Animal Attack: Travis, the murdered chimp

[PiggieMamaKelly]

Originally Posted by Susan613

Right before the attack, she gave the chimp Xanax in a cup of tea. Its sad to see animals getting stuck in a situation with stupid people.

That's interesting. I hadn't read that (although I did read about her giving him wine in long-stemmed glasses frequently). I wonder if the Xanax affected him in some way that influenced the attack.

[Paula]

Originally Posted by Angelgal

Owning a non-domesticated animal is not something everyone can or should do.

It's not something anyone should do, for any reason. End of story. There are rescues and sanctuaries that exist to take in primates like Travis and other animals that people acquire as pets only to realize they haven't the slightest idea how to care for or control them and then abandon them, or something tragic happens (ie Travis) and they are forced to surrender the animal.

The bottom line is, taking an animal like this into your home puts people in danger and does absolutely nothing beneficial for the animal.

Originally Posted by Angelgal

There are other ways to prevent cruelty to animals then stopping breeding/eating them and letting them die off like PETA wishes.

Why, oh why, are you still bashing PETA?

And furthermore, not allowing people to acquire "non-domesticated" animals as novelty pets in the first place would be an AWESOME step toward preventing cruelty to animals.

[Paula]

Originally Posted by PiggieMamaKelly

I wonder if the Xanax affected him in some way that influenced the attack.

It's quite likely that it did. Xanax is used as a calming kind of anti-anxiety medication, but is thought to cause irritability in unstable individuals. (People).

The chimp also had Lyme disease.

[Angelgal]

Originally Posted by paula.m.moore

Why, oh why, are you still bashing PETA?

And furthermore, not allowing people to acquire "non-domesticated" animals as novelty pets in the first place would be an AWESOME step toward preventing cruelty to animals.

Haha no, but I LOVE how you still think I am considering:
a) You don't know me.
b) My views about PETA, never really been stated... so you don't really know them (I have made POSITIVE PETA COMMENTS THANKS)
c) The fact I mention PETA, it's automatically assumed I'm bashing.

Paula, if you notice, my statement including the word PETA, had nothing to do with allowing or not allowing people to own non-domesticated animals, which not everyone should do (some yes, its called a sanctuary, people run it). Stating PETA wants some animals (livestock, pets etc.) to die off because the way we treat them is "cruel" is nothing more than that, a STATEMENT. Then I added a statement, there are other ways for animal cruelty (such as for livestock) to be treated to prevent that, considering I don't think that's going to happen. Human's weren't made to be a large group of herbivours. That is NOT bashing, and I think you need to learn what bashing really. But thank you, I am going to take this up with Cavyspirit because this is just rediculous and childish, this is becoming a personal attack.

Animals play important roles everyday.
- Helping us round up livestock
- Transportation (not public, but private and for the Amish)
- Therapeutic reasons
- Stopping crime
- Animal research played and still plays a roll in making break throughs for human and animal health. How do you think we lived so long?

So before anyone says animals are not needed, you need to sit and really think about that.

Yes, make a law preventing people from having non-domesticated animals as pets. Certain people should only be caring for these in captivity.

[Paula]

Originally Posted by Angelgal

Paula, if you notice, my statement including the word PETA, had nothing to do with allowing or not allowing people to own non-domesticated animals, which not everyone should do (some yes, its called a sanctuary, people run it).

Do you understand that those sanctuaries have to exist because of people that take these animals as pets and then neglect or abuse them? No one starts a sanctuary for the purpose of acquiring these animals as pets. They start a sanctuary because there are so many that are abused and mistreated, thanks to people like Travis's owner.

And your comment on PETA in THIS thread was in fact negative, and irrelevant. Letting livestock and other animals die off doesn't have anything to do with people who acquire wild animals, like chimps and lions and tigers and bears, as pets.

