Indian state says it's OK now to kill tiger poachers on sight

Seems like you have a problem with a vibrant section of society which is progressing. Sorry I am not here to reply your immature tantrums.

Vibrant? Maybe you havent seen the beggars and jugis or people sleeping under bridges.I guess you must be part of the decadent and kleptocratic Vijay Mallya 'living with the good times' type.50 million out of 1.1 billion.

I have a better idea. Capture the poachers and feed them to the tigers. This way the poachers will have a fair chance to get one on one with the species they want to eradicate for profit.

Good,then villagers will make sure that they will kill the forest rangers and it will strengthen the separatist movements even more.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
I am shocked!

While I am all for the preservation of the tigers and am all for the total eradication of poaching, there's a problem here. Tigers can kill people; tigers do on occasion kill people. Now let's just suppose someone is camping out at night and a tiger decides he is on the menu. He has a split second, if lucky, to defend himself. He cannot fight off an attacking tiger; he has to kill it before it gets close enough to kill him. Now, if he does so, he will be killed by a ranger for defending himself.

I think you have misunderstood. These tigers are on protected land i.e, Tiger reserves. 90% of these preserves are off limits to all humans except for the guides. Tourists are limited to the roads. There's really no reason to go into the off limits sections unless you're out to kill an animal. Guides are provided weapons and in most case armed guards for self defense while out on tours.

The forest guides are all employees of the state, so presumably there is a certain amount of training going on to determine when it is appropriate to take a shot at a poacher.

And this is a wonderful idea? Or, someone gets into an argument with a ranger. The ranger draws his gun and shoots him, then files the report saying he was poaching and the tiger ran off as soon as he fired. Argument solved, and the ranger gets a reward for solving it.

Now thats a wild imagination. Why would someone in middle of a Tiger reserve argue with a armed guard when sticking a knife and leaving the scene quietly would work well in a populated area? It would probably be much easier for someone to kill in a city than take someone in middle of a reserve just to kill them. Every killing of poachers is also examined by the State Govt.

Someone mentioned it earlier: due process. Prove that the deed is done before executing the suspect. Let us not go back to the days of despot rulers, where one could disappear for offending someone in power, with no questions asked and no retribution. Let us remember the lessons of history learned through the blood and torture of untold individuals, lest we be required to repeat the course.

The only thing I know of at this time sicker than someone intentionally wiping out a species is others calling for martial law to combat it. And make no mistake, this reads like martial law.TheRedneck

The previous laws weren't really deterring poachers, the potential benefit outweighed the risks. Now though the poachers have to think if the sale of a few pelts and bones is worth their lives and would perhaps be motived to "earn a living" with hard work rather than doing illegal things.

reply to post by Ek Bharatiya

The previous laws weren't really deterring poachers, the potential benefit outweighed the risks. Now though the poachers have to think if the sale of a few pelts and bones is worth their lives and would perhaps be motived to "earn a living" with hard work rather than doing illegal things.

The joke of the century.Like how the Govt destroys the livelihood of the poor by stealing their lands and giving to unscrupulous industrialists and builders?like how govt destroys what they made through hard work in a second?

Originally posted by TheRedneck
Someone mentioned it earlier: due process. Prove that the deed is done before executing the suspect. Let us not go back to the days of despot rulers, where one could disappear for offending someone in power, with no questions asked and no retribution. Let us remember the lessons of history learned through the blood and torture of untold individuals, lest we be required to repeat the course.

The only thing I know of at this time sicker than someone intentionally wiping out a species is others calling for martial law to combat it. And make no mistake, this reads like martial law.

TheRedneck

I would like to further elaborate on this point. This law is something like what it is in US. You have the right to own weapons and use it if someone enters illegally on your property with a weapon. Only here we have armed guards protecting someone who cannot use weapons to defend themselves on protected lands which is their home. If you disagree with this then I believe you should also disagree with US constitution to bear arms and of self defense if some armed suspect enters your property.

reply to post by Ek Bharatiya

I will be the first to admit I know very little about Indian law or customs. I am seeing this from a purely American standpoint, since that is my culture. So, if I make a statement that is exceedingly silly from an Indian standpoint, please forgive and correct me.

I need to ask then, is it possible for someone to venture onto a tiger preserve unwittingly? Never mind the "why would they", but can they? If so, then that is an area of concern for me. Also, I am curious about whether this law even applies outside the preserves? If not, then that is an area of relief for me.

The analogy you give as to our right to self-defense starts off as applicable, but it derails when one considers that even if using self-defense, one must show compelling evidence that it was indeed self-defense. It's not like we can just shoot someone, say the words "self-defense", and walk away as though it never happened. Typically one will be arrested, questioned, and then either summarily released or held for trial, wherein that person must prove they acted in self-defense. That appears to be a far cry from what I have read in this thread.

