To think it's unfair to blame the mother of child hurt by gorilla?

[pinkladyapple]

Yes if she was holding his hand maybe he wouldn't have ended up in the enclosure. But he could have gone over/through the fence in a split second. And the zoo should have fencing which makes this impossible, surely?

The parents aren't being prosecuted for negligence and yet the Internet seem angry at the mother.

But then the people who think that also seem to think a tranquilliser works instantly, and the gorilla wouldn't react to the pain or impact of the dart.

It's sad and terrible though. For everyone.

Yes! Exactly that. Because it is a human child and not any other species. had it been another animal then yes it becomes more pragmatic. Maybe not to save a dog but if it was a super endangered salamander or giant panda maybe. Of course a human child is different.

Is the only reason you're defending the parents and child and the killing of the gorilla because it was a human child as opposed to one of another species?

Er..yes.

Here's the story about the boy who died at the zoo in the US. Very rare but it did happen.

www.nydailynews.com/news/national/parents-settle-lawsuit-pittsburgh-zoo-mauling-article-1.1814515

Take out the "omg it's a human child!" element and say it was another animal, another ape, or a dog, or whatever that had got in there and the same thing happened. Would you be having the same reactions? Is the only reason you're defending the parents and child and the killing of the gorilla because it was a human child as opposed to one of another species?

An ape or dog would be more likely to be able to get out of harms way once the gorilla was tranquilized, it's different. But no, I wouldn't prioritize a dog or a chimp over a gorilla. I'd hope it survived, but like most people I prioritize my own species above any other. I expect most species do.

Actually reading the question back, the child is not at fault, they are four. The parents could have kept a better eye on the child, but it is difficult to watch them every second of the day. The zoo are massively at fault for not ensuring that children can sneak through holes in the fence. The gorilla was entirely innocent and only acting as nature intended. Unfortunately that was severely threatening the life of the boy.

s the only reason you're defending the parents and child and the killing of the gorilla because it was a human child as opposed to one of another species?

Well no type of animal should have been able to get in there, human or otherwise. And for that reason I'm defending the parents, because the barriers should have been much much better than what they were. But ultimately, I wouldn't have expected them to shoot the gorilla if a dog got in. But yes I would expect them to do something about it if a human child got in. Which they did. You don't like that? I don't care that you don't.

Why? Why are humans more valuable when we are so abundant? Are you suggesting if a child got into the enclosure of the last existing rhino we kill that too? Because to me that sums up the arrogance of our species.

Of course we are viewing a human life as having more value than an animals. We are humans, after all. I believe animals have rights but not the same rights as humans. Otherwise I would be sent to prison for the food I ate as a child (now a vegetarian - but still kill the odd wasp and might step on bugs). I doubt you live your life as if it's of the same worth as every animal, if you are honest.

I don't blame the parents. I blame the zoo for not enclosing the gorilla properly.

I can't get upset about a gorilla dying. A child's life is more important.

Am curious Toxic what you think would have happened to that gorilla and all the other animals in that zoo if they had allowed nature to play out and a toddler had had it's limbs torn off or was pounded to death in front of an audience?

Nature dictates that each species protects it's own of course humans will save humans.

Now do I have sympathy for the trainers killed by orca's at Seaworld? Not so much.

Toxicbits - yes. Human life is more valuable than animal life Imo.

Why didn't the parents go in after him?

If that was your child would you not attempt to rescue him? I'd go in after DS.

How long until the gunman got there? Was anything else attempted?

Yep sorry, the last rhino gets it too if a child gets in. Solution? Make the barriers better. Then everyone is happy.

So, hypothetically do I swerve my car to avoid hitting a dog in the road, or avoid hitting your child, Toxic?

Well by toxics stance it will of course be her child who gets hit. Obvs

If it was the last existing rhino it wouldn't be able to breed anyway, as there would be no other rhino for it to breed with.

So, yes if a child was about to be killed by the last existing rhino then the child should be saved.

By your logic, ToxicBits, mass murders/wars aren't much to get fussed about because there are lots and lots of people in the world, and the human race is not about to become extinct.

Toxic

If an animal is so precious, as the gorilla was in this case or a white rhino is, the zoo have a duty to protect it from people getting near it. They have duty of care.

Good point Angie.

No. The dog gets hit. After all they are a domesticated abundant species, not an endangered one.

If you're intent on hitting someone with your vehicle though may I suggest you stop driving

Toxic would you have been of that opinion if this had been your child?

'Oh well never mind. That's my tiny son in there with a gorilla but there are millions of humans anyway. Let's see what happens'.

Really?

Because if so, you shouldn't be a parent.

And if not, then surely you can understand why the action taken was taken?

Thank God the little boy is OK, and let's hope not too traumatised. I expect his well being won't be helped by the inexplicable global desire to demonise his mother. She (or her partner, or whoever) possibly made a mistake. Who hasn't? Shouldn't we all just be thankful the little one is safe?
Totally agree with pps who say zoos have responsibility to human-proof their enclosures. Most people my age or older might remember the quite high profile case of the poor chap suffering from MH issues who climbed in with the lions (I think he was suffering from some kind of religious mania, iirc). Nobody wants the animals to die unnecessarily, but more so, surely, we don't want vulnerable humans (kids, those with MH issues, etc) to face an horrific death?

Thank God the little boy is OK, and let's hope not too traumatised. I expect his well being won't be helped by the inexplicable global desire to demonise his mother. She (or her partner, or whoever) possibly made a mistake. Who hasn't? Shouldn't we all just be thankful the little one is safe?
Totally agree with pps who say zoos have responsibility to human-proof their enclosures. Most people my age or older might remember the quite high profile case of the poor chap suffering from MH issues who climbed in with the lions (I think he was suffering from some kind of religious mania, iirc). Nobody wants the animals to die unnecessarily, but more so, surely, we don't want vulnerable humans (kids, those with MH issues, etc) to face an horrific death?

Don't get me started on the topic of wars. Because yes I do kind of subscribe to that view point but a bit more nuanced than that angie

Yes just what you need in an extreme situation involving a fuck off gorilla with a child in it's hands a panicked mother or father jumping in to the enclosure.