Backlash after Gorilla Shot in Cincinnati Zoo (Updated)

[lacktheknack]

I can correctly call you a biased anthrocentrist. It doesn't mean much, most humans are.

I happily hold the title. Bias ain't always a bad thing.

From the point of view of possibly intelligent nonhumans that we have oppressed, it can be. I have met humans who I would only save after I saved other animals. To say that humans are fundamentally better is such hubris. Nonhuman intelligence is not necessarily worse or lesser. Sentient's rights matter, even if not human.

Unfortunately, none of my reasons for regarding humanity as the greater have a single whit to do with intelligence or sentience and everything to do with pre-distributed value, but I get the feeling that you aren't religious and this argument could go a very depressing direction if it continues further.

 

[Elfgore]

It sucks that the gorilla had to die, but their is no tranquilizer that would be able to knock it out before it killed the kid, I don't get why anyone is getting angry about this, if you establish proper context, the gorilla was shot in order to prevent a child from being killed, I have several questions, including how the fuck does a kid end up in a gorilla pen, but as far as I'm concerned the zoo staff did the right thing

Though I can't speak for everyone angry about this, I can at least speak for myself.

I'm not mad that the gorilla was killed when the situation reached what it did. A human's life takes priority of an animal's. I'm angry because this never should have been a situation in the first place. The Zoo should be re-eventuating their containment procedures and make sure that no visitor, no matter how young or stupid they may be, are able to enter. And I'm mostly angry at the shitty ass mom who at this point should be loosing custody of her child for not properly watching them and endangering their life. She should also be receiving a punch to the face for saying "accidents happen LOL" as a defense for being a shitty mom.

 

[K12]

They should have shot the parents.



But really, I'd hope they could do something else to stop the gorilla aside from killing it.

Unfortunately the gorilla was not "nearby" as the OP said, but it was dragging the child around. If they had tranked it, it would have gotten angry and probably killed the boy before the tranquilizer began to set in, so the zookeepers really only had the one decision, to kill it or let the boy die. And they made the correct decision. As for those parents, they should be charged with child endangerment, animal cruelty, and whatever else can be piled on to remove them from society. They don't deserve to have a child, and they don't deserve freedom. Maybe stick them in the gorilla cage?

Yeah the decision to shoot the gorilla once this scenario happened was probably the best possible option. It's very nice to assume that a big silver back gorilla wouldn't have hurt him and that it was acting kindly but the random anthropomorphised guesses of a bunch of twitter followers is going to be less reliable than the trained response units who made the decision.

It might be true that the Harambe wouldn't have hurt him but if you need to wait until AFTER the gorilla starts attacking before acting then the boy's as good as dead. Human life is much more important (and I'm a vegetarian btw).

I think there's an argument to be had over who's more reponsible: the Zoo for having inadequate enclosures and surveillance or the parents for not watching their child. I don't know enough about the specifics to jump in on either side but no amount of safety and precautions can make accidents like this impossible. The argument that Zoos shouldn't exist at all is also worth considering.

As for tranquilizers, these don't work the way they do in films. A huge animal like a gorilla can take a long time to be go down and could easily panic in the process. Anything chemically powerful enough to knock out a gorilla in the handful of seconds necessary to be safe (without needing to be injected directly into a major artery) would probably kill it or severely brain damage it anyway.

 

[RedDeadFred]

The zookeepers made the right decision, but the parents absolutely need to face serious punishment. They should, at the very least, be fined the cost of the gorilla.

Edit: I don't know how much a gorilla costs, but that could be life ruiningly expensive, so maybe at tad less.

Edit 2: Nevermind, they're way cheaper than I would have though. They can get an idiot fine on top of the gorilla fine.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

I know humans love blame. We feed on it. But we probably dont know how neglectful the parents actually were. Its possible that kid could have hopped over that wall faster then they could have realized what was happening. Not saying it was an "honest" accident, but it could have been.

 

[Recusant]

Why do we still have Zoos?

Anything?

Because without them, a great many more species would be extinct, not only due to those who only survive in captivity, but also from the information we've learned about creatures from captive specimens, and the increased public interest from actually seeing giraffes and knowing that they're not just urban legends.

You're thinking of wildlife reserves.

No, I'm thinking of zoos. Wildlife reserves serve a vital function, but a typical reserve won't be able to give you more than an educated guess as to the population of most of their animals; even the worst zoo in the world will be able to tell you how many rhinos they have. Reserves can and often do provide a better glance at how creatures live in the wild, but that's not all that we need to know- and it's definitely not all that we need to get public opinion on the side of preservation. I'm sure it's a lot more fun to be an animal in a reserve than a zoo, but it's better that some suffer so that the species can survive.

 

[JoJo]

Ugh, I wish they didn't have to shoot the gorilla but a human child's life always takes priority over any animal. Definitely worth investigating where the hell the parents were when their four year old was climbing over the bars of an ape enclosure though.

As the gorilla is endangered and was brought there for breeding it's life was worth more than the easily replaceable child.

Nice try, but most people tend to value human life a fair bit more than that.

The question is why? I think it has to do with empathy and since I'm lucky enough to lack it I'm able to make better decisions.

Empathy would be a large part of it, yes. I don't doubt if you or someone close to you ended up trapped in a gorilla enclosure at a zoo, you would be rather upset if the zoo keeper shrugged their shoulders and said 'Nah, not going to bother doing anything, humans are easily replaceable" and let you get beaten to death by a gorilla.

 

[Kolby Jack]

Ugh, I wish they didn't have to shoot the gorilla but a human child's life always takes priority over any animal. Definitely worth investigating where the hell the parents were when their four year old was climbing over the bars of an ape enclosure though.

