Gorilla Shot Dead At Cincinnati Zoo After Child Falls Into E

[SilverSpur]

ash73 said:

That's a well written piece, and better explains the animal's behaviour, but I don't agree with the binary choice of either using tranquillisers OR shooting it. The obvious solution is to deploy both; and only shoot the Gorilla as a last resort if it doesn't respond appropriately to the darts. The person with their finger on the trigger would have to make the call, with an instant bias towards the best outcome for the child, but at least then it would have a chance.

What would you do if someone shot you with a tranquiliser dart? I think you'd get pretty upset and thrash around trying to work out who just shot you up the arse with a dart.

5-10 minutes later you'd pass out, possibly dropping like a stone when the drugs take affect.

What's the Gorilla going to do whilst the drugs take affect? Do you know, does anyone know? What happens when the drugs take affect and it falls over? too late to shoot it dead then isn't it when its already crushed the child?

Would someone be able to rush over and lift the sleeping gorilla off the childs body? It weighs 400lbs.... pretty hard dead lift I'd guess.
in the mean time both child and gorilla drown in the water where he fell....


They took the right, decisive action at the time, mitigating the risk to the child.

[SilverSpur]

Oakey said:

SilverSpur said:

Heres a thought.... you buy one of those cars that allows you to open the boot/hatch by gesture - waving your foot under the rear bumper usually....

and then you take your kids to Longleat in the new car.....

and the rear door opens when some tiger's tail swishes by....

Does that feature work when the engine is running / car moving then? That seems like the sort of thing car manufacturers would ensure wasn't capable of happening whilst the car is in motion. How does it differentiate between a foot moving under the bumper and driving over something in the road?

edit:

Register said:

Ford claimed the system safeguards against accidental opening by being programmed to open with specific leg motions – a kick, basically - not when an animal runs under the car or when the vehicle hits a bump on the road.

So, no worries then?

lets hope so...

although many companies seem to mess up these basic checks and fail safes.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

AshVX220 said:

Just seen this on my FB feed, a piece written by a Gorilla keeper named Amanda O'Donoughue.

I wondered what she'd got up to after L.A. Law.

[Pesty]

Rollin said:

Ooo look at the lovely bear protecting the human....you can tell by its body language

Yeah its protecting the st outta him

[Pesty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

It has never occurred to me, whilst strolling around London Zoo, that it's a dangerous place. I don't expect the animals to able to get out to the public, and I don't my children to be able to get in to the wild animals.

I would expect an adult to maybe be able to get in with the animals, but with great difficulty, and that would be their own stupid fault.

But a 4 yr old...no way. Supposing he was there with just mum or dad, and the sole parent had a heart attack. Are we then saying "parent collapsed and couldn't look after kid, kid wonders off into gorillas, nothing that could be done to stop it?

Utterly ridiculous.

But if you went somewhere and saw the walls were indeed low and breechable and you child was telling you it was gong to jump in.
Still not your problem. He didn't sneak in some unseen tiny spot. The walls were there to be seen by all.

[Oakey]

Pesty said:

But if you went somewhere and saw the walls were indeed low and breechable and you child was telling you it was gong to jump in.
Still not your problem. He didn't sneak in some unseen tiny spot. The walls were there to be seen by all.

I read he simply slipped under some railings and walked through some bushes?

[Pesty]

Oakey said:

I read he simply slipped under some railings and walked through some bushes?

There was a very brief clip on a us site I saw. That may be the case but on the clip they said the walls were deliberately lunobtrusve as to keep the animals as close to ther normal habitat or something.

Could have just been an excuse . But still parent were there they should have done their own assessment you don't have to be eagle eyed to spot that he could slip under/over / through anything and keep him away

[saaby93]

Why dont they turn these things upside down and put the humans in cages so they cant escape and let the animals roam free.
If youve been to a sea life centre it works something like that

[SilverSpur]

ash73 said:

They will have tranquillised gorillas before so they will understand how it will react;

You've just stated the exact reason why they likely shot it.
That's the point mate. They will have done it before and they will have known the additional risk.


Having seen a dog being tranquillised just last week myself I can affirm that the tranquilliser takes time and the animal grew increasingly confused and unpredictable whilst it the drugs took effect.

[bitchstewie]

I am a little surprised this has run to 10 pages.

