How would The US react if 6 people were killed and 24 mangled by Cougars in Highland Park on July 4th?

In My Humble Opinion
1

This question occurred to me while watching breaking news today on TV - How would The US react if 6 people were killed and 24 mangled by Cougars in Highland Park on July 4th?

Would such a flurry of attacks cause general alarm?
Would the presence of Cougars then be considered a provocation?
Could politicians ignore the Cougar threat with a few prayers and a moment of silence?
Would we strive to reduce the number of Cougars in Illinois?
Would an actual Cougar threat be different from our actual gun threat? (the threat not some perceived right)

IMHO, that level of Cougar attacks in a single day would paralyze the City. At least with regards to schools and public gatherings. Cougars would be considered an immediate threat and shot on sight. A major effort would be made to reduce the Cougar population. Even though there is no significant history of Cougars being aggressive.

So, why are guns different? Why are we unable to acknowledge that guns are a clear and present danger that calls for a reduction of their number?

2

Because Something Something Founding Fathers, Something Something MAH FREEDUMS

3

The OP refers to the existential threat, not to a perceived right.

4

Few people believe that there is a Constitutionally-guaranteed right to have a cougar.

5

People would point to the constitution, it is “bear arms” and not “cougar paws” after all.

6

The Cougars are native Americans.

The question is, would we react differently to the threat?

7

Not on a Constitutional basis.

They are also not people, and are not protected by the laws that are codified to define people’s rights, and protect them.

8

Obviously, but would we be alarmed by the Cougar threat.

(the OP avoids the Constitutional issue which has been amply discussed)

9

That depends on your definition of “cougar”.

10

These figures do not include today’s shootings in Highland Park:
“Nine people have been shot and killed in Chicago over the Fourth of July weekend in Chicago. They are among at least 57 people shot, according to police.
Last year, 19 people were killed and more than 100 people were shot over the long Fourth of July weekend.”

As long as it’s guns, Americans don’t really give a shit, generally.

11

You asked, in your OP:

The reason is the Constitution (and, secondarily, the fact that guns are operated by human citizens, whereas cougars are non-human, non-citizens).

12

If those were attributed to Cougar attacks we’d have panic in the City.

13

False, and rather silly, analogy. Cougars are self-aware mammals. They can analyze prey, asses threats, and decide to hunt, or not to hunt. Worst case, if it gets hungry enough, if it’s defending territory or offspring, it might attack something or someone it ordinarily would not.

A firearm is an inanimate object. It has no agency. It does nothing until and unless a person picks it up, aims it, and pulls the trigger.

14

To paraphrase a saying: Guns aren’t people, people are people.

15

For purposes of discussion we can set it aside. The point is to compare the two threats and their solutions.

Are you saying that the 2nd amendment is sacred and irrefutable? God will smite us if we discuss it?

16

But, I was asking about human reaction to threats, not silliness about animal rights.

Will we react to the gun death this week the same as we would if they had been caused by predatory animals?

17

I don’t personally believe this, but an awful lot of Americans do (as I am sure you are very well aware).

I don’t know what you are hoping to achieve with your thread, other than to point out that if today’s mass shooting had been, instead, an attack by wild animals, the response would be different. Well, no kidding.

18

Doesn’t that strike you as odd. Both are threats to public safety.

19

Not odd, all kinds of stupid, but not odd. Let’s face it; humans are dumb animals, cougars are pretty clever.

20

That just makes the argument for banning guns, rather than cougars, even stronger.