This one bloody gorilla... sigh.

[Water Mage]

I wonder how these people protesting about the Gorilla's death would react if the Gorilla actually killed the child.

Besides, I can't say I blame the zoo for killing the Gorilla, it was, most likely, a split second decision.

They didn't have time to think of the consequences. They had a child to save.

It wasn't planned or anything.

It was an act of deperation. In situations like this, people aren't thinking straight.

Also, it seems that a lot of people are forgetting that an incident just like this one happened in Chile last week, and no one is talking about.

And there's the Warlus who killed two men, in a zoo in China, two weeks ago, I believe.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Water Mage

[Naughx]

Killing the gorilla was the right thing to do.

But I think the responsibility fall on both the zoo and the parents.

[EricaofRenais]

Honestly I think most zoos need to look at their fencing and make sure a child can't get in, my local zoo had some walls that a two year old could get though with little effort, they have made some major changes thank god and now I feel like if a kid got loose an adult would be able to grab them before some thing went wrong. I saw the video of the kid being dragged last night and I feel the zoo did the only thing the could to to keep the kid safe, and while I don't blame the mom she could have had her kid in one of those harnesses that they make for kids. My friend had one for her son when he was two and it was great because he could run around and look at stuff but his mom always had a hold him and knew where he was all the time when they were out.

[Moblin Major General]

Honestly I think most zoos need to look at their fencing and make sure a child can't get in, my local zoo had some walls that a two year old could get though with little effort, they have made some major changes thank god and now I feel like if a kid got loose an adult would be able to grab them before some thing went wrong. I saw the video of the kid being dragged last night and I feel the zoo did the only thing the could to to keep the kid safe, and while I don't blame the mom she could have had her kid in one of those harnesses that they make for kids. My friend had one for her son when he was two and it was great because he could run around and look at stuff but his mom always had a hold him and knew where he was all the time when they were out.

The child was double that age, and while one would attempt to say he should've known better, I know that when it comes to animals, they simply don't understand the threat of animals or getting to them. Sure, children are taught that predators are dangerous, but what four year old outside the Rift Valley understands the danger of a Hippo? Gorillas are the same thing.

[Phoenix Wright]

i can't fathom how people think the gorilla was protecting the child. he was literally dragging him through the exhibit. would harambe have needed to crush the child's head in like the mountain did the viper in order for people to realize the kid was in danger?

i have to side with the zoo. the mother should have been watching her child more closely, maybe the exhibit was too easy to get through and should be fixed, but as far as the events churned out, i don't disagree with the outcome.

[Rezzy]

Houston zoo safety measures are not this bad, in the sense that a child left unattended in a super busy environment could not have performed such acrobatics to get through something like what this 4 year old did.

Plastic sheets behind the fence bars and rails are absolute, especially with the scenario of the layout of the fencing to begin with, and why the fences are three feet high and not four or five feet (please, five feet would be more than fine as far as height goes, and plastic in-between could prevent small children from throwing things at the gorillas' pen or the gorillas themselves.

Whatever the case is with the mom, I'm with her on this one. The zoo's safety measures are clearly minimal and if a four year old can slip through during a crowded day, then the zoo is lucky that this didn't happen sooner.

I'm interested in your opinion as a fellow parent. My son's only almost two, but kids can bolt off in a second. Sure, I've never had anything remotely like this happen, but it's always something in the back of my mind, and I have to worry about it every time I go out with him. Kids that age don't know any better. And unless you're Batman, you shouldn't be able to scale to fence and get into the animal's pen in a matter of seconds.

Whenever I hear something like this, my first thought is "I hope that never happens to me and my kids", because if the fates align, it could happen to any of us.

[Res]

This eyewitness account doesn't blame the mother:

http://www.foreverymom.com/witness-to-cincinnati-zoo-gorilla-death-it-wasnt-the-parents-fault/

…the mother was calling for her son. Actually, just prior to him going over, but she couldn’t see him crawling through the bushes! She said “He was right here! I took a pic and his hand was in my back pocket and then gone!” As she could find him nowhere, she lookes to my husband (already over the railing talking to the child) and asks, “Sir, is he wearing green shorts? ” My husband reluctantly had to tell her yes, when she then nearly had a break down! They are both wanting to go over into the 15 foot drop, when I forbade my husband to do so, and attempted to calm the mother by calling 911 and assure her help was on the way. Neither my husband or the mother would have made that jump without breaking something!

Kids are fast.

[Elieson]

The child was double that age, and while one would attempt to say he should've known better, I know that when it comes to animals, they simply don't understand the threat of animals or getting to them. Sure, children are taught that predators are dangerous, but what four year old outside the Rift Valley understands the danger of a Hippo? Gorillas are the same thing.

Valid. Characters like Smokey the Bear, as well as cartoons/movies like George of the Jungle and the Cinderella have done wonderful jobs teaching kids that animals are dangerous. Go get an autograph with Puumba, kids! Warthogs are friendly! Assuming that your child can understand the difference between reality and imagination are huge. Lexi goes to me all the time "Dad, is that real?" & "Dad, that's not really the Lion King, but he still looks amazing." and that indicates to me her intelligence, as she's done this since before she was in school. Not all kids are raised this way...to try to logically understand the differences between real and fake while at the same time, enjoying what's done with them. That choice lies with the parent's decision of indicating wrong from right. The same can be said of religion, so this is a valid topic of contention.

