Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The "Gorilla" thread...


codeorama

Recommended Posts

Surprised that there was no thread on the Gorilla that was killed at the zoo because a child fell into the enclosure.

 

The mom is getting destroyed because people are saying she was at fault for allowing her child to fall in.. i.e., wasn't supervised.

 

 

I'm not sure what to think, other than its sad that the gorilla was shot and killed, but at the same time, it doesn't sound like the mom was letting the 4 year old roam around alone, so, it seems as if the zoo is responsible because it was even possible for the child to fall into the enclosure.  

 

I don't know. Sucks all around.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/nation-now/2016/05/31/jack-hanna-zookeeper-knoxville-cincinnati-zoo-gorilla-killed/85181272/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The parents are at fault for not keeping an eye on their child. The zoo is at fault for killing the gorilla. Doesn't make either party wrong.

 

I am not exactly sure why a big deal needs to be made of it. Any parent person claiming the zoo screwed up by shooting the gorilla would fell different if their kid fell in the enclosure. The zoo did the right thing in killing the gorilla. 

 

Now, if the parents end up suing the zoo?  I will revise my opinion a bit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank the mother loving gods above that my folks didn't get called out by the whole universe when I slipped away from my mom as a kid.

 

Zoos are a relic of the past and need to go away in favor of natural habitats we can observe, without what must be really irritating interference to a silver back, and that perpetuate species who need our help perpetuating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The parents are at fault for not keeping an eye on their child. The zoo is at fault for killing the gorilla. Doesn't make either party wrong.

 

I am not exactly sure why a big deal needs to be made of it. Any parent person claiming the zoo screwed up by shooting the gorilla would fell different if their kid fell in the enclosure. The zoo did the right thing in killing the gorilla. 

 

Now, if the parents end up suing the zoo?  I will revise my opinion a bit...

 

 

IMO, I ask, is the zoo at fault because its possible for a child to be able to fall into the gorilla enclosure?  I've only been to 3 different zoos and it wasn't even remotely possible to fall into an animal pen.  Nearly all the animals had plexiglass enclosures or 2 sets of fences.

 

You have to imagine that a child getting away from a parent is possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not fond of zoos to begin with, and have said that several times. That being said, I really curious about where we are headed as a society when its actually a debate as to whether or not a several hundred pound killing machine that got hold of a ****ing toddler should have been killed to save his/her life, no matter who's at fault (parent or zookeepers)

Maybe one of these people arguing wouldn't mind if Billy the tiger just ate their child, if heaven forbid that child slinks out of reach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've done a little reading of various viewpoints/articles.

 

1. It is sad that the gorilla had to be shot, but it seems like it was necessary.  It started out protective of the child, but seemed to get spooked by all the noise and yelling, and was dragging the child around.  At that point, quick decisions had to be made.

 

2. I have no idea what the zoos security is like around the enclosure, but apparently this is the first breach they have had since it opened in 1978, so there has to be at least some safety measure.

 

3. The question is how much blame falls on the mother.  Eyewitness account state that the kid was telling the mother he wanted to go into the moat, and she was telling him no, but at what point do you remove him from the area?  I've seen conflicting accounts of just how many kids were with her, and whether her actions could be described as negligent.  I have two kids myself, one of whom is very calm and passive, the other very energetic.  They are six and four.  I have only just now started taking them places by myself, and if they were both like the energetic one, I probably still wouldn't without their mother.  So the question to me is, how many kids did she have with her, could she reasonably expect to watch them all, and was she just not paying enough attention?  I've seen plenty of parents with their noses in their smartphones while their kids wandered around, so I think her actions, both at the time it happened, and leading up to it, are important.

 

If it turns out she was being negligent and that lead directly to the necessary killing of an endangered animal, I have zero problem with charging her.  I do wish the Internet justice police would lay off and give the facts time to come out, rather than posting pictures of her and her family, and slamming her place of business with repeated Facebook comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple things come to mind here:

 

(1) The parents were negligent.

(2) As parents, we are all negligent at times.  Just think about the time this past weekend when you went inside to grab your (whatever) for 2 minutes while leaving your 4 year old in the front yard playing with his squirt gun 

(3) Parents cannot always watch their children likes hawks, nor should they.

(4) The zoo should have had better security, understanding that small children are frequent visitors.

(5) The zoo isn't to blame, because the chances of a 4 year old crawling over the wall are remote (actually want to see the wall before saying this definitively, but for now I'll take the zookeeper at his word).

(6) The kid was dumb, just like all 4 year olds.

(7) The Ape was probably trying to protect that child, at least in its own mind.

(8) The ape dragged the child around like a gym bag.

(9) The ape could easily have killed the child

(10) The zoo did the right thing in killing the ape

(11) The people ****ing about the ape being killed either (1) don't value human life over animal life, (2) are pissed that the ape was in captivity to begin with, or (3) don't understand the following concept: Sometimes, **** happens.  Most likely a combination of the three.

