Should Poachers be shot dead?

[Docturphil]

Uh no...

I like there is some sort of classism going on being the scenes if people think poachers should be shot.

For

1) It's extremely excessive punishment for the actual crime. You're attributing a lot of sentimental value to the animal.

2) What they are doing is/was probably legal in their country. Either way poachers are usually just working class people looking to put food in their bellies. If there wasn't a demand they wouldn't bother shooting the animals. But with limited opportunity and a demand, you throw feelings out of the window

3) Killing a poacher, really? There an insurmountable number of worse crimes that receive far less punishment and stigma.

It's a terrible business, I get that but attack the source of the problem, don't just try to patch up one leak just for another to pop up next to it. What a comment above me said (on my phone otherwise I would @Mention you) the solution is Jobs and education. Not vindictive legislation.

Some logic enters the thread.

[Aitch]

How much is a rhino likely to contribute to the betterment of society? How much is any single man likely to contribute to the betterment society?

I don't mean to defend poachers or even play devil's advocate. I just think it's a comparison that is worth exploring.

[Docturphil]

Thing is, shooting them means that means less deaths for endangered species. Which is what the people involved are actually interested in, not the lives of poachers.

Who gives a shit what the people involved are interested in. If a poacher is not endangering any human life in a significant way, then he doesn't deserve to be shot to death because he's hunting an animal. It doesn't matter if that animal is the last unicorn.

I realize they're violating the law, but the punishment does not fit the crime. Any feelings that anyone might have toward that animal does not change that.

I love animals. I think they're great. I don't want species going extinct. But animals have their place and that place is below any human.

[Crissi]

Who gives a shit what the people involved are interested in. If a poacher is not endangering any human life in a significant way, then he doesn't deserve to be shot to death because he's hunting an animal. It doesn't matter if that animal is the last unicorn.

I realize they're violating the law, but the punishment does not fit the crime. Any feelings that anyone might have toward that animal does not change that.

I love animals. I think they're great. I don't want species going extinct. But animals have their place and that place is below any human.

They (criminal gangs) arent shot on sight because they are killing animals. They are shot on sight because they are killing the Wardens, who would normally just arrest them.

AKA this is self defense on the part of the wardens.

[Total Crica]

Everyone should be shot dead for crimes that society has no other option for.

If there is no one to run a prison or rehab or mental institution or whatever to keep them from doing the crime over and over then shoot em or risk them doing it over and over again, etc.

I am with Rick on this - don't wanna kill people, but when you live in places that are like "the walking dead", shoot em dead.

[Docturphil]

They (criminal gangs) arent shot on sight because they are killing animals. They are shot on sight because they are killing the Wardens, who would normally just arrest them.

AKA this is self defense on the part of the wardens.

Yes, and I'd agree that shooting them is legitimate in such a case. And that's why I specifically said "If a poacher is not endangering any human life in a significant way...".

I wonder how many are shot to death who would not have ever had any intention to harm another human being.

[frogger237]

How much is a rhino likely to contribute to the betterment of society? How much is any single man likely to contribute to the betterment society?

I don't mean to defend poachers or even play devil's advocate. I just think it's a comparison that is worth exploring.

Well there are over 7 billion people on the planet currently and within all of recorded history there has been about 108 billion and less than 100 million people who have helped humanity improve or the environment so do the math on how important the average human is.

There is an estimated 60 Javan rhinoceros left in the world. Animals bring in money from tourism, as well as help maintain a healthy ecosystem.

So not only is the average human worth less to society than the average endangered animal, but by engaging in poaching and eradicating a species they are contributing to the degradation of humanity as well as the planet we live on. And thats not even talking about the ones that kill game wardens.

[Elim Garak]

And poachers are not interfering with nature? Killing them on sight is a good way to stop them from interfering with nature no?

Nope. They are doing what dominating species are doing.
But even if that could be stretched to interference with nature - it doesn't justify killing them. After all no one suggest killing those who protect engendered species for the same reason, right?

[PACOX]

Is our environment part of society? Big mammals like that actually do a lot in their environment, including preserving the native plant life, and water ways.

Western society doesn't actually care about the environment in Africa.

See the history of mankind.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Depends on the poachers tbh. The guy that shoots a deer one day out of season? Nah.
The guys that are practically the equivalent of somali pirates roaming the plains and killing every endangered animal they can find? I'd be less concerned about them.

[Garnier Fructis]

I love animals. I think they're great. I don't want species going extinct. But animals have their place and that place is below any human.

I've asked a few times now and I have yet to get any answer for why other than 'because human.' Which is basically responding to the question of why humans are intrinsically more valuable than animals with 'because they're intrinsically more valuable than animals.'

I contend that absolute moral principles are hocus pocus.

[Polyxo]

I would say kind of yes, but I have mixed feelings about it. It's a more complicated situation in a lot of circumstances, where a lot of poachers are doing it to make money out of necessity. I don't think the appropriate attitude is "FUCKING SHOOT THEM". However, that may be necessary in cases where protecting a species' viability is absolutely critical.

[Halyon]

They truly are not needed. If they are on a brink of extinction that they "need" our protection their input into anything is already minimal. Let them go. It's the nature's way.

´...they are dying BECAUSE of us. We are the most destructive species on the planet. But if you insist on ignorance, be my guest.

[falagar112]

All these people that say that a lot of poachers are doing it to make money out of necessity, are unfortunately mistaken.

Not that there are no people doing exactly that, but you're doing the real poachers an injustice by saying so, and sadly vastly underestimate them, and the value of said rhino horn.

Nowadays poachers come by air (helicopters) fully armed, and get their horn within 15 minutes of landing (they are that good/fast) - making it very hard to stop them to start with - and they do it because one single horn sells for upwards of $60k.

On top of that these are people that shoot first too - and many rangers in third world countries died because "maybe they can be talked to" mentality.

Being a ranger over there is just like the military, you shoot first because if you don't, odds are you're the first to die.

[Halyon]

How much is a rhino likely to contribute to the betterment of society? How much is any single man likely to contribute to the betterment society?

I don't mean to defend poachers or even play devil's advocate. I just think it's a comparison that is worth exploring.

Society won't exist if the ecology gets fucked over and makes all of us extinct. Elephants are a keystone species. Rhinos aren't wildly behind them. We need a LOT of different animal species and habitats for society to exist.

Who gives a shit what the people involved are interested in. If a poacher is not endangering any human life in a significant way, then he doesn't deserve to be shot to death because he's hunting an animal. It doesn't matter if that animal is the last unicorn.

These poachers will kill rangers with no questions asked. They don't give a shit.

[Elim Garak]

´...they are dying BECAUSE of us. We are the most destructive species on the planet. But if you insist on ignorance, be my guest.

It doesn't matter why they are dying. We replace every species killed with more humans. Such is the way of life.

- - - Updated - - -

These poachers will kill rangers with no questions asked. They don't give a shit.

Oh please, there must be a reason, and you know what it is. Remove rangers - no problem.

[Sandraudiga]

Judging these situations through the lens of western society is moronic at best.

[Hiricine]

ITd be nice if people had this mentality for other crimes. The punishment for crimes that are easy to get away with and extremely rewarding needs to be extreme, otherwise the risk perception of potential criminals is so low there is almost no deterrent.

[Total Crica]

animals have their place and that place is below any human.

My kitty companions, all four of them, are above you, in my view. I would take a bullet for them, but I wouldn't take one for you.

Nothing personal, of course, I would do the same to anyone I don't personally know and care about.

[IIamaKing]

They likely would just as soon shoot the ranger and the beast, take the parts they want and leave. So, I am Ok with a Shoot on Sight policy.