|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/20/2008 8:37:40 PM | There are three parties at fault.
1. The zoo for not having an enclosure that met with standards. They will fix that I am sure.
2. The three morons that thought doing this was "fun" and "harmless" It shows what dumb@ss's people are raising these days. Unfortunately the fellow morons like these three think the kids did nothing wrong so the only hope is further natural selection to get rid of those morons.
3. The parents. I dare not to even call them parents because if they were parents those kids wouldn't have gone to a zoo drunk and stoned and acting like idiots. Real parents teach kids respect. What they did was the poster example of lack of respect.
Sadly #1 will be the only one punished. Especially in the SF bayarea. I used to live there and personal accountability for people is not the highest priority there. I would be shocked if those kids or the parents get what they deserve. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/20/2008 9:48:57 PM |
Where is the education of respecting the animals when visiting a zoo.
Are parents so ignorant as to let the children tease the animals and let them do whatever they want??? What kind of parents are they???
My understanding is that there were no parents there. These were party animals. They just partied with the wrong animal.  | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 12:47:56 AM |
How is this taunting the tiger. I understand that this could piss the tiger off, but people do this all the time at a zoo. People wave and yell to get the animals to look towards a camera, kids climb on rails to get closer looks. I dont think the victims are angels, but still think the zoo are mostly responsible. And before anyone starts, weather an animal should be in captivity or not is not the topic.
I agree. The tiger saw and heard all types of things.......every day. It didn't charge or attack at those times. Also..people seem to forget that this tiger was aggressive in the past...during a NON-confrontational event.
I think that this was a bad incident all the way around that could have been prevented had the zoo enforced it's closing time policies,corrected its animal enclosures deficiencies and had asked the men to leave when it was apparent they were rowdy and disturbing the animals. Also,,,they should have used extra caution w/ animal that had attacked a human in the past.
Your dogs bites somebody you let in your house....YOU are responsible for it. Regardless of what they did (or didn't do) to provoke it. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 11:10:45 AM | The tiger saw and heard all types of things.......every day.
And you know this how? I doubt you were there every day to keep track of it. In my experience, in my visits to zoos, people have enough common sense to know antagonizing the animals is neither acceptable nor wise.
Also..people seem to forget that this tiger was aggressive in the past...during a NON-confrontational event.
Feeding time is often a confrontational event, in the view of a wild animal.
I think that this was a bad incident all the way around that could have been prevented had the zoo enforced it's closing time policies,corrected its animal enclosures deficiencies and had asked the men to leave when it was apparent they were rowdy and disturbing the animals.
Yes, the zoo was partially at fault. That doesn't excuse the actions of the men, who would not have been attacked if they hadn't been behaving like twits.
Your dogs bites somebody you let in your house....YOU are responsible for it. Regardless of what they did (or didn't do) to provoke it.
All the dogs I've had have been raised well and been even tempered. If someone had been antagonizing the dog to the point where it bit them (which would only have happened in my absence, as I would have tossed such people out on their derrieres), then that person rightfully deserves it. | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 2:41:54 PM |
2. The three morons that thought doing this was "fun" and "harmless" It shows what dumb@ss's people are raising these days. Unfortunately the fellow morons like these three think the kids did nothing wrong so the only hope is further natural selection to get rid of those morons.
3. The parents. I dare not to even call them parents because if they were parents those kids wouldn't have gone to a zoo drunk and stoned and acting like idiots. Real parents teach kids respect. What they did was the poster example of lack of respect.
I don't buy this for a second.
An organisation cages some of the most lethal animals in the world, then charges the public to come and look at them without any supervision. There is no presumption of "good behavour" from the public. The cage has to hold *especially* in the case where members of the public are being jerks. They're gonna do that no matter what and you absolutely have to design around it.
The cage and nothing else was wrong. If the cage was right this would never have happened.
It's not impossible the tiger may have got out and eaten people even if it wasn't taunted if the cage was under spec.
What are they supposed to do, put up signs that say "If you're not nice to the tigers they may jump out and eat you. We'll bring the cages up to spec later" ?
