Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Ok...guys/glas.
Heres my question.
By now...everyone should have heard about the beautifull young girl that got killed by a shrak in florida.
And the young man who went fishing in close to the same area and got his leg bitten off days later.

My question is this:

WHY DONT THEY JUST CLOSE THE BEACHES IN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA?

AND use the lifeguards as security to keep people away.

What does it take to make thme do this?

Okay folks.....I await your replies

Fred Albury

Fred......That is the cruelest idea you have ever come up with. How else are we gonna feed our sharks?

(couldn't resist)

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

They kill people daily. Why not ban everything?

I am sure that neither the parents of the dead child, nor the parents of the child who now posesses ONE LEG would agree with you.They would have been GLAd to have a ban AFTER something bad allready happened. Think of the grief it would have saved them

Think your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS are being taken away?

I agree....lets fix that by banning EVERY other human being from swimming in the area where these attacks occurred and allow YOU to swim, sans lifeguards, for as long as you wish!
Day OR night! With or without floodlights!!

After all....it is your RIGHT to do so isnt it?

And we defend that....to the death(Um....guess whos?)

(Fred hands speedos or trunks to stranger who is willing to swim in shark infested waters by themselves)

Happy swimming!!

Sincerely,

Fred Albury

I heard you loud and clear. Your simple point was, "WHY DONT THEY JUST CLOSE THE BEACHES IN THAT IMMEDIATE AREA?"

There's a highway near my house that has a high-accident rate. There's more deaths on this highway than any other in the immediate area. Since all of the officials know that this is a dangerous highway, why dont they try to ban driving on the highway? Or at least for a little while, after someone gets hurt or killed? Seem impracticle? So does your idea to ban a specific beach. People know it's dangerous. We don't need government telling us what we can and can't do. If someone decides to still swim in this beach after the attack, well then.. they must love living on the edge, and know damn well what they're getting themselves into.

There's plently of shark attacks here in CA. You can't predict how and when they are going to strike. You screw with the bull you get the horn. I go into the beach fully aware that it is not a completely safe domesticated environment.

"WE dont need government telling us what to do and where we can and cant go?" was quoted by a poster before me.

LOL ROFL...what the @$%*% do you think the PATRIOT ACT is?

Bottem line: KIDS died....unecessarily, stuff does happen and cant be avoided. BUT....they could have closed that section of the beach DOWN AFTER the gril was KILLED.

They didnt....thinking along the same train of though as you that it is a persons PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to make sure that they dont place themselves in dangers way.

But these are kids...and kids dont have the experience often to use good judgement.

Neither do money hungry politicians who would keep a beach open AFTER a CRITICAL shark attack so that the TOURISTS and locals can SURF or Boogieboard.

Personal responsibility?
Im all for that. Train your kids well.But they are still kids.

Responsibility in our government?

THAT is an illusion. Lawmakes could have put a ban on that beach. Its THAT simple....But they choose not to.

So...on one hand you have the "freedom" to go swimming in shark infested waters post a murder via shark in same area

And on the other...your email...your..phone....your mai..this post........and your comings and goings can and are being recorded and domcumented. yup yup

So....WHERE is the REAL ISSUE of "Personal Freedom" here?

""LOL ROFL...what the @$%*% do you think the PATRIOT ACT is?""

"roll on the floor and laugh your arse" off all you want, but the last time I checked, the patriot act imparts little inconvenience to my personal life and Im sure it does very little to yours. Title IV of the "surveillance broadening" act describes protecting our borders. Look at the border patrol in the Michael Moore movie...hardly seems under any sort of "control".

""They could have closed that section of the beach DOWN AFTER the gril was KILLED. They didnt....thinking along the same train of though as you that it is a persons PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY to make sure that they dont place themselves in dangers way.""

Do you want to know something? In 1995 there was a young boy run over across the street from Colony Park in CA. The boy was my age at the time. The next day, all of us still crossed that street to go to the park (unbeknownced to our parents). Since the street was unsafe (as many people said it was), why didn't they just close the street down? Because there are too many variables, and it's a moot point. Sure, it was a dangerous road. Then again, no one else ever died there. Sure, close the beach for 3 days...hell lets go crazy. Why dont we close the beach for 3 years? On the first day of re-opening, that same shark may be trolling through the waters looking for something to eat with a face full of scowl. 3 days of closing isn't going to do anything about the real problem. Please.

