Nope, doesn't teach the person a thing. But it does prevent the tragedies that would have come from leaving the individual alive.
Let's take a little heat out of the equation by saying this is a vicious pet (horse, dog, cat, bird- doesn't matter) you start by asking yourself is this individual able to be rehabilitated into a safe member of the family/society. Your choices are:
1) Do Nothing. Allow the behavior to continue which means you may be indirectly responsible for changing someones life when the vicious pet mangles them.
2) Isolate the pet (jail), now you are responsible for everything in the life of that individual and consideration must go to physical and mental care and the prevention of dangerous behavior to themselves and others. Birds are especially hard to keep from injuring themselves when isolated so mental stimulation is paramount for some in this eventuality.
3) Retraining to be safe to interact with. What behaviors must be changed? How are you going to do it? Will it "stick"?
Let's take the common problem of biting. Is it Defensive (take them down so you can get away)? Defensive Aggression (Take them out before they can get me)? Offensive Aggression (I own the world and you should do as I wish!) Predatory (Kill it now and dinner is assured.) Just the beginning. Not so simple.
Almost everyone believes pure defense is allowable. What we have here is a problem with Defensive Aggression- Is it justifiable?
Warren was obviously Offensive Aggression. It doesn't matter how they became unstable what matters is does someone think they are worth the time, energy, effort and cost required to make them safe or is it more sensible to eliminate them, mourn the loss, and start over.
I used to rehabilitate dangerous dogs and option one is just plain out for me and I feel it should be the same with humans. Our legal system says most people agree but deciding on the appropriate action is difficult.
So in my opinion Xander in this story instinctively did the morally right thing. There was no way to reliably contain Warren and he appeared too delusional for rehab. Now whether Xander will be able to deal with his actions we will have to wait and see.
There is no good answer. I've given up on 5 dogs one I still wonder if I should have. On the other hand I tried to rehab one Great Dane and was subsequently responsible for the death of my goats and another of my dogs when I didn't manage to contain her. Weren't their lives just as valuable?
There is no way to know the absolutely right thing to do unless you're God. But eliminating a threat makes us feel safer. Right or wrong Defensive Aggression has its value. Next question: Should Xander go to jail for protecting his family from guaranteed future pain? He has proven himself dangerous to others, so is he a safe member of society? I'd say yes, but there is an argument for no.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Yah! He's dead.
Date: 2010-07-12 05:22 pm (UTC)Nope, doesn't teach the person a thing. But it does prevent the tragedies that would have come from leaving the individual alive.
Let's take a little heat out of the equation by saying this is a vicious pet (horse, dog, cat, bird- doesn't matter) you start by asking yourself is this individual able to be rehabilitated into a safe member of the family/society. Your choices are:
1) Do Nothing. Allow the behavior to continue which means you may be indirectly responsible for changing someones life when the vicious pet mangles them.
2) Isolate the pet (jail), now you are responsible for everything in the life of that individual and consideration must go to physical and mental care and the prevention of dangerous behavior to themselves and others. Birds are especially hard to keep from injuring themselves when isolated so mental stimulation is paramount for some in this eventuality.
3) Retraining to be safe to interact with. What behaviors must be changed? How are you going to do it? Will it "stick"?
Let's take the common problem of biting. Is it Defensive (take them down so you can get away)? Defensive Aggression (Take them out before they can get me)? Offensive Aggression (I own the world and you should do as I wish!) Predatory (Kill it now and dinner is assured.) Just the beginning. Not so simple.
Almost everyone believes pure defense is allowable. What we have here is a problem with Defensive Aggression- Is it justifiable?
Warren was obviously Offensive Aggression. It doesn't matter how they became unstable what matters is does someone think they are worth the time, energy, effort and cost required to make them safe or is it more sensible to eliminate them, mourn the loss, and start over.
I used to rehabilitate dangerous dogs and option one is just plain out for me and I feel it should be the same with humans. Our legal system says most people agree but deciding on the appropriate action is difficult.
So in my opinion Xander in this story instinctively did the morally right thing. There was no way to reliably contain Warren and he appeared too delusional for rehab. Now whether Xander will be able to deal with his actions we will have to wait and see.
There is no good answer. I've given up on 5 dogs one I still wonder if I should have. On the other hand I tried to rehab one Great Dane and was subsequently responsible for the death of my goats and another of my dogs when I didn't manage to contain her. Weren't their lives just as valuable?
There is no way to know the absolutely right thing to do unless you're God. But eliminating a threat makes us feel safer. Right or wrong Defensive Aggression has its value. Next question: Should Xander go to jail for protecting his family from guaranteed future pain? He has proven himself dangerous to others, so is he a safe member of society? I'd say yes, but there is an argument for no.
Helene