It doesn't matter if it is for shock value or whatever. It is cruel, unnecessary and just sick. Now i know there are a lot of immature people who will respond with 'how cool' it is to see them die, etc. But honestly, it is not. This is just absolutley pathetic and should have never happened and should never happen again.
shareMost of them were eaten though, so does it really matter if they were killed on film or not? They probably would have been killed and eaten anyway. May as well get more than just food from it.
shareyes it does matter, it allows us to view someones suffering as entertainment and whittles away at our compassion for others.
no one should suffer for your entertainment, regardless of what happens to the body afterwards.
Why did they kill the turtle?
Just for food or for the experience as well?
I'm pondering on watching this but to answer your question. How often does one eat a turtle? Not that often.
shareWithin the confines of the movie's plot, they kill the turtle with the intention of just getting food, but the enjoyment they get from the experience is one of the many things that show us how mentally unhinged the characters are.
It makes perfect sense that they do this, as delight in cruelty to animals is a well established indicator of psychopathy.
That said, if you're putting this scene into a movie, you should absolutely do it with special effects. Killing animals on film for entertainment purposes is just not right.
Yes, animals are killed every day, and this is accepted as fine by the majority of people. But the fact that this particular animal's death was totally unnecessary makes it morally wrong in my opinion.
The Animal Kingdom needs to revive Harambe so that we can know what he thinks about it.
shareP.E.T.A. Stands for People Eating Tasty Animals
share