Backlash after Gorilla Shot in Cincinnati Zoo (Updated)

[Yuuki]

the child expressed a desire to enter the enclosure

Oh I guess that's alright then. The child expressed desire.

No but really, is that some kind of excuse for having terribly-designed enclosures which children can fall into if they simply "express desire"?

Holy shit. I'm done.

Next up: a child expressed desire to walk into a nuclear reactor.

Sure, you can't keep an eye on your kids 24/7, but that doesn't excuse a person from responsibility.

Thousands of parents bring thousands of kids to that zoo every year without incident, so that shows a good level of responsibility.

But any zoo enclosure which can be entered by a 4 year old is an accident waiting to happen because of the law of statistics.
Zoos are practically kid-magnets, kids love zoos, EVERY public zoo has tons of kids running around.
If this particular kid hadn't fallen in, it could've been another kid a year from now. The fact of the matter is that this could've been entirely avoidable if that enclosure had some kind of fencing. That would immediately reduce the chances of anyone falling in to basically 0%.

It is completely the zoo's fault that they lost a gorilla and a toddler got hospitalized. This is literally an impossible scenario in any other well-designed zoo.

Trying to put any blame on the parents is missing the bigger picture.

 

[Kameburger]

Honestly to what length would a parent not go to save their child's life?

Apparently according to some asking them to keep an eye on their child is too far.

I wouldn't disagree with that, but this isn't the kind of thing that happens because of gross negligence it's the kind of thing that happens when you stop to tie your shoe for a moment and your child runs ahead with out you. Children run around, they are hard to take care of, stuff happens. In this case it was tragic because it ultimately meant the end of an endangered Gorilla's life who likely meant no harm, but we are being super quick to judge here in my honest opinion.

 

[happyninja42]

Thousands of parents bring thousands of kids to that zoo every year without incident, so that shows a good level of responsibility.

And thousands of zoos have thousands of kids come into their parks and not fall in, that's also shows a good level of design for the enclosure. See I can do that too. If the design was so terrible, kids would be falling in like song about it raining men.

But they don't. So apparently, for the majority of kids, it's a sufficient deterrent.

But any zoo enclosure which can be entered by a 4 year old is an accident waiting to happen because of the law of statistics.
Zoos are practically kid-magnets, kids love zoos, EVERY public zoo has tons of kids running around.
If this particular kid hadn't fallen in, it could've been another kid a year from now.

1 kid, maybe a year down the line, after years of no kids falling in. It's an epidemic!

The fact of the matter is that this could've been entirely avoidable if that enclosure had some kind of fencing. That would immediately reduce the chances of anyone falling in to basically 0%.

I am aware of that, and you neglected to quote where I agreed that the zoo is also responsible for the safety of their guests.

It is completely the zoo's fault that they lost a gorilla and a toddler got hospitalized. This is literally an impossible scenario in any other well-designed zoo.

Trying to put any blame on the parents is missing the bigger picture.

Wrong. The parent is always responsible for the safety of their child. Please note, that isn't the same as saying they are the only person responsible for the safety of the child. They don't just hand them off to the crowd and assume they will be cared for. Would you assume that the security at any facility with that many people, would be sufficient to protect kids from being abducted? No, which is why the parent keeps an eye on their kid. Hell those places have signs all over the place specifically telling parents to mind their children in the facility. To remove any and all blame from the parent is missing the bigger picture.

 

[Leg End]

THE PARAS MUST BE STOPPED Actually, I haven seen Paragon Fury around. Anyone else seen him?

They should have shot the parents.

You just /threaded this so hard it gave me whiplash.

 

[Dango]

I don't know enough about the situation and the psychology of gorillas to really make an argument for whether or not the gorilla should have been killed. Some people have say the gorilla wouldn't have killed the boy, some people say he would have, I can only go with what experts say.

That said, more people would be questioning why there's only a 3 foot wall into a gorilla enclosure. Yeah, there is a moat, but pretty anyone can get into it and get themselves in trouble with minimal effort.

 

[ecoho]

ok just one question why didn't a trainer first go in and call the gorilla over like they did the last time? I mean they really didn't try much first. as to the child honestly don't really care, if his parents were that dumb (and by all account they seem to be) they shouldn't have reproduced in the first place. then again I have very little sympathy for my fellow man after being shot at for a number of years so take that as you will.

