Axl Rose Posts Open Letter in Response to Danish Giraffe Controversy
Rose recently posted a lengthy open letter offering a much more in-depth reaction to the story, which found the Copenhagen Zoo in the middle of a worldwide controversy after officials killed the giraffe, named Marius, and fed it to lions. (Barbaric as it sounds, the zoo's policy is not without its defenders.)
Between bouts of animal rights activism, the Guns N' Roses frontman is plenty busy on the musical front; the band boasts a growing 2014 tour schedule, including an upcoming return to the Joint at the Las Vegas Hard Rock Cafe for another extended run of dates. Here's hoping his GNR obligations don't keep him from continuing to weigh in on the news via social media -- it's always a treat to read about what's going on in Mr. Rose's mind. You can read the complete letter below.
Over the past week I've put out a few intentionally sarcastic tweets in response to the killing of the 18 month old baby male giraffe named Marius by the Copenhagen Zoo in Denmark. And in that regard I think that without more information or a better understanding of not just how this particular breeding program works or why it's believed to be necessary and seemingly without room for exception or public opinion... to the average person it would seem that...
1.) Marius could have been spared and was a waste of a healthy young animal's life.
2.) The manner in which he was if not euthanized then disposed of seemed particularly barbaric, unnecessary and a vulgar or grotesque display of inconsideration and complete disregard for public sentiments adding a level of morbid spectacle and horrendousness difficult for most to comprehend by doing so not just in front of but for what seems some misguided or twisted sense of educational purposes for children.
3.) The seemingly cold and clinical responses and attitudes regarding this unfortunate event by those involved appearing to be somewhat defiant, arrogant and even seeming somewhat perversely satisfied with themselves and their actions going as far as to express "pride" in their decisions comes off as completely heartless in regard to the animals and seems extremely disrespectful toward the general public on this issue.
Perhaps their comments were taken out of context? Perhaps there's something lost in translation? I don't know that anyone is trying to say or act in this situation as if they truly know more than these particular or any professional animal caretakers or zoologists etc. but I do know that at present plenty of lay people worldwide do not understand or approve of what took place here. And again without more information and better understanding of the breeding program and why this was deemed the appropriate course of action this event seems misguided and a crime against the very nature those in such positions are thought to be involved with as protectors and caretakers of such animals.
One can attempt to justify these choices as those taking into consideration a bigger picture scientifically but in my view there seems to be more than one perspective to that picture and it would appear that adherence to such a rigid or strict nature of such clinical focus may be disregarding the public impact of their actions.
For most normal everyday people that love, care about and enjoy animals this event has been a tragedy. An unexpected, unimaginable and what for many is most devastating a seemingly avoidable horror show that somehow seems lost on the professionals involved and those speaking for the zoo a facility that's in my opinion thought to exist for the animals, the public, educational purposes and science in as best a sense of harmony as possible. Just as it's a privilege for the public to visit, view and experience these animals it's also a privilege to work with and care for the animals and have the opportunity do so while interacting and/or working with the public.
Unfortunately somehow in this instance all or much of that seems to have been forgotten.