3 ms·

A handgun won't be of much use if you're jumped on from behind by a beast 3 times your weight and many times your strength.

• throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  If pouncing on villagers routinely resulted in catching a 12ga slug (buddy system when doing high risk things will do a pretty good job of guaranteeing that) then the tigers that live long enough to pass on their genes would be the ones that don't make a habit of pouncing on villagers. It only takes a few generations for animals to become afraid of or lose their fear of humans. You see this in all sorts of species when hunting pressure is applied/removed.
  • macintux 6y ago
    I suspect you’d find that a single untrained human, even well-armed, isn’t always sufficient to kill a tiger. So rather than avenge your buddy and improve the tiger gene pool, you’d get killed too.
    • swader999 6y ago
      For grizzly bear attacks, bear mace is more effective than guns. https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/spray-more-effective-than-guns-against-bears-study-1.707738 https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/spray-more-effective-than...
    • throwaway0a5e 6y ago
      You don't have to get them every time just often enough that they stop doing it It's about making it statically much riskier for the tigers to misbehave, not saving everyone.
      • macintux 6y ago
        Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_attack the majority who attack humans are infirm and desperate. Doubt taking them out of the gene pool would do any long-term good.