As the gorilla is endangered and was brought there for breeding it's life was worth more than the easily replaceable child.

Nice try, but most people tend to value human life a fair bit more than that.

The question is why? I think it has to do with empathy and since I'm lucky enough to lack it I'm able to make better decisions.

No, that just makes you a sociopath. I'd suggest seeking out counseling. Unless you're faking it to sound edgy. That just makes you an asshole.

This is a sad case, and someone needs to be fired/arrested/sued. I'll leave it to the proper authorities to determine who that is. That said, there really was no other way to end it with the child's safety guaranteed once it progressed as far as it had.

 

[JoJo]

Ugh, I wish they didn't have to shoot the gorilla but a human child's life always takes priority over any animal. Definitely worth investigating where the hell the parents were when their four year old was climbing over the bars of an ape enclosure though.

As the gorilla is endangered and was brought there for breeding it's life was worth more than the easily replaceable child.

Nice try, but most people tend to value human life a fair bit more than that.

The question is why? I think it has to do with empathy and since I'm lucky enough to lack it I'm able to make better decisions.

Empathy would be a large part of it, yes. I don't doubt if you or someone close to you ended up trapped in a gorilla enclosure at a zoo, you would be rather upset if the zoo keeper shrugged their shoulders and said 'Nah, not going to bother doing anything, humans are easily replaceable" and let you get beaten to death by a gorilla.

You can be upset,that is natural, but anyone that bonded with the gorilla has an equal right to be upset. If someone I loved was threatened I would value their life over the unknown gorillas. (Unless it was last gorilla or something) I can understand why humans inherently behave like human life is more valuable, but not all of us agree with that anthrocentrism. Easily replaceable would not be the reason why. That should ideally not reduce your personal value. I think some animal's lives are worth more than some human's. I also understand why some humans find that offensive. It isn't lack of empathy but rather being empathetic of nonhumans as well.

The fact that we make most of our decisions based on human well-being without as much concern for our effects on the rest of the creatures we share this planet with just shows the monumental degree of human hubris and privilege.
I am firmly convinced that we need to be able to maintain and sustain ecosystems and other flora and fauna to feasibly colonize other planets. I could be wrong,but I see no good reason to ruin a perfectly good biosphere.

If Harambe was the last male gorilla would any of you change your minds on whether it was right to shoot him?

I wouldn't say I was anthrocentric, so much as sapient-centric. I will always prioritise an intelligent being's life over that a non-intelligent being. We can quibble over the definition of that, but at present I would only class humans as being in that category. If the other great apes were capable of moral distinction, there wouldn't be a threat to the child in the first place. I agree that biosphere preservation would be in our own interests, however the elimination of one gorilla in a zoo has no notable effect on the biosphere.

If Harambe was the last male gorilla, realistically the species would be as good as dead anyway with such low genetic diversity in the remaining population, so I wouldn't change my mind.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

I can correctly call you a biased anthrocentrist. It doesn't mean much, most humans are.

I happily hold the title. Bias ain't always a bad thing.

From the point of view of possibly intelligent nonhumans that we have oppressed, it can be. I have met humans who I would only save after I saved other animals. To say that humans are fundamentally better is such hubris. Nonhuman intelligence is not necessarily worse or lesser. Sentient's rights matter, even if not human.

Unfortunately, none of my reasons for regarding humanity as the greater have a single whit to do with intelligence or sentience and everything to do with pre-distributed value, but I get the feeling that you aren't religious and this argument could go a very depressing direction if it continues further.

I'm pretty sure taking religion and dogmatic values of things only improves the discourse.

It's quite fine with me to reason that a human life is worth more to us. It's deplorable to me to value a human more than a gorilla just because 'God said so' or some such.

 

[Cowabungaa]

They'd better take a good look at their enclosure design after this, not to mention how the child got in there in the first place. See whether the parents did something wrong too, that sort of thing.

Also, just to illustrate; the zookeepers apparently waited ten minutes before taking the final shot. They really didn't want to kill that gorilla and neither did they believe that the gorilla intended to harm the kid. The thing is; have you looked at a gorilla lately? One wrong move and that kid would've been paste, intention or no.

You're thinking of wildlife reserves.

No, zoos do that too. They're usually very active in research, conservation and breeding programs.

 

[Dragonbums]

Ugh, I wish they didn't have to shoot the gorilla but a human child's life always takes priority over any animal. Definitely worth investigating where the hell the parents were when their four year old was climbing over the bars of an ape enclosure though.

As the gorilla is endangered and was brought there for breeding it's life was worth more than the easily replaceable child.

Nice try, but most people tend to value human life a fair bit more than that.

The question is why? I think it has to do with empathy and since I'm lucky enough to lack it I'm able to make better decisions.

Oh great. 'Logic not feels comment'. Get real dude. Empathy also comes into play when stating that it was a tragedy the Gorilla had to die. If you truly give zero fucks you wouldn't bother posting in this thread.

You feel enough empathy for the Gorilla to deem it more worthy than the kid. This isnt the edgy hour.

 

[Saetha]

Start charging the families of the people involved in incidents like this the cost of the animals and see how fast this kind of thing stops.

At the very least. The gorilla died due to their gross negligence. They should have to pay for it. Too bad the gorilla didn't have basic rights so that the parents could get a manslaughter charge or something. Yeah humans sure are superior.

You know we have these things called "animal rights," yeah? And that the callous neglect or torture (Which includes killing) of animals is called - drum roll please - animal cruelty. Which is a punishable offense. If you're arguing that the punishment should be more severe, then yeah, argue that. But there is a punishment system in place for humans that wrong animals.

So, you know, sand down your edge there maybe.