If you substitute "aquarium" for "cage" it's even more apparant. There's nothing you can say to a shark that justifies the glass breaking and a quarter million gallons of water being dumped. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 4:30:56 PM |
In my experience, in my visits to zoos, people have enough common sense to know antagonizing the animals is neither acceptable nor wise. In my experience, kids and adults yell and wave their hands to get the attention of animals to see their faces or to take a picture. I am not their every day to see zombies you described on your visits to the zoos. I have never seen people standing church mouse quit at zoos.
Feeding time is often a confrontational event, in the view of a wild animal.
True. So ther zoo should have made damn sure the zoo keeper was safe.
That doesn't excuse the actions of the men, I dont excuse mistreating animals. But if thye did mistreat them, (not proven yet, remember that)that does not excuse the zoo for not having proper protection. A | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 9:33:25 PM |
In my experience, kids and adults yell and wave their hands to get the attention of animals to see their faces or to take a picture.
There is quite a difference between the noise a regular visitor makes, which a zoo animal would be used to, and the actions taken by these particular men, which included climbing on the rails and throwing things at the tiger.
True. So ther zoo should have made damn sure the zoo keeper was safe.
Based on what I have read, the person feeding the tiger was being careless. I still haven't seen any description of the severity of the attack. Unless you have access to more information than I have, for all we know the attack was just the tiger taking a swipe at the person to get at the food.
But if thye did mistreat them, (not proven yet, remember that)
Actually, at least one of the men has admitted to it.
that does not excuse the zoo for not having proper protection.
I have already repeatedly stated the zoo also has fault in this, just as I'm repeatedly having to point out that if the men hadn't behaved like this, the attack wouldn't have happened. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 9:58:47 PM |
The cage and nothing else was wrong. If the cage was right this would never have happened.
Sorry. I disagree with your statement that 'nothing else was wrong'.
Stupid, stoned, drunk teenagers were wrong. Stupid, stoned, drunk kids lying about instigating an animal attack is wrong. Parents that weren't concerned about their stupid, stoned, drunk kids until they turned up maimed or dead is wrong. There is nothing 'right' about bad, irresponsible behavior either from the kids or their parents. The zoo is at fault, but so are the kids. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 10:15:50 PM |
There is quite a difference between the noise a regular visitor makes, which a zoo animal would be used to, and the actions taken by these particular men, which included climbing on the rails and throwing things at the tiger.
Perhaps YOU need to get YOUR facts straight. Not even the police are stating that the kids threw anything at the tiger. That statement came from the zoo's media department,which has since been discredited.
Based on what I have read, the person feeding the tiger was being careless. I still haven't seen any description of the severity of the attack. Unless you have access to more information than I have, for all we know the attack was just the tiger taking a swipe at the person to get at the food.
Again..another case of your facts not being up to date. The trainer did attempt to remove an object from the animal's enclosure and was attacked at that time. The skin and muscle from her wrist to elbow was removed by the tiger and she suffered a significant loss of blood, She has recovered but she lost the use of that arm. Since this person was a trained animal professional...which I'm sure neither of us are...wouldn't it be prudent to withhold judgment unless we were?
This is tragic case all the way around. A man is dead. A rare animal was destroyed. And a zoo that was trying to protect and preserve animals will likely lose a lot of money paying to settle lawsuits and for legal fees that could have been used to improve the zoo and help animals.
At this point....I don't see where blaming the victims does anything other than show a lack of empathy for your fellow human beings. Tell me...do you go to the cancer ward and laugh at the dying ex-smokers? | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 11:10:12 PM |
That statement came from the zoo's media department,which has since been discredited.
People also said the zoo was discredited for claiming the men did anything that might cause the tiger to attack, but at least one of the men admitted later that they were behaving recklessly.
At this point....I don't see where blaming the victims does anything other than show a lack of empathy for your fellow human beings.
I freely admit to a lack of empathy for people who come to harm because they were acting like jerks. The man didn't deserve to die for his actions, but regardless, if he and his friends hadn't acted like that, they wouldn't have been attacked.
