cincinnati zoo kills gorilla because a kid fell in the enclosure

[SeventhSandwich]

i cant believe "is it ok to kill a gorilla to save a child" is even a legitimate question

It's a reasonable philosophical question. Gorillas are arguably conscious, sentient animals, just like us.

But practically speaking, you shoot the damn gorilla.

[Ad Bot]

[McZealot]

It's a reasonable philosophical question. Gorillas are arguably conscious, sentient animals, just like us.

But practically speaking, you shoot the damn gorilla.

I mean, the gorilla honestly might've been as intelligent as the human boy.

The difference is that the human boy wasn't threatening the gorilla.

for pageloss:

I don't get why anyone things they did something wrong. I'm a huge animal right supporter (and a vegan) so I obviously don't like dead animals, but If I were in charge, I would've shot the gorilla even sooner. He was throwing the kid around the moat, and clearly acting aggressive, at least from the clips I saw. A 500 pound gorilla would take 10-15 minutes to tranquilize--it's hard to tranquilize even small animals. And now you have a 500 pound gorilla with a child, whose just been shot with a sharp piece of medal. Chances are, he's gonna be PISSED, and you'll have seriously endangered the life of a child.

The parents shouldn't be charged, don't be ridiculous. Unless they literally dropped the kid off at the zoo and headed down to the Barely Legal Babes Club I don't imagine that they in any way allowed this to happen. They might have stepped out to the restroom, or been turned away, talking to a friend. Or maybe they let him climb up a bit on the fence, to get a better view. Kids can move fast, and many zoo fences aren't very high.

It's hilarious that the same people who say "KIDS ARE TOO SHELTERED... PARENTS GET IN TROUBLE FOR DOING ANYTHING THESE DAYS!" are the same people who say "CHARGE THE PARENTS WITH A CRIME BECAUSE THEIR KID DID SOMETHING A KID WOULD DO!"

[e-maxx]

they should have tranquilized the kid

[Nonnel]

Wow they killed another black guy for doing nothing wrong smh

[SeventhSandwich]

Wow they killed another black guy for doing nothing wrong smh

cringe

[SeventhSandwich]

The parents shouldn't be charged, don't be ridiculous. Unless they literally dropped the kid off at the zoo and headed down to the Barely Legal Babes Club I don't imagine that they in any way allowed this to happen. They might have stepped out to the restroom, or been turned away, looking from a friend. Or maybe they let him climb up a bit on the fence, to get a better view. Kids can move fast, and many zoo fences aren't very high.

Unless the kid was left unattended, it should have been impossible for him to climb over the railing.

Look at it another way: if a kid climbed over the fence of a power substation and was about to touch a live transformer and the city had to cut power to 50,000 customers to save the kid, you would charge the parents with neglect. The parents brought the child to an area where they could cause themselves significant harm, and they willingly ignored their child, allowing them to climb over safety measures and almost get themselves killed. This scenario, as well as the one with the gorilla, constitutes criminal negligence.

[Refticus]

Wow they killed another black guy for doing nothing wrong smh

10/10

[Lego lad]

good thing those brits dont have guns jeeeesus christ

him irl:

I mean, the gorilla honestly might've been as intelligent as the human boy.

The difference is that the human boy wasn't threatening the gorilla.

for pageloss:

i can see what you're trying to say about the parents thing, but apparently the parents already knew he wanted to actually go IN the exhibit, so they probably should have kept a better eye on him
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/05/29/gorilla-shot-at-zoo/

“The little boy himself had already been talking about ‘go in, go in, get in the water’, and his mother is ‘no you’re not, no you’re not,'” witness Kim O’Connor said. “I don’t know if the screaming did it or too many people hanging on the edge, if he thought we were coming in, but then he pulled the boy down further away from big group.”

[McZealot]

i can see what you're trying to say about the parents thing, but apparently the parents already knew he wanted to actually go IN the exhibit, so they probably should have kept a better eye on him

Unless the kid was left unattended, it should have been impossible for him to climb over the railing.

Look at it another way: if a kid climbed over the fence of a power substation and was about to touch a live transformer and the city had to cut power to 50,000 customers to save the kid, you would charge the parents with neglect. The parents brought the child to an area where they could cause themselves significant harm, and they willingly ignored their child, allowing them to climb over safety measures and almost get themselves killed. This scenario, as well as the one with the gorilla, constitutes criminal negligence.

But they didn't leave him alone in a highly electrical plant--they literally brought him to a place where you are SUPPOSED to bring kids. You can't watch a little boy 24/7. If he wants to get away, he can. I heard an interview (second hand, don't know 100% if it's true) where the mother said that she had been pushing a baby stroller, with him behind her, when he darted off to the side. You don't know how tall the zoo fence was, and neither do I, and unless it was 15 feet high, I bet a kid could climb it pretty fast.

Now, I don't really believe in "Finding the person to blame," exactly, and I think we should have enough maturity to understand that everyone could've done better and to further improve. But if any sole party is at fault it should be the zoo owners, for allowing a saftey hazard (accessible gorillas) in an area where we expect children to play.

[shitlord]

me when a kid jumps into a gorilla enclosure

[SeventhSandwich]

But they didn't leave him alone in a highly electrical plant--they literally brought him to a place where you are SUPPOSED to bring kids.

Yes, and there's nothing illegal about standing next to a substation either. Teaching your kids about the electrical grid is a great thing, until you decide that it's a smart idea to leave them alone. That's when negligence comes into play.

I heard an interview (second hand, don't know 100% if it's true) where the mother said that she had been pushing a baby stroller, with him behind her, when he darted off to the side.

You should take this with a grain of salt. The mother knows that she's under scrutiny for child negligence, and there's always such a thing as covering your own ass.

Now, I don't really believe in "Finding the person to blame," exactly, and I think we should have enough maturity to understand that everyone could've done better and to further improve. But if any sole party is at fault it should be the zoo owners, for allowing a saftey hazard (accessible gorillas) in an area where we expect children to play.

I don't believe that we necessarily need someone to blame either. I just blame the parents.

As for the zoo owners, I guarantee that there's signs and contracts and such that remove any liability from the zoo. The parents can always file a lawsuit, but the zoo will have better lawyers and probably a better case.

I'm sure they recognize that this is all bad press, and they'll raise the fences before they put in a new gorilla.

[Sideswipe]

At least NerdCubed agrees with me

[Ipquarx]

Apparently what happened was the parents had turned away for a few seconds and the kid wandered into a bush. The cage was literally right behind the bush and the bars were big enough for the kid to slip through. No fence, no glass, not even a net to catch him. There's plenty of blame to go around here.

[Mr. Hurricane]

Apparently what happened was the parents had turned away for a few seconds and the kid wandered into a bush. The cage was literally right behind the bush and the bars were big enough for the kid to slip through. No fence, no glass, not even a net to catch him. There's plenty of blame to go around here.

This, as there is no way the kid should have even been able to have the chance to fall in to the loving pen.

In the parent's defense, children are loving handicapped naive and ignorant, they'll walk in to traffic if you let them, and generally try their damnedest to get themselves killed.

For the scrutiny of the parent, letting them do that is negligent. If they keep trying to die though, well, then maybe it was just ment to be.

That kids gonna be forgeted for life now.

[kidplasma]

everyone's blaming the parents, but i blame the kid for falling in

This is terrible reasoning. You should blame the kid for not beating the gorilla in battle, and taking its pelt as his prize.