One could make a strong argument that the gorilla shouldn't have been on display in the first place. That the design was very unsafe is clear. The child should never have been able to get into the gorilla's environment. The parent in charge? If a hefty fine could be levied for brute stupidity and neglect the child's parent should get hit with one. Having said all that, you can't take a risk with a child who could have been killed in an instant. It's tragic that there wasn't a brave zoo keeper willing to go in immediately and attempt to draw the animal away from the child. That done successfully would have saved both lives, the gorilla's and the child's. The zoo was unprepared for such an event, unaware that the enclosure was unsafe, and not imagining that a parent could be so negligent. It was a perfect **** storm of stupid.
Good answer. Given the situation, killing the gorilla sadly seems like the sensible decision. They already explained tranquilizers would act too slowly, and I don't know what else could have been done given how excited/agitated the gorilla apparently was.
Reminds me of the idiots at yellowstone who "rescued" a baby buffalo calf by putting it in the back of their SUV and taking it to a ranger station because "it looked cold". Of course the bison had to be killed after it was rejected by it's mother because it smelled like human. Nothing else the zoo could do in this case. Not sure what the mom was thinking/doing.
The issue with the bison was an example of short sighted bureaucracy forcing something stupid to happen. If it wasn't against the rules, they could have given the bison away or even sold it to someone who would bottle feed it and raise it till it could take care of itself.
The gorilla should have been tranquilized and allowed for rescue of the child. Whatever happened in that couple minutes between the tranq hitting the animal and the gorilla passing out is on the parents. If you're going to pay to take your child to the zoo, learn to supervise it. These animals are in captivity, but going into the zoo, and walking up to the exhibit, anyone that isn't an absolute, complete moron should realize that there could be some danger if one goes into the exhibit. Thus, supervise your freakin child, or else. The worst thing in the whole situation, is that, after watching the video, it seems fairly apparent that the gorilla was probably trying to protect the child. Maybe they should have left the child in the exhibit and it would have gotten better parenting... Gorilla never asked to be put on display and gawked at. It definitely didn't ask to be killed for being itself. Idiot mom basically forced the zoo to poach its own animal. Utterly disgusting, and I hope he parents face a huge fine if not jail time.
There are places that would have taken the bison in and kept it bottle fed while doing the tests to see if it had brucellosis. There's not just a whole lot of purebred bison out there and the chances that this baby bison had brucellosis is fairly small. That said, I understand why they put it down, they aren't a zoo or a wildlife rescue, they are a national park.
I don't think there was any other course of action. A brave zoo keeper might put the child's life in greater danger. It's a sad thing to do, as a gorilla, simply because it is not human, it treated by being placed in captivity and disposed of for doing nothing but being a gorilla. I think zoo's shouldn't contain mammals unless they are offering refuge to animals that can no longer survive on their own and need medical assistance of some type. Also, did TJ just compare a black person to a gorilla? I mean, wow. Just wow.
Agree with the posters saying that the very fact that a small child ended up there indicates at least a strong look into how the zoo was designed is in order. But, if there was a fair fence, and the child just climbed over it...is that the zoo's fault, or the parent's? In watching the video, I think the gorilla was not trying to injure the child, but was trying to help it. But I also agree with one of bystander's who said there wasn't any way they were going to get the child away from the gorilla. That would be even more the case if the gorilla were trying to protect the child, as it would get very defensive and aggressive. As tranquilizer darts had been ruled out as too dangerous given the time lapse in that situation, I'm not seeing what the other alternatives were at that point. Sad situation all around. Would like to know exactly how the child got there before casting blame, though. I know waiting for facts is so blase these days, though.
That wouldn't work. Tranquilizers take a few minutes to take effect, and would agitate the gorilla during that period of time...thereby placing the child in greater danger. I would like to hear some analysis of why they couldn't have tried that, while having the guns trained on the gorilla. But, as you can see from the video, it could just take a second for the gorilla to grab the child and do something that could cause serious harm. Gorillas are unbelievably strong, and quite large. About the size of a bear. Were this not a gorilla, but a bear...would there be this same outrage?
You have to shoot the gorilla. They are unpredictable and supposedly was already upset. You take the child away from the parents. You don't let you child climb over three different barriers. The mother also has a history of endangerment. They don't need to be breeding or raising children. It is common sense, you watch your children and you don't let them cross multiple layers of security. You have an independent agency come in and review the area to see if there is a compromise in general safety. You cannot make a zoo or any other location 100% safe, it is a waste of resources and probably not even possible. At some point common sense needs to win out.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"Can't believe those ****s killed that gorilla for a kid."<br>[tosses two dozen half eaten Memorial Day kids' table burgers into trash bag]</p>— ⚡David Angelo⚡ (@MrDavidAngelo) <a href="https://twitter.com/MrDavidAngelo/status/737353707445051392">May 30, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
You do understand why there's a difference between the death of an endangered gorilla and that of a cow, correct?
