Gorilla Shot Dead At Cincinnati Zoo After Child Falls Into E

[Abbott]

[quote=Pan Pan Pan]Even when I was around four, or five, I clearly remember having an inbuilt healthy respect for high drop offs, deep water, deep moats,quote]

But did you learn that through playing on building sites when young and learning by the occasional minor accident?
Sad case but balanced against the consequences of a bad move by the gorilla it was inevitable.

[Boring_Chris]

Where does the law stand on (unlawfully) killing a Gorilla? I'm assuming (probably incorrectly) that it's different to killing a dog?

The parent(s) or guardian should be charged with that. And neglect, obviously.

[Boring_Chris]

Mr GrimNasty said:

But the zoo has a duty to make sure its enclosures are entirely child-proof!

Honestly, if your 4 yo kid said I'm going to get in the Gorilla cage, would you take them seriously and restrain them - it simply shouldn't have been possible!

Edited by Mr GrimNasty on Monday 30th May 13:09

In another thread you were bemoaning the states over-interference?

What planet do you live on, exactly? I bet it's a fking riot up there.

[anonymous-user]

5ohmustang said:

No at 4 I never tried to climb into a Gorilla enclosement or anything even close to that level of retardedness.

You did buy a mustang though, thats pretty retarded!

[rb5er]

And he fails to realise that different people end up in different situations throughout their lives....thats pretty retarded.

[Impasse]

They've had gorillas there since 1931 without a child entering the enclosure.

But then, someone invents a new type of idiot.

[Lordbenny]

The parents must not be blame whatsoever. The zoo is completely at fault, a child should be able to run off out of sight of its parents in a zoo without the parent worrying it will fall into a dangerous animal enclosure. A zoo is a place that should be TOTALLY child safe. The gorilla should have been shot, a tranquilizer would not have been an option because of the time it takes to take effect. Best outcome for a sad event.

[Pesty]

Lordbenny said:

The parents must not be blame whatsoever. The zoo is completely at fault, a child should be able to run off out of sight of its parents in a zoo without the parent worrying it will fall into a dangerous animal enclosure. A zoo is a place that should be TOTALLY child safe. The gorilla should have been shot, a tranquilizer would not have been an option because of the time it takes to take effect. Best outcome for a sad event.

The parent was there the child was telling her he was going to go in the water. It didn't run out of sight.


However I agree

[nellyleelephant]

Lordbenny said:

The parents must not be blame whatsoever. The zoo is completely at fault, a child should be able to run off out of sight of its parents in a zoo without the parent worrying it will fall into a dangerous animal enclosure. A zoo is a place that should be TOTALLY child safe. The gorilla should have been shot, a tranquilizer would not have been an option because of the time it takes to take effect. Best outcome for a sad event.

100% agree. Sad event, but the zoo were at fault. There should be no way for a 4 year old into an enclosure except with a key.

[Oakey]

There'll be a vigil for the Gorilla at 2pm in Cincinnati for those of you who want to light a candle. Maybe we can petition Elton to pen a song too?

[rolex]

Oakey said:

There'll be a vigil for the Gorilla at 2pm in Cincinnati for those of you who want to light a candle. Maybe we can petition Elton to pen a song too?

Don't let your son go down on me?

[saaby93]

nellyleelephant said:

Lordbenny said:

The parents must not be blame whatsoever. The zoo is completely at fault, a child should be able to run off out of sight of its parents in a zoo without the parent worrying it will fall into a dangerous animal enclosure. A zoo is a place that should be TOTALLY child safe. The gorilla should have been shot, a tranquilizer would not have been an option because of the time it takes to take effect. Best outcome for a sad event.

100% agree. Sad event, but the zoo were at fault. There should be no way for a 4 year old into an enclosure except with a key.

Have to completely disagree of course
The Zoo has to use its best efforts to prevent anyone getting into the enclosure, but we know human ingenuity. If someone does get in who has greater priority the thing youre trying to protect in the zoo or the trespasser?

If it was Buckingham Palace whose side would you be on?

[nellyleelephant]

saaby93 said:

ave to completely disagree of course
The Zoo has to use its best efforts to prevent anyone getting into the enclosure, but we know human ingenuity. If someone does get in who has greater priority the thing youre trying to protect in the zoo or the trespasser?

If it was Buckingham Palace whose side would you be on?

I would still be on the side of the 4 year old!

How hard is it to work that out, the kid was 4. When you were 4 did you always stick to the marked path? Probably not. To think otherwise, frankly, shows you up to be fking stupid.

[stinkspanner]

On the face of it the parents look pretty retarded, but however it happened what a terrifying situation for parent to find themselves in

[Oakey]

rolex said:

Don't let your son go down on me?

Gorilla In the Bin

[DoubleSix]

So if this st went on for 10 mins, why can't I watch a 10min uncut video??

[Oakey]

It's reasonable to think that a child should be safe in the public areas of a zoo and if a 4yr old can circumvent their security measures by slipping under a railing then maybe they need to review things?

[saaby93]

nellyleelephant said:

saaby93 said:

ave to completely disagree of course
The Zoo has to use its best efforts to prevent anyone getting into the enclosure, but we know human ingenuity. If someone does get in who has greater priority the thing youre trying to protect in the zoo or the trespasser?

If it was Buckingham Palace whose side would you be on?

I would still be on the side of the 4 year old!

How hard is it to work that out, the kid was 4. When you were 4 did you always stick to the marked path? Probably not. To think otherwise, frankly, shows you up to be fking stupid.

Same argument applies

Kid age 4 walking along pavement with parent
Kid breaks free and runs across road
Do you ban all cars (or bikes for that matter) from the road in case this happens
or accept that on the odd occasion Darwin comes into play - it's a risk but on a percentage basis an acceptable risk.

Lets hope no-one proposes banning all air travel on the basis that a plane has fallen into the med.
We have to decide which thing is normal behaviour that we're trying to protect and which is an abnormal.

In this case surely the Gorilla was behaving normally, it didnt try to break out of its pound or anything - the kid was the abnormal

[nellyleelephant]

saaby93 said:

ame argument applies

Kid age 4 walking along pavement with parent
Kid breaks free and runs across road
Do you ban all cars (or bikes for that matter) from the road in case this happens
or accept that on the odd occasion Darwin comes into play - it's a risk but on a percentage basis an acceptable risk.

Lets hope no-one proposes banning all air travel on the basis that a plane has fallen into the med.
We have to decide which thing is normal behaviour that we're trying to protect and which is an abnormal.

In this case surely the Gorilla was behaving normally, it didnt try to break out of its pound or anything - the kid was the abnormal

Surely normal behaviour in this case is that the enclosure is designed in such a way that a 4 year old can't get in?

Surely you should be able to take a 4 year old somewhere designed to appeal to 4 year olds that is 4 year old proof?

[Willy Nilly]

Is there any situation the in USA that doesn't end in something or someone getting shot?