Some people argue over who’s going to win the Republican Primary. Some people argue over who would win in a fight between the Avengers and the X-Men. Some people just want to know whether Han shot first. Here’s a thing that totally makes sense, as far as cryptozoology is concerned, but that you might not have thought of:
A lot of big foot enthusiasts disagree as to whether, if they ever encountered the rare-to-nonexistant creature in the wild, it would be alright to murder it.
The crux of the answer lies in whether you think that obtaining proof that sasquatches exist is worth the life of a single (possibly one of very, very few) sasquatches.
Some say yes, because that’s the only way to prove they exist, and once proof is found, funds could be made available to protect them as an endangered species. Others say no — that because Bigfoot sightings are so rare, they must have very small populations and killing one might drive the animals to extinction.
Tranquilizer rifles have been proposed to solve this dispute, and, according to Live Science, are “gaining steam” among bigfoot hunters. Live Science also reminds its readers that what you think might be a bigfoot behind that bush could actually be another kind of endangered species, an animal that someone owns, or even a person; mentioning the case of the Texas teen who shot what he thought was a chubacabra but was probably actually an injured dog or coyote with mange. If it had indeed been a dog and had actually belonged to someone, he could have faced felony charges for killing it.
So, if you meet a bigfoot on the road, don’t kill him. Same thing goes for Ronald McDonald.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]