 

Beautiful animal is dead.  Four year old child is safe.  Parents are being shamed.  Zoo is crapping its pants.  And protesters now have another opportunity to express their self-righteous indignation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were at the lake this weekend, walking along some trails. My daughter and nephew (both 3 year olds) just break out on full sprint on this gravel road that is sometimes used by vehicles too. They were ten feet in front of us when they decided to make a break for it and usually they stop or come back once you use a stern voice. But this time they didn't stop and disappeared round a bend. 

 

So I ran  them down. Point is that kids, even good listeners, will sometimes do something that you cannot control. It doesn't mean one is a bad parent. 


 

Beautiful animal is dead.  Four year old child is safe.  Parents are being shamed.  Zoo is crapping its pants.  And protesters now have another opportunity to express their self-righteous indignation.

Great post. And that is why it is a tragedy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The zoo did not have a choice in the matter.  Who knows how long a tranquilizer dart would have taken to kick in? It really sucks that they had to put down the Gorilla due to a negligent parent. 

 

O'Connor said she heard the boy joke with his mother about going into the moat. The mother was then briefly distracted by other children with her, and suddenly the boy was in the water, O'Connor said.

 

The boy had gotten into the enclosure by going under a rail, through wires and over a moat wall, according to the zoo.

 

Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cant come down too hard on the mom. It's by the grace of God that anybody that's a parent hasnt had something happen. It literally takes a second for your attention to be elsewhere and your kid to be into something. If somebody is trying to say they havent dodged some accident with their kid, they're a stone cold liar.

Now that said, from what I understand about this story, it's more nuanced than people are giving it credit for. The mom wanted to take a pic of the gorilla, so she had the kid hold her pocket. It's not like she was totally not paying attention. The kid bolted through the crowd and wound up in the pit.

The issue I have a problem with more is how it was possible for this kid to bypass all the security measures so easily. He didnt seem impeded in the slightest where it would've allowed some seconds for maybe somebody to have stopped it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The gorilla absolutely had to be shot.  I trekked through western Uganda and got withing ~30 feet of a family of gorillas.  I saw a silverback casually reach behind his head and snap a 6-inch trunk of a tree as if it was a matchstick.  I think its entirely possible (likely even) that the gorilla would have seriously hurt or killed the kid.  Not because it was malicious, just because they are freakishly strong and they don't know better.  

 

I don't think the fault has to be the zoo's OR the parents.  It can certainly be both.  That zoo has had millions of visitors and it hasn't happened before, so either that kid is unusually quick/nimble or that parent was unusually negligent.  Also, it should be impossible to get in no matter how awful the kid or parent is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've done a little reading of various viewpoints/articles.

1. It is sad that the gorilla had to be shot, but it seems like it was necessary. It started out protective of the child, but seemed to get spooked by all the noise and yelling, and was dragging the child around. At that point, quick decisions had to be made.

I noticed that watching the video. All that screaming and yelling wasnt gonna help keep the gorilla calm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a 400lbs gorilla is that dangerous, and it is, then it shouldn't be possible for a 4yo to gain access to its cage.

I believe that to be fact. That rests the "blame" on the zoo.

This particular zoo does a lot for conservation, but I assume it's extremely difficult to find funding, so you allow the public access to view the caged animals for profit.

Making it not look like a cage and allowing for the illusion of a natural habitat, is what makes it unsafe for a 4yo and the captivity exclusive animal, which rests solely on the zoo.

Personally, I'm more interested in a discussion about zoos, circuses and other ways animals are used for entertainment and the ethical and moral reasoning behind them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the worst people in this mess, are the people that are trying to make the zoo and parents feel bad about the outcome. No one wanted this outcome.

first, we love to find our villain and focus all our energy. It's much safer, than thinking beyond that.

Second, a 4 yo boy was able to break through security and almost died. An endangered animal did die because of it.

There should be some accountability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the worst people in this mess, are the people that are trying to make the zoo and parents feel bad about the outcome. No one wanted this outcome.

Yeah but just because you don't want something to happen doesn't mean you're not at fault when it does. I don't want to crash my car, especially with me in it. But if I get drunk and go 40 miles over the speed limit, people are going to try to make me feel bad when I hit and kill a family of four.

Edit: that was just a general thought. I don't know enough about this gorilla story to assign blame. I'm only here because somebody in another thread said the topic had gotten derailed into sex with dead animals,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is protesting for others rights, "self" righteous?

 

The standard thought process of a protester here is this:

 

"A reasonable, responsible person (or organization) would have done the following, which I, for one, surely would have done:

 

(1) Watched the child more closely;

(2) Had a more secure barrier, or a secondary barrier, third level barrier, and forth level barrier;

(3) Not had a Gorilla in captivity to begin with;

(4) Attempted other measures prior to shooting the Gorilla, like darting it;

(5) Realized that the gorilla was only attempting to protect the child;

(6) In addition, the parents should now be charged with the murder of a Gorilla;

(7) The zoo should pay reparations, perhaps by making a large donation to [enter charity's name] which assists captive gorillas in the transition back to their natural habitat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...