And of course, my largest concern is that so many people leap for joy when someone passes a law that grants someone the right to life and death over others, just because they see those others as "bad". That scares me more than the law does.

TheRedneck

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Ek Bharatiya

I will be the first to admit I know very little about Indian law or customs. I am seeing this from a purely American standpoint, since that is my culture. So, if I make a statement that is exceedingly silly from an Indian standpoint, please forgive and correct me.

There is no reason for you to apologies at all. We all are here to learn from each other.

I need to ask then, is it possible for someone to venture onto a tiger preserve unwittingly? Never mind the "why would they", but can they? If so, then that is an area of concern for me.

Reserves are generally surrounded by walls where there is a chance animals going stray towards human populated areas. For example. take the case of Jim Corbett National Park where stone masonry wall on the southern boundary of the reserve is being build where it comes in direct contact with agricultural fields. There are signs placed around the reserves so anyone can know it's dangerous to go in there. Rarely it does happen some stray animal or person wander into each other areas.

Also, I am curious about whether this law even applies outside the preserves? If not, then that is an area of relief for me.

These laws do not apply outside the reserve.

The analogy you give as to our right to self-defense starts off as applicable, but it derails when one considers that even if using self-defense, one must show compelling evidence that it was indeed self-defense. It's not like we can just shoot someone, say the words "self-defense", and walk away as though it never happened. Typically one will be arrested, questioned, and then either summarily released or held for trial, wherein that person must prove they acted in self-defense. That appears to be a far cry from what I have read in this thread.

The state government examines every killing of poachers. Usually the rangers know almost all the poachers who operate in and around the reserve through informants and intelligence. Earlier poachers used to post bail from the money they made, after serving few months in jail and went back to killing more animals. They knew the light jail sentences and the option to post bail was laughable so they acted rampantly and still do in dozens of other reserves in India. Remember these poachers also give help keep up illegal arms trade/ smuggling and other illegal stuff which make them extremely dangerous. These poachers are known to shoot and kill wildlife rangers who used to be unarmed earlier. You cannot protect wildlife with sticks and stones from heavily armed gang of thugs who will not waste a second to kill you.

Poachers also create havoc for other population around the reserve who are dependent on the tourism and they livelihood is based on how many people will come to reserves. If there are no animals who will come to see an empty park and there will be no tourism left which is bad for people living in that area.

And of course, my largest concern is that so many people leap for joy when someone passes a law that grants someone the right to life and death over others, just because they see those others as "bad". That scares me more than the law does. TheRedneck

I will not shed a tear for someone who wants to kill just to make quick money instead of earning a living.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by Gauss

 

Easy to speak off the high horse.Poverty is coming to your nation.You will see desperation and despair in the future and you will know what you will be willing to do.

You know, I feel it's sitting on a higher horse deciding that you have the right to kill animals threatened by extinction. Either way, it's clear to me that you and I will not agree on this issue. But if these people are poor and starving, then they would do better to waste their bullets on an actually edible animal than something like a tiger, which is almost hunted to extinction.

And so my previous statement stands. I'll even go so far as to say this; Poachers are organized criminals and even outright murderers, and in my book, the only good poacher is a dead poacher.

Originally posted by Gauss
Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by Gauss

 

You now, I feel it's sitting on a higher horse deciding that you have the right to kill animals threatened by extinction. Either way, it's clear to me that you and I will not agree on this issue. But if these people are poor and starving, then they would do better to waste their bullets on an actually edible animal than something like a tiger, which is extinct.

And so my previous statement stands. I'll even go so far as to say this; Poachers are organized criminals and even outright murderers, and in my book, the only good poacher is a dead poacher.

I absolutely agree with you. It takes money to buy guns, bullets illegally and gear to hunt and kill tigers. Tigers cannot be just found everywhere they are elusive animals and you have to track them for days just to find one. The poverty thing doesn't ring true because when someone can spend such amount of money and time to kill something which they will not even eat then they can absolutely use all that time and money to earn a proper living. These animals are just killed so they can be butchered into hundreds of pieces and sold for quick cash. They are killed because these people do not want to work hard like a normal person does. If they are hungry why dont they kill animals which they can eat for food? They dont because its not about hunger it's about money.

reply to post by Ek Bharatiya


Guns bought and given to poor locals by traders involved in the trade.Traders do not involve themself in direct action and are closely linked with politicans.The trader politican nexus is the issue not the poor poacher. Remove the trader and politicans .

reply to post by Ek Bharatiya

There is no reason for you to apologies at all. We all are here to learn from each other.