[Angelgal]

Originally Posted by paula.m.moore

Do you understand that those sanctuaries have to exist because of people that take these animals as pets and then neglect or abuse them? No one starts a sanctuary for the purpose of acquiring these animals as pets. They start a sanctuary because there are so many that are abused and mistreated, thanks to people like Travis's owner.

And your comment on PETA in THIS thread was in fact negative, and irrelevant. Letting livestock and other animals die off doesn't have anything to do with people who acquire wild animals, like chimps and lions and tigers and bears, as pets.

A sanctuary is not alone started thanks to owner's like Travis's. Sanctuaries to protect endangered species, species that cannot survive in the wild, rehabilitation etc. Neglect/abuse is just one of the many reasons. All these people still need the same proper education about the animals they do take in. I never said for the sole purpose of pets.

Paula, it wasn't negative. It may not be positive but it is kind of true if you have ever been to their website. I think you need to look up the definition of bashing, because what I made a statement on was far from it. And it was relivant in a sense to something someone else posted, which was irrelivant to the topic yet *I* get the heat. Funny that is.

However, I am done here, perminantly. This account can perminantly be closed because when you disagree here, your accused of bashing. This is pro-aninmal rights, and I do not stand for being personally attacked and harassed ((Funny how animal rights groups do the same thing to people!!)). I'm quite experienced and educated in the way of cavies so, there is no need for me to be here or refer others to your line of harassment.

[Mhera]

Well after all the mudslinging and bashing, we now see that even humans aren't quite domesticated. Our reasoning greed and pride will be the doom of our race, even if we're "superior" right now.

I miss the old days when people rode horses because they needed to, when they only had and trained dogs if they needed them for hunting things for food, not just the fluffy pet that's entertainment and company. Back when if a kid wanted a dog, they worked for years to earn enough money, didn't cry if the dog bit them once or twice, and the dog wasn't shut in a small pen. Back when the only time you saw exotic animals was in a circus, not in a zoo. With responsibility come the irresponsible.

[CavySpirit]

I have replied to Angelgal via Private Message about this issue. I don't want to see any more 'debate' about or mention of PETA on this thread.

Thank you.

[AnimalHouse36]

Sure, we may have technology now, but its technology that's destorying this planet. Causing global warming, health problems etc. Honestly the world was a much healthier place when we were using animals for everday use (transportation). So should the population of humans with disabilities or mental health problems go without help?? You'd be amazed at the change animals can bring to people.

Animals are also very therapeutic, for a variety of disabilities and crime management. It has been prooven to be successful, and I have seen it and been in that area myself for a first-hand experience.

Specific livestock are bred for clothing, food etc. Sure, there is vegan/vegetarian but not everyone can live off this (like myself). We are not herbivours. There are other ways to prevent cruelty to animals then stopping breeding/eating them and letting them die off like PETA wishes.

Well NOW the animals we use for carrige ridding are abused, scared and hurt. Your saying you want all people treating horses like slaves?

Also, the #1 reason for global warming is because of factory farming. NOT cars.

If the need for breeding sheep (for clothing) and slaughtering pigs for our tastes buds was no longer nessacary, everyone COULD live off a veggie diet and a vegan lifestyle.

Okay, this is only going to turn into MORE PETA bashing. I'd rather not have this thread ruined by people who think they know everything about everything when it comes to misunderstood organizations.

And I think, that it IS right to have animals "die off". But you make it seem like they'll be starving on the streets. NO. They'll be taken care of by everone desperate for a dog who will resort to shelters.

A sanctuary is not alone started thanks to owner's like Travis's

But there are shelters just for poor victims like travis. I've seen them. I don't understand where you are coming from with all your nonsense posting. You say you support keeping wild animals? I honestly don't understand where your coming from.

[sophistacavy]

Animals play important roles everyday.
- Helping us round up livestock
- Transportation (not public, but private and for the Amish)
- Therapeutic reasons
- Stopping crime
- Animal research played and still plays a roll in making break throughs for human and animal health.

