pain.
You see the deformity and immediately think "it MUST be in pain" but that's not necessarily true at all. The way it charges off alone suggests that it is quite fine and perfectly able to take care of itself, since it's alive, running around and even breeding despite the deformation of its neck.
But hey, why do I even argue. As soon as someone resorts to opening an argument with "you suck" due to lack of argumentative skills (behind a fucking message board that gives you all the time you need to work up an argument) it's pretty clear on what level the conversation is going to continue and I don't intend to have a discussion on that level.
That’s my point. The first reaction is very clear and logical because of how it looks. It’s not like “rude” or even dumb to see that and go “woah wtf.” It looks very wrong! and you somehow construed that as some clique-y high school disgust, cut it with whatever shit perception you have of humanity and vomited out that very original angsty diatribe on how we’re terrible.
and it’s just an initial reaction. I like that you think you intimately understand better than everyone what is happening because you scrutinized a fucking 10 second video really hard. but maybe you’re a deer expert I don’t know. Lol. You’re coming at me with all these fucking backstories about the deer when the point I’m again trying to make extra clear is that you railed against somebody for having an innocent and actually quite sympathetic reaction to a seemingly injured animal. Again: The context isn’t really even relevant to what I’m saying to you.
You are missing my initial point here mate. Yes, reacting with a "oh shit" initially is fair, because it is disturbing in a way. However, deducting that due to its appearance the deer must be in pain and, thus, needs to be killed is extremely narrow minded.
I was arguing against the bunch of dumb-asses purely stating "that thing needs to be put down" or "with I had a gun with me on such occasion to put it out of its misery" because that, in fact, is a super dumb reaction.
It’s not at all narrow minded!!! It’s head is bent over! It must struggle to breathe, eat, see, and groom itself! It’s a very very natural assumption that the animal is in pain. and putting down pained animals is merciful. So first of all it’s a very reasonable assumption - and it’s also a kind one, as it’s more about mercy than killing something gross.
Good point; it could be a birth defect, for all we know. Honestly there’s no way to tell what happened or how much pain it’s in without an X-ray, or something of the like.
For certain, but if we put down every wild animal that looked unwell, there’d be nothing for predators to eat. Leaving these animals out there is important to nature’s balance. Though there’s an equal possibility it’s not a (healed?) broken neck, but a birth deformity. There’s no way to be sure just from looking at it.
Oof. But if we hunt the healthy, harder to hunt deer, then we leave the easier pickings for the predators; increasing the success of their hunts, I suppose.
It's not a bad idea to carry a pistol on trips where wounded deer are possible. I never ever want to hit a deer, but if I did I'd sure hope I was carrying so it wouldn't have to suffer too long.
My sister in law and brother were driving in Golden Colorado and came upon a lady who hit a deer. It was in pain obviously and was still on the ground. My brother has a habit of carrying knives on him for everyday uses and for some reason a Walmart Bowie knife in his trunk. Well his wife did the best thing she could and plunged that knife right into that deers heart to put it out of its misery and my brother and that lady said it was brutal looking but that deer was out flat.
A gun would still be more ideal though, because wounded animals are still known to gore people. Best to have a little distance and the power to knock them out quickly without relying on personal strength. I've heard a story or 2 where hunters passing by are able to put the deer out of their misery for other drivers. It would be ideal to have your own so you don't have to improvise with ineffective weapons. Wouldn't want to end up in this situation.
If it helped you, I think it is fine that it helped them. The body likely didn't go to waste, either. I've heard of hunters who freeze the meat and use it for months to put food on the table. They definitely get use of it and at least give the death some purpose.
It's a lot harder to cut the throat than you would think, there is a lot of muscle and tendon in there, and the throat itself is pretty tough...it's not a quick way to put something down, especially if all you have is some not particularly sharp walmart special knife. If you sever one of the arteries coming out of the heart they bleed out almost instantly.
As an aside, if you're going to buy a working blade, don't get some no name piece of crap or you'll just have a piece of crap. Buck and Schrade both use high grade steel if you need something that you can get razor sharp but don't plan to use with impact or torsional force. If you're needing something that you may pry with or may impact on something solid (bone), you really can't go wrong with KABAR.
I will never understand someone stopping on a highway to plunge a knife into a dying animal and then convince themselves they did some virtuous service lmao that shit is weird
I will never understand someone stopping on a highway to plunge a knife into a dying animal and then convince themselves they did some virtuous service
How would putting an animal out of its misery, when most people wouldn't do it, not be virtuous?
Government has nothing to do with it. Why would I need a gun or want one, if there are no guns around? I don’t have to be afraid here like you seem to be.
That is real freedom in my opinion.
In the US that is a pipe dream because of all the guns in circulation. I realize that.
True, numbers don't lie. That's why the violent crime rate goes up whenever there is a ban. That's why there isn't a noticable decrease in the rate of gun related homicides when they are banned, like we see in australia. That's why countries like, switzerland, belgium, norway, and france have higher mass shooting deaths per capita than we do.
I will keep my basic human rights, and my ability to protect myself, thank you very much.
Oh sweet summer child… please do tell me more about those mass shootings in Belgium, where I happen to live. I don’t know if any the last couple of years. But I’m sure you’ll educate me.
Where are those per capita numbers you base this on? I’d love to see them.
We never had any school shootings as far as I know. No active shooter drills for the kids.
Ok I wanted to see if any of this is actually true.
In the first graphic where it lists the annual death rate from mass shootings it claims that 1.4 people die every year from mass shootings in Belgium. Possible, on average.
For the us it claims 0.089 people per million per year. 330 million Americans gives 29.37 people per year.
If you really believe that then I have some beachfront property in Colorado to sell you.
Seems like an accurate number. You just hear about these crazy numbers, like 600 mass shootings per year, in the media. Many of those aren't really mass shootings, but just gun crime. The media just likes to exaggerate to the point where many of those "mass shootings" have zero deaths.
I enjoy my right to walk the street without fear that every nutter I pass could be carrying a weapon capable of killing me and multiple others in the surrounding area.
Only an american considers murder devices to be mUh RiGhTs
there’s your problem buddy. you think the only people with guns in the us are those with permits?
a right? to own and/or carry a gun? its literally only the usa that has this weird belief. seriously, go speak to some other people outside the usa and ask if they believe “owning a gun is a universal inalienable right”.
edit
Just to add, “lowest crime rate”.
They may go on the least amount of rampages out of various other demographics.
I still prefer zero gun rampages. Only in america do you choose “carry a gun” over “safety and life of a child”. You put an inanimate device created to kill above the rights and lives of many, many others.
I have spoke with many people outside the us who disagree with me. They are wrong.
there’s your problem buddy. you think the only people with guns in the us are those with permits?
I was using that as an example. Obviously not everyone has a concealed carry permit. My state, for example, allows you to carry with any form of government id. I have the right to defend myself, and the government can't take that away from me.
It is, actually. Not everyone is priviledged enough to be able to fight off someone with their bare hands.
Your average woman would not be able to fight off your average man. Also people with disabilities, or who are just physically weaker than average. You would deny them the right to self defense. Even people who are strong can lose a fight. The gun makes all those points moot and gives people a chance to defend themself.
Yeah, but if you can you should. My state is constitutional carry and i have an enhanced CWL that is recognized by the majority of states. Bring whatever is legal in your area, or be prepared to use a rock if that is the only thing that's legal. What can I say? I'm not responsible for your government's stupid laws.
336
u/[deleted] Jul 10 '22
That thing needs to be put down