A B S O L U T E L Y !

That just got you a star, sir.

Reserves are generally surrounded by walls where there is a chance animals going stray towards human populated areas.

That puts my mind at ease somewhat.

These laws do not apply outside the reserve.

And that puts my mind at ease even more.

The state government examines every killing of poachers.

And that clenches it... I believe I may have misjudged your law.

One thing I found amazing in your explanation is that there ever was a time when rangers were not armed! One of the big reasons I carry a weapon is for wildlife. It's not that I go looking for something to kill, but if something decides to kill me I want to be able to kill it first. I live in a wild area which is teeming with various species, a few of which (feral hogs, black bear, and cougar) can be deadly. Even more, like bobcats, can be dangerous, and there is always the threat of a rabid animal.

It is undoubtedly even more dangerous with the wildlife experienced in these preserves. To send someone into them unarmed is akin to attempted murder IMHO. This is especially true when the poaching humans (the most dangerous animal by far) are known to be there and armed themselves.

I will not shed a tear for someone who wants to kill just to make quick money instead of earning a living.

You should remember that in this culture, a problem already exists among some in authority despite all the legal checks and balances. To then remove one of those checks and balances would be insane.

I do see one similarity with our culture: government complexes. In a government complex such as, say, the Pentagon, one does not simply walk into a restricted area. Doing so means security has the right to plug you where you stand. Of course, the perimeter of all these areas is sealed off as well to prevent any accidental entry.

But I will shed a tear for someone who, via corruption and a bad turn of luck, is subjected to any sort of punishment... especially capital. It now appears to me that you have this situation under control as to that aspect, but whenever a large cross section of society begins celebrating what is in effect martial law... sorry, that just scares me.

Thank you for educating me.

TheRedneck

*Future diary entry of a wealthy big game hunter*

day 1..my jet landed in India without delay and my Travel agencey managed to get decent lodgings near where the big game is is spotted periodically.

day 2... The tracker/guide finds discarded ciggarette butts along the trail on our first outing and tells me we will find our game soon.

day 3... I finally did it! I achieved what most hunters dream of! It was a 150 yard kill and we didnt have to track down the kill. Took pictures with my trophy due to usa laws no such trophies are allowed, but am eager return to the states and frame the pics next to my Rhino head. I will return next year with my sons to enjoy more big game hunting.

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
reply to post by poloblack

 

When your family is starving and only means to make some money to feed your family is to kill some wild animals then?

hmm i think I'd rather take my gun and go rob some pillock like yourself.

reply to post by reg


That won't be possible.My vehicles are armored.Chances are I will run you over. Plus I have Orisis sniper rifle and a Makarov.

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
reply to post by reg

 

That won't be possible.My vehicles are armored.Chances are I will run you over. Plus I have Orisis sniper rifle and a Makarov.

course ya do well i have an armored helicopter a rocket launcher and 2 makarovs so ner.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by hp1229

 

Many a times these 'endangered' species are a very severe nuisance and danger to human life.

edit on 25-5-2012 by mkgandhas because: (no reason given)

There are so many dangers to a human life. We cannot simply avoid them. Thats like comparing someone killing a military personnel just because they are safeguarding the nation. If they ever get into revenge killings then definitely the GOI has to place tougher measures.

Leopard kills people and/or livestock as they're wild animals and that is what they do for food given the fact that most of the land has been domesticated by the GOI for the people where the wild animals once used to roam free.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by llmacgregor

 

If you care so about animals and overpopulation then kill yourself and give the animal your space.

Sad you have no humanity.When poverty descends on you and you are desperate ,it will be worthwhile to ask you then.

edit on 26-5-2012 by mkgandhas because: (no reason given)

If Poverty is the cause then why not fix just that? In all fairness, its the GOI that is the culprit. Not the poor rangers or poachers. I say let there be a skirmish between the poachers and rangers so that it might get some much needed political attention and hopefully the GOI can provide alternatives and/or possible funding/environment to eliminate the poverty in that particular region/state.

Originally posted by mkgandhas

Originally posted by Ek Bharatiya

Originally posted by mkgandhas

reply to post by llmacgregor

If killing a beast can enable feeding a poor family I am all for it.If you are so concerned about beast you are welcome to be their food.Could help feed the useless beast you love.

How long will that sustain the poor family? How many months/years? Once the wild life population has vanished then what? India as I know it based on the recent surveys and reports is a thriving economy and many wealthy indians created every year. Where is the GOI using the money it collects from Taxes? The aim should be to end the poverty or atleast control through the means of employment and not through poaching.