WA
373 posts
for
And the next time i hear the argument that more people die by toaster, coconut, car crash etc etc i will slowly exhale and ask just what is the proportion of the population that actually spend significant time in the water?
The basis of my argumant is that those that spend more then 2 hours per week in the ocean are more at risk then they were.
WA
400 posts
I eat meat and fish so I must be FOR the killing of sharks. Otherwise I would look like a hypocrite. Also I dont follow trends and fashions (like this has blown out to be, look at me!! Im a smelly hipster and I dont want the odd shark that continues to stray near the coastline and threaten swimmers to die while they munch on a mcfish burger as they only eat white meat to be good to the enviroment)
Argh but no one says anything about the crocs up north or the 10 000 of seagulls culled at rotto weekly. HYPOCRITES!
WA
1267 posts
Against anything Barnett comes up with.
WA
868 posts
For
(although in years well past I would have said no).
QLD
2434 posts
So they have still only caught one tiger right?
Mmmmm, don't seem very efficient these drum lines.
WA
1404 posts
Wrong season mate...if it was sept to nov it would be a blood bath
WA
3509 posts
Whales = Sharks
I have been fairly undecided on this one but if I have to choose then count me in, FOR.
WA
71 posts
For.
This polls turning out a bit different to the Today Tonight one, who woulda-thunk it aye?
WA
74 posts
I voted for the sex party at the federal election because I didn't give a crap for either.
On this topic I vote a strong FOR
WA
748 posts
For there is to many and i do like animals but sharks don't like me especially when you swim in with a broken mast from a mile out doh!
WA
467 posts
for
for the current strategy the govt has. it isn't a cull. far from it.
QLD
12365 posts
For.
Humans are at the top of the food chain. If sharks are smart enough to kill humans, they should be smart enough to realize they might get killed back.
WA
4642 posts
results up to here;-
Page one ..........,12 for : 12 against
Page two ........., 22 for : 2 against
Page three so far, 15 for : 1 against.
------------------------------------
Total ..... . . . . . . 49 for : 15 against.
There are quite a few posts which don't have a for or against on them so I didn't include those either way.
They might have voted elsewhere in the poll.
Strangely enough, evilpandaman went to the trouble of setting up a google poll but I cant see where he voted on this one.
If anyone counts differently to the above, feel free to correct the relevant page.
I did it while watching tv so it doesn't come with a money back guarantee.
One interesting bit of trivia,
In the first 8 hours, For 1 : 11 against.
From there the no vote went rapidly downhill.
In the next 16 hours the NO vote managed only 3 more votes.
I think I can see why these pop polls which news reporters do, usually come up with a bogus result.
In the first few hours, all who have a barrow to push, rush up to be counted. All 12 of them.
After that, all the rest who have an opinion but are not seeking to ram it down everyone elses throat, amble past and cast a vote.
In this later group, most make the common sense choice, and a few vote against it, which is normal.
Not everyone sees things the same way but are happy to go along with the majority view, without smashing windows.
What is very clear is, as usual, the vast majority view does NOT coincide with the vocal minority.
TAS
2967 posts
May I suggest a game of Sea Breeze Lotto ? . . . . . . We could run a book on
"HOW MANY SHARK TOPICS WE CAN FIT ON ONE PAGE OF SHOOTING THE BREEZE"
I see 'shark' in the heading now and tend to ignore the topic.
