Lunch! Slow feeble easy warm lunch! See also
and
Tigers, wolves and bears I can kinda understand, but a man eating plant I’d have problems with.
How many of you all felt compelled to say “Sharknado!” out loud when you read this?
It’s not like it can chase you. Unless it’s a Triffid.
Do you mean after you die?
If you’re not clear on this, you shouldn’t blame the cats for any misunderstandings that occur.
Forget thee not the Audrey II:
Feed me, Seymour! Or is that “Feed me Seymour!” ?? 
He’s a florist AND a dessert topping.
Yeah. Cats’ command of English is sketchy at best. As is their adherence to owner edicts.
I predict this business will end badly for our dear @susan.
“We ate her face when she died. It’s what she wanted.”
“What did she die of?”
“Having her face eaten.”
Perhaps it’s a matter of - saving face.
It’s not the microbiome, it’s the entire digestive system.
Not to mention that if predation stopped we’d all long since have been smothered in, among other things, mice.
It’s not only the entire digestive system: it’s the entire ecological system.
Haven’t read the thread, just the title (which discourse doesn’t make easy to quote); but I wouldn’t find it insulting to be killed by either wildlife or weather. Unpleasant, quite probably; but not insulting.
Under most circumstances I’d find it insulting to be killed by another human, though.
I think I’d be insulted, and find it rather unpleasant, if I died from being smothered in mice.
What if it’s angora mice?
Someone did a YouTube video on this once. The Earth after 100,000+ years of no death resulted in layers of living insects hundreds of miles thick, living animals hundreds of miles thick, living humans hundreds of miles thick.
(Although that wasn’t just no carnivorism, but no death, period.)
A mole of moles.
Okay, maybe a bit less unpleasant, but still insulting.
Hmm, a completely different meaning to being an apex animal.
A moose mousse.
Well, lots of snark is pretty on-brand for this board. I think I said some other things, but fundamentally it seems like you misunderstand the nature of collective action problems.
“Why do carnivores exist if animals could just agree not to be carnivores?” has the same answer as “why do bank robbers exist if we could just all agree not to rob banks?”
There are individual advantages to not agreeing is why.
And yet you skipped the obligatory link. I’ve done the needful here for those non-cognoscenti in our midst.