ction Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 I agree that no station would (or should) be obligated to show the footage. I just think the family should respect his wishes and not be the ones to say no. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted September 28, 2006 Author Share Posted September 28, 2006 So- if he was accidentally disemboweled or cut in half, it should still be up to the TV stations- not the family- to decide whether it's made publicly available? What if he was mauled by a grizzly bear? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 So- if he was accidentally disemboweled or cut in half, it should still be up to the TV stations- not the family- to decide whether it's made publicly available? What if he was mauled by a grizzly bear? If that's what he wanted, sure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Yes, assuming he explicity asked for any footage of his death to be aired. If I decide I want to be cremated and my family refuses to do it, just because they think I should be buried in the ground somewhere, I'm gonna be pissed and haunt somebody. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
owl Posted September 28, 2006 Author Share Posted September 28, 2006 In that sense, sure (although it's good that I wish to be cremated because my family would probably do it anyway). Seems to me, though, that there should be a degree of reason associated with the decision. Cremation vs. burial is an issue with which everyone has to cope. Showing footage of a grisly death on television, though, is a little more complicated, methinks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Aren't there people who disapprove of cremation pretty vehemently though? For them, it may be right up there with the thought of having footage of the death out there in the public domain. What about a die-hard athiest who dies and asks that no religious service be performed, only to have that wish overruled by a family member with strong faith? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 If that's what he wanted, sure.What if he decided to murder a schoolful of kids and then was gunned down by the police on camera? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 If that's what he wanted, sure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 What if he decided to murder a schoolful of kids and then was gunned down by the police on camera? That would be tough. Since he's already dead an all. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 What if he decided to murder a schoolful of kids and then was gunned down by the police on camera? Don't take this as a personal attack but that is probably the stupidest argument I've heard here in a long time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 Don't take this as a personal attack but that is probably the stupidest argument I've heard here in a long time.My point is simply that just because he requested something be done post-mortem doesn't mean it's necessarily prudent to follow through with it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 What if he decided to murder a schoolful of kids and then was gunned down by the police on camera? The guy made educational shows about wild animals. The sad fact is, sometimes people die because of contact with wild animals; this is one aspect of our relationship with them which is as natural as anything else that goes on in these documentaries, and yet it's never shown. While some may consider it morbid, it seems to me an excellent educational opportunity to show kids (and adults) that if you get too close to some animals, they can kill you. I don't personally care whether or not it gets shown, but I don't have a problem with it being aired, as long as it's done tastefully. Clearly, there will be a lot of sensationalism surrounding the video if it ever gets distributed, but if it's what he wanted, it's what he wanted. He wasn't breaking any laws when he died; he was a documentarian, known to work with some of the most dangerous animals in the world, doing an educational piece about potentially dangerous sea life, when he was killed by one of the animals he was documenting. Clearly a different scenario than the one you suggested. Not quite sure what your point is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
JUDE Posted September 28, 2006 Share Posted September 28, 2006 My point is simply that just because he requested something be done post-mortem doesn't mean it's necessarily prudent to follow through with it. I certainly hope you can tell the difference between a person who is so passionate about their life Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.