I'm interested in your opinion as a fellow parent. My son's only almost two, but kids can bolt off in a second. Sure, I've never had anything remotely like this happen, but it's always something in the back of my mind, and I have to worry about it every time I go out with him. Kids that age don't know any better. And unless you're Batman, you shouldn't be able to scale to fence and get into the animal's pen in a matter of seconds.

Whenever I hear something like this, my first thought is "I hope that never happens to me and my kids", because if the fates align, it could happen to any of us.

You know for a fact that I'd lose my shit if I bent down to tie my shoe or pick up the hat that some grouchy stranger bumped off of my daughter's head, only to turn around and find my daughter out of sight. I'd be shouting her name and looking desperately to find her, usually by dashing to the most nearby & plausibly dangerous place I could spot. My daughter's six years old but I don't necessarily trust her to just run off and do things. We're still working on her going to use a public restroom by herself, and you know that I'm not gonna be more than 50 feet away without my eyes glued to her or that door the entire time. She could find a trail of nickels that someone's loose pocket could have leaked out, just so she could bring them back to me and say "Look what I found, daddy! Now we can go get that icecream cone together!" and get lost in a heartbeat. Actually, she'd instead ask people if the nickels were theirs because I've raised her to always try to find the owner of something that she finds before keeping it for herself, since "We ain't no thieves or litterbugs!"

The problem becomes even worse when other people or environmental attributes do things that keep you from being glued to your child, in particular, having multiple children. People assume it's easy to just, keep your eyes attached to your child at all times, but realistically, nobody is going to be physically able to hoist their child into their arms every time they say, need to stare at a map to find out where they are/are going, need to communicate a problem to an authority figure, or try to do something right, such as pick up a wallet from a person standing next to you in line and hand it back to them, while your child is say, in a stroller in front of you. Lexi can dart pretty darn quickly, and in my experience, kids can be quick to lose in a crowded place.

It's important to build those lasting memories but it's important to keep safety as a prime responsibility. I try to always keep my daughter safe when I take her to a place that I know she can potentially be hurt at, but really, there's a difference between strapping your child to your chest and letting them hold your hand while they walk around.

I just returned from Disney World with my daughter not even 24 hours ago, and it's a lot of effort to keep her safe & happy at the same time. If I had to do something that would have her out of my arms' reach, I'd have my eyes glued to her. The thing I remember though, is that if I feel that the environment is safe for her to play around in, I'd let her run rambunctiously to play. Her big head and body wouldn't fit through the rails in the fence at the Animal Kingdom's Kilamanjaro Safari ride (Hell, it wouldn't have fit if she was 6 months old), so I could tie my shoe without worrying that she'd fall through it and get hurt while we waited in line. If the zoo's safety fences allow something to go wrong, something will go wrong, and the zoo is responsible for not doing everything in their power to prevent such an accident from occurring.

[Tangerine]

Some people have more attachment to animals precisely because humans can be so terrible with a conscience. I don't really, but I don't blame them.

I imagine in the case of animals like this it has more to do with sympathy and guilt than anything, with us being the exclusive reason they're endangered. Of course, the people using that as reasoning that the gorilla's life was worth more than the child's are lunatics, and it's surprising how common that sentiment is lol.

[Rezzy]

This eyewitness account doesn't blame the mother:

http://www.foreverymom.com/witness-to-cincinnati-zoo-gorilla-death-it-wasnt-the-parents-fault/

Kids are fast.

That sounds close to what I had imagined when I heard the news. If I had been in that situation, I'm not sure if I would have been able to prevent myself from jumping in after my son, even though I can see it's a bad decision logically. Having my child in peril and being able to do nothing about it is literally my worst nightmare.

Random tangent, but Molly Weasley's bogart in the Harry Potter series is I think the most realistic portrayal of one's worst nightmare made manifest of all the examples we see. Who's scared of vampires and mummies compared to that?

Valid. Characters like Smokey the Bear, as well as cartoons/movies like George of the Jungle and the Cinderella have done wonderful jobs teaching kids that animals are dangerous. Go get an autograph with Puumba, kids! Warthogs are friendly! Assuming that your child can understand the difference between reality and imagination are huge. Lexi goes to me all the time "Dad, is that real?" & "Dad, that's not really the Lion King, but he still looks amazing." and that indicates to me her intelligence, as she's done this since before she was in school. Not all kids are raised this way...to try to logically understand the differences between real and fake while at the same time, enjoying what's done with them. That choice lies with the parent's decision of indicating wrong from right. The same can be said of religion, so this is a valid topic of contention.

