Child Falls Into Gorilla Pit

[Voice of Reason]

The one issue I have not seen addressed is the witness comment that the child told the mother a couple times I want to go play with the gorillas. If that is true and this child has a history of disobeying and reckless actions, then the parent is much more culpable IMO.

[PurplePride92]

I've seen some food fights over this one on Facebook.

[PurplePride92]

[ATTACH]56247[/ATTACH]...

 

I've laughed so hard over this one all day. :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

[UKMustangFan]

I've seen numerous times that the kid was telling the mom that he was going to go into the exhibit. That fact makes it 100% the parent's fault.

 

The fact that it was a child makes the Zoo's actions correct. It's horrible, and upsetting, but you have to do it when dealing with a child. Should've never gotten to that point.

[hoops5]

I always thought that was what the moats were for, if someone actually penetrated the first barrier then u had the moat.Didn't know the animals could get to the bottom of that.

This is the problem. The enclosures were built to keep animals in! They were not designed to keep people out. If the gorilla climbs in the moat he can go no further.

1. Gorilla gets down into moat. Yes there is a ladder to climb.

2. Gorilla cannot climb up

the other side of the 15ft wall to the visitors. There is no ladder on the visitor side.

[Billy Costigan]

Everyone so quick to bash the mom here. I guess we all are the best parents who never let there kid out of sight. And maybe the mom is at fault, but I'll wait and see... I've seen people posting on her employers Facebook - just miserable people. In today's society it HAS to be someone's fault, not just an accident.

[HHSHOG62]

I also find it interesting that we cry about the innocent animal being killed yet we're cool with deer, Fish, rabbits, sharks, and alligators being killed for our entertainment.

 

I think that one of the main differences between killing this Gorilla, and killing deer, fish, sharks and other game animals is that this species of Gorilla is endangered and therefore recognized as a protected species.

 

By recognizing that some species are to be protected, we accept that some animals are more "valuable" than others, and therefore need to be additional protection. I don't find any hypocrisy at all in condemning the killing of this gorilla, and being cool with hunting other game animals.

[HammerTime]

I've laughed so hard over this one all day. :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:

 

Someone did the crying Jordan to him. I couldn't post it.

[Clyde]

Just pointing out he wasn't caught in the wild... And still' date=' after the millions of inspections it's passed, it's not the zoo's fault.[/quote']

 

Oh, they had inspections?

 

Come on.

[HHSHOG62]

Oh, they had inspections?

 

Come on.

 

Is it really that hard to believe that a Zoo is required to have safety inspections at least once a year? I would imagine it would be more often than that, and should have an answer here shortly.

[plantmanky]

Oh, they had inspections?

 

Come on.

 

USDA Inspects each zoo twice a year.

[Clyde]

Is it really that hard to believe that a Zoo is required to have safety inspections at least once a year? I would imagine it would be more often than that, and should have an answer here shortly.

 

I don't doubt they had inspections. To say they had inspections therefore they are not culpable is illogical.

[HHSHOG62]

I don't doubt they had inspections. To say they had inspections therefore they are not culpable is illogical.

 

Why is that illogical? If their safety procedures are up to current standards, then why would the zoo be held liable?

[Clyde]

Why is that illogical? If their safety procedures are up to current standards, then why would the zoo be held liable?

 

So you believe the safety inspections cover every possible way for a child to enter? Doesn't this case actually prove that inspections are not fullproof?

[woodsrider]

I've seen numerous times that the kid was telling the mom that he was going to go into the exhibit. That fact makes it 100% the parent's fault.

 

The fact that it was a child makes the Zoo's actions correct. It's horrible, and upsetting, but you have to do it when dealing with a child. Should've never gotten to that point.

So a 3 year saying they are going into a gorilla exhibit makes it 100% on the parents if it actually happens? First who the hell would think that was really an option. I've been to this zoo and at no point did I think it was even possible for a 3 year old to get in there. It's not like this was a member of Seal Team 6. It was a 3 year old.