4 ms·
If the State does not euthanize it after a bite, they could be found liable if someone gets bitten again. There’s also the question of rabies, the detection of
by voakbasda 3y ago
If the State does not euthanize it after a bite, they could be found liable if someone gets bitten again. There’s also the question of rabies, the detection of which requires examination of the brain tissue.
- nradov 3y agoIt's not a liability issue. States generally have sovereign immunity over such things, and there is no legal requirement to protect people from wild animal attacks. This is more a matter of public safety, and humans generally come first.
- willcipriano 3y ago"It you attack a human, you die" probably predates modern humans.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- kijin 3y agoWe've been enforcing this rule for long enough that most animals avoid attacking humans even if they could easily kill us. The rule has been written into their genes through sheer evolutionary pressure. Except house cats, of course. Somehow we've bred them to attack us with impunity.
- _Adam 3y agoThey've optimized the fitness function "cuteness^2 - propensity to bite". So even when they're tearing up my arm it's still so adorable.
- willcipriano 3y agoInteresting to think about that in the context of tribal beliefs around the sprits of their ancestors providing them with protection from nature.
- maxerickson 3y agoIf they were more lethal we would probably do more about it. I startled a cat I had when it was sitting in the window getting worked up about a cat outside and it turned on me with all it's murderous power, clawing my shins pretty bad. I picked it up and put it in the basement.