I agree that we need animals such as seeing eye dogs, and other types of specially trained dogs/animals for differently disabled people.
I don't think that being a guardian to a dog is a bad thing at all. I've watched Underdog to Wonderdog, and that show definetely shows me that living with a dog is not something to feel guilty about. I don't think that companion animals should die off, maybe just livestock used for human food and clothing purposes. But we would need to keep some in order to feed our omnivourous and carnivorous animal companions.

But this is going off topic from the original post. But I hope the friend is going to be okay. I wonder if the two are going to be friends anymore? I don't know what I would do if I were the friend. I also hope that the lady who had Travis gets in big trouble, and is forbidden from getting another chimp. She might have mental issues, in my opinion. I can back that up because she obviously didn't think enough about adopting a dog first. She must have just thought to herself that there was no other way to go than a chimp. Psycho. I mean, I'm sorry that her family is gone, but the way she is coping is inappropriate and completely unhealthy. She needs a psychiatrist.

[auburnmare5]

These types of animal "attacks" should never be taken lightly. First of all, why was it a pet? Even if it had a reason for being with her, did she treat it like a pet and keep it in her home? These types of things are to be expected with wild animals. It doesn't matter how well they are trained, they still have their own minds and are not programmed robots that do whatever we say.
All of the fuss being made over this is ridiculous. The animal wouldn't attack just because it was bored, it had to have had a legitimate reason. The authorities should be asking questions of what happened before this "attack" and not during and after the fact.
Seriously, people...come on!!!! People are mad at the chimp??? He probably put up with so much crap, and one thing (yes, it was a pretty big thing) he did is more important than what could have provoked it? And how it could have been prevented all together?
I am not blaming anyone, I am just stating my opinion.

[Delon]

This story has so many twists.

[Paula]

Originally Posted by Angelgal

However, I am done here, perminantly. This account can perminantly be closed because when you disagree here, your accused of bashing. This is pro-aninmal rights, and I do not stand for being personally attacked and harassed ((Funny how animal rights groups do the same thing to people!!)). I'm quite experienced and educated in the way of cavies so, there is no need for me to be here or refer others to your line of harassment.

A disagreement and statement of such does not constitute an attack, and most surely isn’t anything personal.

Originally Posted by auburnmare5

The animal wouldn't attack just because it was bored, it had to have had a legitimate reason. The authorities should be asking questions of what happened before this "attack" and not during and after the fact.

I don’t think the contention has ever been that the animal attacked because he was bored. It was because he was confused, probably drugged, and probably angry for reasons the owner didn’t understand or have any way of effectively dealing with.

Originally Posted by auburnmare5

People are mad at the chimp??? He probably put up with so much crap, and one thing (yes, it was a pretty big thing) he did is more important than what could have provoked it? And how it could have been prevented all together?

I doubt anyone’s actually mad at the chimp. He was in a situation he never should have been in, and I think most people realize that the owner is entirely to blame for that. And I do believe that investigators are doing the best they can to piece together the extenuating circumstances that led to this most tragic turn of events. The only way to prevent these types of things is to keep people from having these types of animals in the first place. There’s no way to know when an attack like this is coming, because the animals are unpredictable and virtually unable to communicate in any way we can understand. I suspect there were a great many warning signs with poor Travis, that were misunderstood or ignored completely. Charla Nash paid terribly for that mistake. She’s got years of surgeries ahead, as well as physical and psychological trauma that she’ll no doubt spend the rest of her life working through. And Travis, well, he paid for that mistake with his life.

The piece of this story that truly irks me, is that this owner put a group of responding emergency staff (police officers) in a situation where they had to shoot and kill an innocent animal, her "pet." Travis attacked the friend for reasons we can't know or understand, but he had no way of understanding that what he was doing was wrong, or that it would lead directly to him being shot and killed. I've said this before, but it bears repeating - that chimp is honestly the only true victim in this case.