To: Huck
"I say some level of risk in life is acceptable, whether we're discussing tobacco, guns, bears, sports, or many other things. The goal is not a risk-free society."
I agree with you there. see my home page. The problem is unlike those other activities, which are under human control, bears are wild animals and not under human control.
Put it this way. Sky diving is probably more dangerous than encountering a bear, however, people who skydive do not put others at risk when they do so.
Perhaps you should get your own bear so you can enjoy interactions with a bear and everyone else can rest assured that you will keep them safe from said bear?
153 posted on
11/23/2004 9:01:19 AM PST by
monday
To: monday
Perhaps you should get your own bear so you can enjoy interactions with a bear and everyone else can rest assured that you will keep them safe from said bear? Nope. Perhaps we should manage wildlife rationally, rather than just be scared babies about it.
154 posted on
11/23/2004 9:09:25 AM PST by
Huck
(The day will come when liberals will complain that chess is too violent .)
To: monday
however, people who skydive do not put others at risk when they do so. That's not true. Planes can crash. Even divers can have accidents that could hurt others. Private planes crash and destroy property from time to time. It's not risk free. It's a risk people accept. Raccoons can bite and cause rabies. Kids could die from it. We don't exterminate all the raccoons. Wonder why? Maybe because risk free life is not the goal.
156 posted on
11/23/2004 9:21:24 AM PST by
Huck
(The day will come when liberals will complain that chess is too violent .)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson