What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Gorilla Rescues Toddler at Zoo, Gorilla Euthanized (1 Viewer)

BustedKnuckles said:
first lets close up and get rid of ALL zoos and circuses as  they serve no purpose 

and 

second get rid of ####ty parents 
Click to expand...
They provide employment to dancing and unicycle riding bears and to tigers which like to jump through flaming hoops.  Those opportunities being limited in the wild animals with those propensities often become nuisance animals, lingering around the outskirts of human habitations, looking for opportunities to express their natural tendencies. Soon they are encroaching on our limited and shrinking human habitat.

Also, if you get rid of zoos where are young milfs supposed to push their strollers around to try to regain their figures, huh, did you for a moment consider that?

 
renesauz said:
Despite the words of the article, this is OBVIOUSLY FALSE. The article also said the gorilla and child were together for 10 minutes. Later, it's said the child was checked out at the hospital and released the SAME DAY.

Now...it doesn't take a whole lot of intelligence to put these facts together and come to the conclusion that the FOUR HUNDRED POUND GORILLA could NOT possibly have been "violently dragging and throwing the child", (who had just fallen 15 feet into a foot of water) for ten minutes. If he had, the child would be dead or in the ICU still
Click to expand...
Dude, there is a video of it.  The gorilla grabs the kid around the ankle and sprints across the cage multiple times very fast, dragging the kid behind him in and out of water, across rocks, etc.

Maybe not violent compared to what a 400 pound gorilla could do if it wanted to really mess something up, but violent compared to what you can watch a 3 year old taking.  The kid was basically being waterboarded.  He could have swallowed a lung full of water or had his head whacked on a rock at that high velocity at any moment.

Extremely sad situation for the gorilla.  He definitely got a raw deal (for his entire life, really), but a choice had to be made.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Uwe Blab said:
:yes:   Even if he was protecting him, he doesn't know his own strength, was sadly panicked, and most certainly could have killed the kid on accident even just dragging him around.  Zoo 100% did the right thing.

Its going to suck, however, if/when the parents sue because of the barrier though.
Click to expand...
You'd hope that the parents don't sue, if anything it's the Zoo who should be pissed because some kid decided he wanted to jump in the monkey cage and they had to destroy one of their prized animals.

I heard on the news that the exhibit had been setup the way it is since 1989. Not that we know the kid was trying to get into the monkey pit...  I just don't see any form of negligence or responsibility to the actual zoo when they haven't had any problems in nearly 3-decades.

 
Uwe Blab said:
We need to get that "Ask a Zookeeper" guy back in here....
Click to expand...
I am a zoologist, will that work for you?

FWIW, one of my most vivid memories in school was from a professor who is (was?) a population biologist, and he was against zoos. He said that all animals in zoos are essentially dead. They are cruel and inhumane, and he encouraged everyone not to patronize them.

 
Uwe Blab said:
:loco:
Click to expand...
Yea, you're right. Parents should definitely routinely take small toddlers to public places, especially those with enclosures containing dangerous animals, and pay no attention to them while they wander off unsupervised and are permitted to put their lives in actual danger. And all without consequences.

 
Tom Skerritt said:
I am a zoologist, will that work for you?

FWIW, one of my most vivid memories in school was from a professor who is (was?) a population biologist, and he was against zoos. He said that all animals in zoos are essentially dead. They are cruel and inhumane, and he encouraged everyone not to patronize them.
Click to expand...
I completely understand that position.  That said, many obtain their first love of these critters in that setting and grow from there to be conscious and active environmentalist.  I'm torn on the subject.

 
DallasDMac said:
Yea, you're right. Parents should definitely routinely take small toddlers to public places, especially those with enclosures containing dangerous animals, and pay no attention to them while they wander off unsupervised and are permitted to put their lives in actual danger. And all without consequences.
Click to expand...
A heavy fine and a banning from the zoo:  Sure.

Take the kid away?

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
I completely understand that position.  That said, many obtain their first love of these critters in that setting and grow from there to be conscious and active environmentalist.  I'm torn on the subject.
Click to expand...
I feel the same way. I would never go to a zoo on my own, but I took my kids when they were little. But I most certainly explained to them that these animals are not free. And by consequence, they do not truly exist. And while it is nice to see the beauty of these creatures, I ask them to think about the many other aspects of their captivity.

 
There are only  hundreds of mountain gorillas left in the world and there are billions of humans.(that are destroying the earth)

Perhaps I'm bias because I've actually been to Uganda and spent time with the gorrilas in the wild, but the wrong decision was made here IMHO and it's not even close.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Eminence said:
I heard on the news that the exhibit had been setup the way it is since 1989. Not that we know the kid was trying to get into the monkey pit...  I just don't see any form of negligence or responsibility to the actual zoo when they haven't had any problems in nearly 3-decades.
Click to expand...
Not a lawyer, but I feel safe in saying that the bolded wouldn't matter at all in court. Seems that "a four-year old got in" is auto-negligence, regardless of any and all facts -- and regardless of any parental actions** short of purposefully throwing their child into the enclosure.

No word about how, specifically, the child got in, huh?

** I definitely agree that the parents dropped the ball all over the place. It's just that a zoo has to be safe-ish even for negligent families. Maybe that's an unfair standard, dunno.

 
Quez said:
Everyone is blaming the mother, but the zoo is responsible for this.  I just can't comprehend how there is anyway a toddler can get into any exhibit.  It's not like an 8yo who can climb a tree.  The entire zoo should be closed, and every square inch examined.
Click to expand...
Even the bathrooms? 

 
Tom Skerritt said:
I am a zoologist, will that work for you?

FWIW, one of my most vivid memories in school was from a professor who is (was?) a population biologist, and he was against zoos. He said that all animals in zoos are essentially dead. They are cruel and inhumane, and he encouraged everyone not to patronize them.
Click to expand...


Your professor had a myopic view.  A lot of animals in zoos were rescued due to loss of habitat or natural causes. 

That being said, zoos due provide terrible habitats.  The worst scenario I can recall is the Lincoln Park zoo that had Tigers in a glass walled room the size of a typical bedroom...or snow leopards in an enclosure not much larger...these are animals that have a natural range of hundreds of MILES.

Zoos are getting better but the progress is much too slow. 

 
Doug B said:
Not a lawyer, but I feel safe in saying that the bolded wouldn't matter at all in court. Seems that "a four-year old got in" is auto-negligence, regardless of any and all facts -- and regardless of any parental actions** short of purposefully throwing their child into the enclosure.

No word about how, specifically, the child got in, huh?

** I definitely agree that the parents dropped the ball all over the place. It's just that a zoo has to be safe-ish even for negligent families. Maybe that's an unfair standard, dunno.
Click to expand...


From the reports that I read, before the toddler fell in, he had expressed to his mother that he was going to go play with the gorillas. To which his mother replied "No, oh no you're not!" (or something to that effect)

 
TripItUp said:
Your professor had a myopic view.  A lot of animals in zoos were rescued due to loss of habitat or natural causes. 

That being said, zoos due provide terrible habitats.  The worst scenario I can recall is the Lincoln Park zoo that had Tigers in a glass walled room the size of a typical bedroom...or snow leopards in an enclosure not much larger...these are animals that have a natural range of hundreds of MILES.

Zoos are getting better but the progress is much too slow. 
Click to expand...
Please know that I reserve a clear distinction between captive animals and rescued/injured animals. That said, it does not change my overall view. These animals are not free.

 
Tom Skerritt said:
From the reports that I read, before the toddler fell in, he had expressed to his mother that he was going to go play with the gorillas. To which his mother replied "No, oh no you're not!" (or something to that effect)
Click to expand...
She probly said that and went back to playing Candy Crush on her phone.

 
TripItUp said:
There are only  hundreds of mountain gorillas left in the world and there are billions of humans.(that are destroying the earth)

Perhaps I'm bias because I've actually been to Uganda and spent time with the gorrilas in the wild, but the wrong decision was made here IMHO and it's not even close.
Click to expand...
In your opinion, what exactly should the zoo have done?

 
Ditkaless Wonders said:
I completely understand that position.  That said, many obtain their first love of these critters in that setting and grow from there to be conscious and active environmentalist.  I'm torn on the subject.
Click to expand...
In a perfect world, there would be no need for zoos. But because we have idiots who think gorilla paws make nice ashtrays or ground up rhino horns help them get erections, they are a necessity.

This particular zoo had a stellar track record for safety according to what has been reported. The fault here lies 100% with the parents They watch their child, this doesn't happen. Again if you believe some of the reports, the kid was talking about how he wanted to go be with the monkeys over and over, he squeezed through a piece of orange fencing that was there and jumped/fell into the moat with the apes.

I mean there is only so much we can do as a society to protect stupid people from doing stupid things. It is unfortunate this rare animal had to pay with his life because of some stupid brat, who will probably grow up and do nothing with his life. As society continues to go down this path, I swear we are going to need to start putting warning labels on every tree--"Warning falling from the top of this, could kill you."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Uwe Blab said:
A heavy fine and a banning from the zoo:  Sure.

Take the kid away?
Click to expand...
So what is your personal limit for actually endangering the child's life before this becomes the best option? Two? Three? Successfully allowing the child to perish? Admittedly, I am not going to say it's 100% in this case that they are responsible. A thorough investigation needs to be accomplished to determine that. But everything I have read so far seems to indicate that there is no way these people should be allowed to be responsible for the life of a child.

 
cstu said:
The gorilla is dead for one reason and one reason only - fear of a lawsuit if the kid had died before the tranquiler kicked in.
Click to expand...
A "humans before animals" ethic was a much bigger factor, IMHO. The lawsuit was coming either way ... though it's obvious that the lawsuit is easier to bear if the child is alive and essentially unharmed.

As for tranquilizers ... the issue I've read about (second hand) is that they don't put the animal down quick enough. The gorilla would've had a few minutes longer to engage the child. Plus, my understanding is that many animals panic and flail out as tranquilizers set in.

 
Doug B said:
A "humans before animals" ethic was a much bigger factor, IMHO. The lawsuit was coming either way ... though it's obvious that the lawsuit is easier to bear if the child is alive and essentially unharmed.

As for tranquilizers ... the issue I've read about (second hand) is that they don't put the animal down quick enough. The gorilla would've had a few minutes longer to engage the child. Plus, my understanding is that many animals panic and flail out as tranquilizers set in.
Click to expand...
Shoot it with a tranquilizer and let the cards fall where they may.

 
Uwe Blab said:
:goodposting:   People are losing their minds over this.  Comments sections of articles are truly where logic goes to die, but I don't think I've seen a bigger collection of insane people like this.  The whole situation sucked for all involved.  But sometimes, #### happens.
Click to expand...
Love animals.  This is tragic.  But I can't fault the zoo here.  The real outrage would be if the child were harmed if they didn't kill it.  Fix the ####### railings, Jesus

 
Uwe Blab said:
Every single animal expert and zoo professional (other zoos, not Cincy zoo) agreed this would not have worked in the least bit.

Gotta love the FFA's continued team of self-described experts on everything...
Click to expand...
I don't think you understand...I have a different definition of "worked"

 
DallasDMac said:
So what is your personal limit for actually endangering the child's life before this becomes the best option? Two? Three? Successfully allowing the child to perish? Admittedly, I am not going to say it's 100% in this case that they are responsible. A thorough investigation needs to be accomplished to determine that. But everything I have read so far seems to indicate that there is no way these people should be allowed to be responsible for the life of a child.
Click to expand...
I hate that I'm having to defend the parents here at all as I think they suck gorilla balls for what happened.  And I will really, really hate them if they sue.

That said if we took every person's kids away for the one time (is there some prior record you've heard of?) their kid got themselves into a stupid/dangerous situation, we wouldn't have a lot of non-state sponsored parents.  And I would have grown up a foster kid as well. 

 
Uwe Blab said:
Every single animal expert and zoo professional (other zoos, not Cincy zoo) agreed this would not have worked in the least bit.

Gotta love the FFA's continued team of self-described experts on everything...
Click to expand...
Who said it would not have worked? How do they know? What I saw was people speaking to risk. They found the risk of waiting for the tranquilizer to kick in too great. That is not remotely close to "would not have worked."

 
Uwe Blab said:
:lmao: Ah, ok.  I was addressing this to the non-sociopaths....  Carry on.
Click to expand...
Like I said, billions of earth destroying humans, hundreds of innocent mountain gorillas endangered because of humans.

Easy decision.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Ham said:
Fix the ####### railings, Jesus
Click to expand...
Zippo information coming out about how the kid got in. I'd like to form a reasonable take on fault -- but without at least some specific detail about the entry, it seems impossible.

...

For anyone with experience with zoos, large animals, etc.: are there human handlers that the gorillas "know" and "trust" that could have gone into the enclosure and retrieve the child relatively safely? I know that two female gorillas were scurried out of the enclosure (by humans, presumably). Might have been a case of having limited resources on hand -- what handlers were present took care of the females, and there was no one left to deal with the male? Just spitballing here.

 
Apple Jack said:
Who said it would not have worked? How do they know? What I saw was people speaking to risk. They found the risk of waiting for the tranquilizer to kick in too great. That is not remotely close to "would not have worked."
Click to expand...
:shrug:   I defer to actual experts in the field quoted in numerous articles about this who all have said that tranquilizing wasn't a real option in this case....not Apple Jack and HeavyMatt in the FFA and MouthBreatherXtReMe and BeefyLBS in the comments section of said articles  

 
Doug B said:
Zippo information coming out about how the kid got in. I'd like to form a reasonable take on fault -- but without at least some specific detail about the entry, it seems impossible.

...

For anyone with experience with zoos, large animals, etc.: are there human handlers that the gorillas "know" and "trust" that could have gone into the enclosure and retrieve the child relatively safely? I know that two female gorillas were scurried out of the enclosure (by humans, presumably). Might have been a case of having limited resources on hand -- what handlers were present took care of the females, and there was no one left to deal with the male? Just spitballing here.
Click to expand...
The keepers tried to lure the male away for 10 minutes, obviously unsuccessfully. 

 
Apple Jack said:
Who said it would not have worked? How do they know? What I saw was people speaking to risk. They found the risk of waiting for the tranquilizer to kick in too great. That is not remotely close to "would not have worked."
Click to expand...
A tranquilizer would not have achieved the objective -- which in this case, would've had to have been an insta-drop of the gorilla.

Speaking to risk? For a small child in the gorilla enclosure ... you bend over backwards to get the kid out as safely as possible. For better or worse, anything else -- and especially the well-being of the gorilla -- is pretty much of no concern.

 
TripItUp said:
The keepers tried to lure the male away for 10 minutes, obviously unsuccessfully. 
Click to expand...
Understood. That suggests that going in and "taking the child away" from the silverback was probably not in play. The handlers would understand the gorilla's behavior in the moment and be able to assess the risk of any course of action.

 
Doug B said:
Zippo information coming out about how the kid got in. I'd like to form a reasonable take on fault -- but without at least some specific detail about the entry, it seems impossible.

...

For anyone with experience with zoos, large animals, etc.: are there human handlers that the gorillas "know" and "trust" that could have gone into the enclosure and retrieve the child relatively safely? I know that two female gorillas were scurried out of the enclosure (by humans, presumably). Might have been a case of having limited resources on hand -- what handlers were present took care of the females, and there was no one left to deal with the male? Just spitballing here.
Click to expand...
Good Morning America reported that the kid slipped under the railing, walked through some bushes and fell.

 
Willie Neslon said:
I guess it's because a majestic, helpless animal was kidnapped and jailed for life so dip####s could stare at him and eat popcorn.  Then one day a family wearing burger king t-shirts showed up and took their eye off their 3 year old as he crawled into the gorilla exhibit. Because of that an awesome animal who did nothing wrong except being born on earth got shot between the eyes. That's why people are pissed. It's all good though as the kid is fine and will be able to drink Dr. Pepper for the next 40 years until his diabetes death reunites him with the innocent animal.
Click to expand...
Could be wrong but I think this gorilla was born in captivity. 

 
Quez said:
Everyone is blaming the mother, but the zoo is responsible for this.  I just can't comprehend how there is anyway a toddler can get into any exhibit.  It's not like an 8yo who can climb a tree.  The entire zoo should be closed, and every square inch examined.
Click to expand...
I'm sure this is shtick but I'll bite.  That exhibit has been open for almost 40 years and this is the first breach. Something extraordinary happened here.  I've been there dozens of times can't and figure out how he climbed over/through the barriers without ANYONE noticing. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

the moops
What's a typical weekday for you?
2
Replies
85
Views
3K
MAC_32
MAC_32
supermike80
Thread---Marital Advice
2
Replies
70
Views
3K
coopersdad
C
Joe Bryant
A Glimpse of Beauty In an Ugly Place
Replies
0
Views
362
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top