Tell me...do you go to the cancer ward and laugh at the dying ex-smokers?
Tell me... do you have to take someone's statements and then take them to an exagerated extreme conclusion to try to bolster your argument? | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 11:17:58 PM |
Tell me... do you have to take someone's statements and then take them to an exagerated extreme conclusion to try to bolster your argument?
Your statements show a surprising lack of empathy for man that was killed. A man ,who by the way (it has yet to be claimed) did NOT taunt the animal in question......making him an innocent bystander.
If you show no empathy towards someone who was killed in manner I was wondering if you would show a similar lack of empathy towards people who intentionally performed acts that lead to their premature deaths (i.e. smokers).
It can confusing when people blame some victims...and not others. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/21/2008 11:29:20 PM | So then, in regards to my question in post 64 that you quoted in post 65, the answer would be yes.
I guess you feel more comfortable trying to bait me than actually trying to discuss the topic. Until you get back to the actual topic, I'll just ignore you. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/22/2008 5:02:48 AM |
There is quite a difference between the noise a regular visitor makes So, you believe that no one has ever stood on the rail, waved their hands and yelled at animals. This is regular noise.
Actually, at least one of the men has admitted to it. All I have heard is the men or one man admitted to standing on the rails, waving and yelling at the tiger. This is not mistreating them. Its sounds as if they were attempting to get the tigers attention, Maybe if the zoo officials had taken first reports of the tiger being loose seriously instead of a prank by mentally ill people, the teen and the tiger might still be alive.I do see where everyone holds some sort of responsibility, but I see most of it falls on the zoo.
climbing on the rails and throwing things at the tiger. I read that the men did stand on the rails, but nothing where they threw things at it, Can you share this,please. I am curious about this.
Jennifer Miller, who was at the zoo with her husband and two children that ill-fated Christmas afternoon, said she saw four young men at the big-cat grottos - and three of them were teasing the lions a short time before the tiger’s bloody rampage that killed 17-year-old Carlos Sousa Jr.The boys, especially the older one, were roaring at them. He was taunting them,” the San Francisco woman said. “They were trying to get that lion’s attention. … The lion was bristling, so I just said, ‘Come on, let’s get out of here’ because my kids were disturbed by it.”
She said Sousa - whom she later recognized from his photo in the newspaper - was not heckling. The Chronicle contacted Miller after learning that she and her family had seen the young men at the zoo Christmas Day. They were roaring at the tigers trying to get their attention. She said Sousa was not doing this. so, he should have been protested from the tiger. He was not. He is as innocent as the police who killed the tiger to protect themselves. Sausa only distracted the tiger to himself to get it off his friend.As a result, he died. He is a hero. This witness mentions nothing of them throwing things at the tiger. And anyone with common sense should know that idiots go to zoos as well and responsible people, so the zoo should have made sure the moat was high enough to protect innocent people like Sousa. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/22/2008 7:18:01 AM | >>>I read that the men did stand on the rails, but nothing where they threw things at it, Can you share this,please. I am curious about this.
They found pine cones and twigs in the enclosure, and theres no tree nearby for it to simply land in there. Someone threw them in there.
Mind you, anyone could have done that, at any time, but I guess its enough proof that these teens deserved to die for something they may or may not have done,and that we are justified in blaming them based on our assumptions. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/22/2008 11:40:56 AM | Arieann, rather than going over what you stated point by point, I'll just put it simply. I've already stated that the zoo bears some fault for what happened. What you don't seem to or choose not to realize is that the men are at fault as well, as this wouldn't have happened if they had not been behaving the way they were.
The tiger is just as much a victim in this as the men, moreso in my opinion, as it did nothing to provoke the situation. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/22/2008 11:42:22 AM |
An organisation cages some of the most lethal animals in the world, then charges the public to come and look at them without any supervision. There is no presumption of "good behavour" from the public. The cage has to hold *especially* in the case where members of the public are being jerks. They're gonna do that no matter what and you absolutely have to design around it.
The cage and nothing else was wrong. If the cage was right this would never have happened.