""But these are kids...and kids dont have the experience often to use good judgement. Personal responsibility? Im all for that. Train your kids well.But they are still kids.""

Dude, it could have been anyone. I've read of adults being consumed/dimembered by sharks. It has nothing to do with judgement. It does however, have everything to with being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

"So...on one hand you have the "freedom" to go swimming in shark infested waters post a murder via shark in same area"

I have the freedom to go to the bathroom, right now

Unfortunately this is the kind of thinking that leads to breed bans in dogs, and etc...

It seems to me that a shark attack would be very well known in that immediate area and if you want to take a swim, best of luck to you. There wouldnt be a good way to do it anyway. You cant track the shark to find out where its going. I dont know how much area they can cover in a day but I would guess its a lot. I say post a sign stating there was an attack: swim at own risk.
To take your side though, maybe closing it down for a few days wuld be a good idea. No food for shark, shark leaves. Of course then it just goes to Daytona for lunch, and the same problem arises again.
Odds are still in your favor though. How many thousands/millions of people go to the beach each year compared to how many get attacked. Ill take those odds to Vegas anyday.

ep
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
1.1.5 balls
2.1.8 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, 4 normal,
4 anery )
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
1 fish
1 mouse
3.3 cats

Have to throw in on the side of common sense. As a Long term (40 years) Florida resident I can tell you that shark sightings are common as some species migrate thru here. The point of closing a beach is ridiculous as the shark will just go elsewhere. You would have at this point....to close the entire Gulf coast for it to be effective because that shark could be anywhere in a matter of days.

Not such a simple thing to ban nature.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Understood Frank. Exhos of "JAWS" ring in my head though, where they chose not to close th beaches and had dire consequences. I say screw it, close the entire gulf, turn the lifeguards into security patrols :!)

Bet you freedom lovers enjoyed that statement!!!

lol

make people pay a TAX to enter the beach...a nice healthy one!

Man....I sound like Bush..

Time to rest

Fred Albury

why doesnt bush just declare ware against them?

war* why cant you edit your posts on this forum?

Bush is such a stupid child. War on terror. how about a war on anger? Why dont we declare war on that? Look at the war on drugs. Its damn near impossible to score a joint these days...oh wait.

I hope you post was just a joke or a satire on the over-reacting media... it was truly a tragic incident that that girl was killed and a horrible coincidence that the boy was bitten too.....
but come on...... let's look at the stats here.. we can be silly and say truthfully that on average more people in the US die from falling vending machines in a year than shark attacks..DEATH TO ALL VENDING MACHINES!!!!!!!! oh wait.. let's be a little more serious.... since 1959 in coastal states 22 people have died from shark attack, 1857 from lightning..or during the 90's on a yearly average 130 people died from running into a deer with their car, 18 people from dogs bites, 15 people from (oh no) snakes bites and 0.4 from sharks.. oh here's a good stat for you, what should we ban here, during the year 1984 in the city of New York there was reported 1,589 incidents of people biting people and only 14 shark bites in the entire US...this is a cute one too.. 1996 there were 43,687 people who were injured by their toilet.. I can here the news trailer now.."Is there something in your bathroom waiting to attack you?.. film at 6"... oh and during that same year only 13 shark related injuries..anyways please don't add to the shameless medias desire to have us all running around in a frenzy.. It was an isolated tragic incident.. oh I'm sorry there was that boy who was bit close by... 100 mile close by..
all stats courtesy of http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/ ..
-----
BC
0.0.1 GTP
2.2 Ball Python
1.1 JCP
1.0 Stimson's Python
0.1 Dumeril's Boa
0.1 Albino Corn
0.0.1 Albino black rat
1.2 Bearded Dragon
0.0.2 Bumble Bee Darts
0.0.1 Albino Pac-man
1.1 Canine
2.1 Homo Sapien

Ummm you do realize that you're about 100 times more likely to die from being struck by lightning in Florida than by a shark bite...
Should they ban going out in the rain, too?