3 ms·

Theranos was a scam that stole and squandered investors money. This crime had no such direct victims. The two are not very comparable IMO. Who is the victim i

by Dig1t 3y ago

Theranos was a scam that stole and squandered investors money. This crime had no such direct victims. The two are not very comparable IMO. Who is the victim in this situation? What actual harm was done?

munificent 3y ago
Anyone who lives in an environment is a potential victim if you go about creating or introducing a new species that becomes invasive.
- Dig1t 3y ago
  > Schubarth brought parts of the largest sheep in the world, Marco Polo argali sheep (Ovis ammon polii), from Kyrgyzstan into the United States without declaring the importation He didn’t import an invasive species, he imported PARTS. I do not see any victims of his actions. Also this is for a wild game ranch, for hunting. These ranches have extra high fences that surround the entire property to keep all the animals contained. Even if he did import the whole sheep, he has a strong economic incentive to contain them. This exact thing is perfectly legal in Texas, happens all the time, and causes no problems.
  - klyrs 3y ago
    > These ranches have extra high fences that surround the entire property to keep all the animals contained. I watched that movie!
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    > He didn’t import an invasive species, he imported PARTS. "It's OK, I killed the endangered animal first!" isn't likely to be a successful defense argument. > I do not see any victims of his actions. As with drunk driving, you are not required to; we're allowed to act before widespread ecological disaster ensues. > This exact thing is perfectly legal in Texas, happens all the time, and causes no problems. The Endangered Species Act applies in Texas too.
  - munificent 3y ago
    > He didn’t import an invasive species, he imported PARTS. Yes, in order to clone DNA from them in order to breed hybrid animals. Did you not read the article? > I do not see any victims of his actions. It's generally better to prevent a catastrophe than to wait for one to roll around and harm a bunch of people before you take action.

by Dig1t 3y ago

munificent 3y ago

Anyone who lives in an environment is a potential victim if you go about creating or introducing a new species that becomes invasive.

Dig1t 3y ago
> Schubarth brought parts of the largest sheep in the world, Marco Polo argali sheep (Ovis ammon polii), from Kyrgyzstan into the United States without declaring the importation He didn’t import an invasive species, he imported PARTS. I do not see any victims of his actions. Also this is for a wild game ranch, for hunting. These ranches have extra high fences that surround the entire property to keep all the animals contained. Even if he did import the whole sheep, he has a strong economic incentive to contain them. This exact thing is perfectly legal in Texas, happens all the time, and causes no problems.
- klyrs 3y ago
  > These ranches have extra high fences that surround the entire property to keep all the animals contained. I watched that movie!
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > He didn’t import an invasive species, he imported PARTS. "It's OK, I killed the endangered animal first!" isn't likely to be a successful defense argument. > I do not see any victims of his actions. As with drunk driving, you are not required to; we're allowed to act before widespread ecological disaster ensues. > This exact thing is perfectly legal in Texas, happens all the time, and causes no problems. The Endangered Species Act applies in Texas too.
- munificent 3y ago
  > He didn’t import an invasive species, he imported PARTS. Yes, in order to clone DNA from them in order to breed hybrid animals. Did you not read the article? > I do not see any victims of his actions. It's generally better to prevent a catastrophe than to wait for one to roll around and harm a bunch of people before you take action.