 

[Comic Sans]

ok just one question why didn't a trainer first go in and call the gorilla over like they did the last time? I mean they really didn't try much first. as to the child honestly don't really care, if his parents were that dumb (and by all account they seem to be) they shouldn't have reproduced in the first place. then again I have very little sympathy for my fellow man after being shot at for a number of years so take that as you will.

According to the zoo that's the first thing they did. The two female gorillas in the enclosure went when called but the male didn't. They also couldn't tranquilize it due to it only making it more likely the kid would be killed. Shooting it was the only option left.

I find people calling the parents negligent incredibly unfair to the parents and more a product of hindsight. I've seen a few witness accounts online and none of them blamed the parents. What I read said that the parents only took their eyes off for seconds to attend another child and to take pictures. That's all it took for the kid to cross the fence and get in the bushes where they could no longer be seen. It's easy to look back and claim they should have had eyes on the kids but anyone who has ever done anything with kids that age could tell you that you cannot keep eyes on them 100% of the time. You stop to look at something, you tie your shoes, you say hello to someone you know, another kid needs your attention for a moment. All kinds of innocent things that draw your attention for a short time. To say you need eyes on your kids 100% of the time is pure ignorance. Kids will be kids and will run off the second you aren't looking. The only accounts I have seen blaming the parents are from people who weren't there and thus have no idea what really happened. If evidence and/or more witness accounts pop up saying the parents really did cause the problem then I'll change my view. Until then, like anyone who has dealt with kids should do I will give them the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes shit happens and it's nobody's fault

 

[manic_depressive13]

The zoo is definitely in the wrong. Why was it possible for a child to just walk in to an enclosure for large, dangerous animals? When you're running a facility like that, negligent parents really ought to be something you anticipate.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Wasn't an issue this whole time since 1978. It seemed to do its job keeping animals and humans separate for years. This mom was the first one who let her kid run in. Now that the zoo knows how much they have to accommodate for under-supervised children, perhaps it won't happen again. The mother then made it worse by trying to shy away from responsibility. If she hadn't just summed it up as "accidents happen" and said an "glad my son is safe, I should have done better. I'm so sorry for that poor gorilla," then perhaps she wouldn't be seen as such a villain.
If her kid said he was going to play on the freeway and she didn't stop him from climbing a barrier and jumping on would it be her fault or the states? We can't keep idiot-proofing the world and eschewing personal responsibility without this world becoming a haven for irresponsible idiots.

I think the mother is a negligent asshole and I don't like how she responded at all. But if anything needs to be "idiot proofed" it's a zoo, because when people do stupid shit, as they are wont to do, it's the imprisoned animals that have to pay for it. Unlike freeways, which exist for people to drive on, the whole point of zoos is supposedly to protect and conserve wildlife, so the onus is on them to make sure this sort of thing can't happen.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

While the gorilla sadly had to be shot, I dearly hope the zoo sues the negligence off of the kids parents for causing this accident. How do you let your kid fall into the lake with the huge gorilla.

 

[CeeBod]

Something I read the other day that seems rather relevant to this thread: Whilst everyone's been losing their shit over a single Gorilla being killed, over 1,000 men, women and children drowned trying to cross the Mediteranean last week -

At least 1,000 people are thought to have drowned or are missing in nine migrant shipwrecks in the Mediterranean over the last six days, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) said on Tuesday.

The hyenas baying for the parents' blood over this clearly have a major problem with perspective! Gorilla dead, bit of a shame, shit happens. In the 3 days since this thread started, over 60,000 children will have died worldwide, (Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming the deaths on this thread, I'm sure Parasondox didn't kill ALL of them!) there will have been large numbers of fatal accidents, deaths to curable diseases, people shooting each other in long-running conflicts in Syria, Ukraine, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc, victims of crime worldwide, and all kinds of horrible crap that mostly don't ever even make the news any more. Ukraine was sooo last year's story, Iraq was supposed to be done and dusted ages ago, and we're all bored with hearing about Syria now, so yeah let's all get all bent out of shape about a single Gorilla shooting instead!

As this post is waaay more depressing than I originally intended, I'll end with a good news story! - The PGA has shown that it actually has a pretty good sense of humour, by moving the 2017 World Golf Championship from the originally planned course - Donald Trump's Doral course in Miami, to Club de Golf Chapultapec in Mexico City.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Gorilla dead, bit of a shame, shit happens.