Yeah, right. Wishful thinking on your part. Animals and humans have both been known to exceed any design structure limitations placed on them when the circumstances are unusual, as they were in this case. Little old ladies have been known to lift heavy things off of children. I've personally seen a semi trucker lift a ford escort laying on a college aged girl just seconds after her FWD vehicle went through the ditch, threw her, and it landed atop her.
This kind of thinking you're doing may be legal but it's not right when the rubber meets the road. You can not possibly design anything to accomodate all the possible fools out there and if you've ever seriously tried to design anything you'd understand that.
The other thing that you do not understand is this: Alcohol and pot do not exist in the wild, at least not on other animals breath's they encounter. So unless an animal is conditioned to it by human relations any one near them with those two things on their breath is sick. (at least as far as a wild animal's senses are concerned) Sick and maybe even considered weak and dying.... ready to be food in the wild kingdom as are arthritic elk or deer. This can influence their behavior.
The bottom line is this: Even if that cage was four feet higher you can not rule out a statistical anomaly of a tiger jumping higher when under a surge of adrenaline or other survival instincts.
Or somebody doing something stupider. If you read back a few years ago here some one during the night cut the cage wire to the wolve's exhibit at Como Zoo and placed a trail of red meat to try to lure them out to freedom. This was done in the middle of the night. However in the AM zoo crews found the animals had not left. How do you design around THAT kind of stupidity?
(Imagine the disappointment the next day when the criminal hears the news all their late night criminal behavior and cost of red meat was for nothing! ) | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/22/2008 11:59:51 AM |
Sorry. I disagree with your statement that 'nothing else was wrong'.
Stupid, stoned, drunk teenagers were wrong. Stupid, stoned, drunk kids lying about instigating an animal attack is wrong. Parents that weren't concerned about their stupid, stoned, drunk kids until they turned up maimed or dead is wrong. There is nothing 'right' about bad, irresponsible behavior either from the kids or their parents. The zoo is at fault, but so are the kids.
This is an appeal to emotion, not logic.
If the decibel meter hits 87 it doesn't matter if it came from 1, 3 or 60 people and it makes no difference whether they were busloads of small children or crazy people. The cage has to hold the animal in. There's no such thing as "good enough" when the modality of failure is lethal.
To believe otherwise would indicate the need for a sign that says "if you annoy these animals they'll eat you and it's your fault not ours".
If the cage doesn't hold, it's broken. We know the cage was 4' too short and the tiger jumped over it and the zoo is fixing it.
The only real question is how many other zoos cages are not up to spec either? | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/24/2008 2:11:45 PM |
I climbed into a pig pen once when I was a kid and teased one of them thinking " Their pigs man! I mean how much damage can they do??? I learned a rough lesson..
Any good farm boy will tell you, pigs will eat your a~s~s!!!
I am truly sorry that nice man lost his son... truly I am. I really suspect the tiger ate the wrong one... but they ALL got what they deserved. The tiger was the only innocent one in the process... just doing what tigers do and look what it gets him!
I have thought about this alot and wandered what I would do if it were my kids... if they were the ones still alive they would wish they weren't. If one were the dead one I would be devestated but I would have been more angry at the zoo for not protecting the cat and too the police who killed it. | |
|
| |
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/24/2008 2:30:02 PM | I don't care what those punks did(short of opening the cage)...the zoo is still negligent. As much as I detest what those punks did to the animal...the zoo and the city of San Francisco will be sued for millions of dollars. | |
|
| Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting Posted: 1/24/2008 2:37:03 PM |
this is the reason i only taunt the weak and small animals when i go to the zoo... i/e, flamingos, spider monkeys, prarie dogs, lizards, occasional ant eater, etc.
Haha, best post on this thread!
In all seriousness, though:
It sucks the Animal had to be put down.
It sucks for the poor kid who was ignorant and lost his life.
It sucks the zoo is not keeping people safe.
It also sucks that people are so fervently happy to see another human being die, b/c he made a poor, misguided decision.
I'm sure nobody here did anything stupid in their teenage years... | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 12
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 |
|