Reminds me a little of various Police threads and the "couldn't they shoot the gun out of his hand" posters.

Once the child was in the enclosure unless you're a very brave person who's happy to gamble with the life of someone else's child it's only going to end one way which is the way it ended.

There's a little too much Monday morning quarter-backing going on IMO.

[Ken Figenus]

iphonedyou said:

Few people above saying they should have tranquillised the gorilla. This whole situation is desperately sad, but a tranquilliser isn't the answer given it takes up to 20 minutes to work.

Staggeringly sad they didn't even try a tranquiliser - albeit with a rifle in the other hand to take swift action if this did actually cause him to start harming the child. The precedent is there that they can be quite approachable by fully grown men, so a child would pose less of a threat I guess. Looks a decision taken behind closed doors conceptually not one based on observing him. The 'what if' was greater than the 'what was'?

Edited by Ken Figenus on Tuesday 31st May 18:27

[slybynight]

Ken Figenus said:

Staggeringly sad they didn't even try a tranquiliser - albeit with a rifle in the other hand to take swift action if this did actually cause him to start harming the child. The precedent is there that they can be quite approachable by fully grown men, so a child would pose less of a threat I guess. Looks a decision taken behind closed doors conceptually not one based on observing him.

Really not looking to get into an argument on this - I think the death of the gorilla is very sad, but I would imagine that animal could kill/maim the child quite literally with its little finger in less than a second "once he started to harm the child". No exaggeration. Literal. 10 times stronger than a man, says the post from earlier. Its a long time ago, but I think I used to be able to bench press 90Kg in my younger days. This thing could bench press a car!

[bitchstewie]

Ken Figenus said:

Staggeringly sad they didn't even try a tranquiliser - albeit with a rifle in the other hand to take swift action if this did actually cause him to start harming the child. The precedent is there that they can be quite approachable by fully grown men, so a child would pose less of a threat I guess. Looks a decision taken behind closed doors conceptually not one based on observing him. The 'what if' was greater than the 'what was'?

What would you do if it was your child and you had a tranquiliser gun and a real gun to hand?

[slybynight]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Good point.... imagine giving a 1 year old a chick. - I'd imagine the strength ratio to be similar. Sure the little chap might play gently with it for a while - but how long do you think the chick would last? A minute? Now hand the infant the bird and give it its innoculation jabs... how long now? - oh while hundreds of adults are screaming at the poor chap! edit.. also this imaginary one year old is pumped with more testosterone than Mr Moat on a bad day.

Edited by slybynight on Tuesday 31st May 18:47

[Ken Figenus]

bhstewie said:

What would you do if it was your child and you had a tranquiliser gun and a real gun to hand?

Hope to use one before the other. Yes of course he could have harmed the child but he didn't and he hadn't - that helps informs choice. If it was a Baboon/Lion etc I wouldn't be saying this, but it was a Gorilla. A dead one.

[twizellb]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I agree with just about everything you say.
There was no other option once the child had entered the enclosure.

[98elise]

Ken Figenus said:

bhstewie said:

What would you do if it was your child and you had a tranquiliser gun and a real gun to hand?

Hope to use one before the other. Yes of course he could have harmed the child but he didn't and he hadn't - that helps informs choice. If it was a Baboon/Lion etc I wouldn't be saying this, but it was a Gorilla. A dead one.

Have you ever seen an ape get shot with a dart? They don't like it. If the Gorilla decied he wanted to harm the child then it would be over in a second.

IMO its very odd that you would risk your child over a Gorilla.

[bitchstewie]

Ken Figenus said:

bhstewie said:

What would you do if it was your child and you had a tranquiliser gun and a real gun to hand?

Hope to use one before the other. Yes of course he could have harmed the child but he didn't and he hadn't - that helps informs choice. If it was a Baboon/Lion etc I wouldn't be saying this, but it was a Gorilla. A dead one.

What do you do if it doesn't work out and your kid's dead or missing an arm - is that a risk worth taking?

Everyone's different I get that, but I'd struggle to understand anyone suggesting they'd be happy to take chances with their child's life.

It's a stty situation but the outcome is the only one I think it could be in that particular set of circumstances.

[Oakey]

Have you seen the damage that chimp did to that woman? Imagine what a gorilla would do!

[Oakey]

I dunno about that but the chimp ripped off that womans face. Imagine having your face ripped off.