That's, like, your opinion man. What's to stop "bit of a shame, shit happens" applying to everything else you just listed? People dropping a comment or two on the internet isn't going to affect the conflict in the Middle East one way or another. It's fine when people are losing their shit over some game, but when it comes to animal rights issues, suddenly it's an outrage that people aren't discussing the Somali Civil War.

 

[Parasondox]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming the deaths on this thread, I'm sure Parasondox didn't kill ALL of them!

I am trying okay, DAD!! Being a villain is so much hard work. Half the henchmen are useless, some want to go on strike. For some reason they have a henchmen union, Putin is not returning my calls and Britain keeps selling me half ass arms. I need that damn cluster bomb upgrade but the budget is low. Damn Tories. No honour among villains these days. Killing is hard. I should've gone into baking like my mother told me too. Kill them with diabetes AND OBESITY!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

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.

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.

Yes it is and no it's not. There isn't a single animal species that has ever been "saved" by keeping a couple spares locked in zoo.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

Something I read the other day that seems rather relevant to this thread: Whilst everyone's been losing their shit over a single Gorilla being killed, over 1,000 men, women and children drowned trying to cross the Mediteranean last week -

At least 1,000 people are thought to have drowned or are missing in nine migrant shipwrecks in the Mediterranean over the last six days, the International Organization for Migration (IOM) said on Tuesday.

The hyenas baying for the parents' blood over this clearly have a major problem with perspective! Gorilla dead, bit of a shame, shit happens. In the 3 days since this thread started, over 60,000 children will have died worldwide, (Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming the deaths on this thread, I'm sure Parasondox didn't kill ALL of them!) there will have been large numbers of fatal accidents, deaths to curable diseases, people shooting each other in long-running conflicts in Syria, Ukraine, Iraq, Nigeria, Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, etc, victims of crime worldwide, and all kinds of horrible crap that mostly don't ever even make the news any more. Ukraine was sooo last year's story, Iraq was supposed to be done and dusted ages ago, and we're all bored with hearing about Syria now, so yeah let's all get all bent out of shape about a single Gorilla shooting instead!

As this post is waaay more depressing than I originally intended, I'll end with a good news story! - The PGA has shown that it actually has a pretty good sense of humour, by moving the 2017 World Golf Championship from the originally planned course - Donald Trump's Doral course in Miami, to Club de Golf Chapultapec in Mexico City.

Starving children in Africa! Starving children in Africa! Did I mention the starving children in Africa! Seriously, there are few things more irritating when discussing anything than having someone pointlessly tell everyone they should be discussing something else. Further more, that same logic could be applied to any other topic.


A new game is announced: "Why are we talking about games when there are starving children in Africa."
A thread about a recent movie: "Shouldn't we be talking about the starving children?"
Another mass shooting happens: "This is tragic and all, but it pales in comparison to the starving children in Africa!"
A woman was just raped: "But 10 women were just raped overseas! Also, starving children in Africa!"


There is so much misery in this world and only so many hours in the day to talk about, so of course people will discuss issues that are closer to home and/or closer to their sphere of interest. There are plenty of people who will devote their attention to animal rights but ignore all the starving children, just as there are people who will devote their attention to all the starving people but will ignore all those killed in wars, just as there are those who will devote their attention to those killed in wars but will ignore pollution and environmental issue, just as there are those who will devote their time to environmental issues but will ignore the horrific working conditions in certain countries, just as there are ... etc.

Just saying, pointing out that there are bigger issues doesn't make the smaller ones go away. Further more, there are plenty of people "losing their shit" over these other issues you described, they just aren't necessarily on this site.

Also, it would also be pretty funny if hypothetically your own posting history was filled with posts about videogames, movies, and other miscellaneous stuff that has nothing to do with those issues you just mentioned, just like the rest of us.

If it seems like I'm being overly hostile about this it's because the the appeal to relative privation is not just irritating, it regularly gets used as a red herring to derail legitimate political discussion. Everytime someone discusses minimum wage laws, or gay marriage, or working conditions, or animals rights, or any other issue at all, you can practically set your watch to the precise moment someone inevitably reminds everyone about all the other problems overseas, before promptly forgetting about them until the next time they need to derail a discussion.