You know for a fact that I'd lose my shit if I bent down to tie my shoe or pick up the hat that some grouchy stranger bumped off of my daughter's head, only to turn around and find my daughter out of sight. I'd be shouting her name and looking desperately to find her, usually by dashing to the most nearby & plausibly dangerous place I could spot. My daughter's six years old but I don't necessarily trust her to just run off and do things. We're still working on her going to use a public restroom by herself, and you know that I'm not gonna be more than 50 feet away without my eyes glued to her or that door the entire time. She could find a trail of nickels that someone's loose pocket could have leaked out, just so she could bring them back to me and say "Look what I found, daddy! Now we can go get that icecream cone together!" and get lost in a heartbeat. Actually, she'd instead ask people if the nickels were theirs because I've raised her to always try to find the owner of something that she finds before keeping it for herself, since "We ain't no thieves or litterbugs!"

The problem becomes even worse when other people or environmental attributes do things that keep you from being glued to your child, in particular, having multiple children. People assume it's easy to just, keep your eyes attached to your child at all times, but realistically, nobody is going to be physically able to hoist their child into their arms every time they say, need to stare at a map to find out where they are/are going, need to communicate a problem to an authority figure, or try to do something right, such as pick up a wallet from a person standing next to you in line and hand it back to them, while your child is say, in a stroller in front of you. Lexi can dart pretty darn quickly, and in my experience, kids can be quick to lose in a crowded place.

It's important to build those lasting memories but it's important to keep safety as a prime responsibility. I try to always keep my daughter safe when I take her to a place that I know she can potentially be hurt at, but really, there's a difference between strapping your child to your chest and letting them hold your hand while they walk around.

I just returned from Disney World with my daughter not even 24 hours ago, and it's a lot of effort to keep her safe & happy at the same time. If I had to do something that would have her out of my arms' reach, I'd have my eyes glued to her. The thing I remember though, is that if I feel that the environment is safe for her to play around in, I'd let her run rambunctiously to play. Her big head and body wouldn't fit through the rails in the fence at the Animal Kingdom's Kilamanjaro Safari ride (Hell, it wouldn't have fit if she was 6 months old), so I could tie my shoe without worrying that she'd fall through it and get hurt while we waited in line. If the zoo's safety fences allow something to go wrong, something will go wrong, and the zoo is responsible for not doing everything in their power to prevent such an accident from occurring.

You put that far more eloquently than I could have. Watching one child is hard enough. I've got a second one in the oven, already.

[Water Mage]

Speaking of eyewitness, another one, named Kimberly Ann Perkins O'Connor, who was the one that recorded the phone video, said something interesting.

According to her, moments before everything happened, the kid actually told his mother that he was going to enter cage, and her, probably in a playful manner, went along with it.

If that's true, the whole thing is partially her fault, because while she probably thought that he wouldn't do it, she should have realized that kids take this sort dares seriously, and don't think of the consequences, because, if he was making claims that he was going to enter the cage, she really shouldn't have taken her eyes off him, even for an instant.

[Rezzy]

Speaking of eyewitness, another one, named Kimberly Ann Perkins O'Connor, who was the one that recorded the phone video, said something interesting.

According to her, moments before everything happened, the kid actually told his mother that he was going to enter cage, and her, probably in a playful manner, went along with it.

If that's true, the whole thing is partially her fault, because while she probably thought that he wouldn't do it, she should have realized that kids take this sort dares seriously, and don't think of the consequences, because, if he was making claims that he was going to enter the cage, she really shouldn't have taken her eyes off him, even for an instant.

It would really depend on how they were saying it. I doubt she took him seriously. When talking with kids, they make weird claims all the time, like we're driving by a factory, "I'm going to go up there a get some clouds!" (Referring to the smoke stack.) In these cases, you just kind of humor them, you don't stop the car and explain to them how dangerous it would be to try to climb the factory. The mother might have assumed that the zoo barricade was designed in a way that the kid would have been unable to get in, if he tried.

[Res]

Going from one kid to two... it's not just double the work. It's tough!

Tangentially related: My mom had twins. The first thing twins learn to do once they're mobile is to go in opposite directions. I've spoken to parents of other twins and it's almost an instinctual thing.

Anyway, first week of preschool, my mom warns the teachers, 'look out for my son, he's a good escape artist.' They dismissed her fears - 'look, there's three of us, we've been running this preschool for twenty years, we've seen it all, we have two locked gates, blah blah'.

First day my mom gets a phone call - my brother slipped past three teachers' watchful gaze, unlatched the door, walked through the yard, got past a locked gate, and was several feet down the road by the time the teachers managed to catch up to him. And there were three of them, and this was their JOB.

If you think it'll never happen to you - that's when it'll probably happen to you. I'm careful never to say never.

The mother might have assumed that the zoo barricade was designed in a way that the kid would have been unable to get in, if he tried.

I would view this as a fair assumption.

[Water Mage]

A little correction on my previous post:

While did ask his mother if he could enter the Gorilla's cage, she actually said no, and he got quite angry.

Also, this links explain the shooting of the Gorilla quite well:

http://archive.is/uuIX7

http://archive.is/oOrzz

There really was no option other than killing the Gorilla.

[Rezzy]

A little correction on my previous post:

While did ask his mother if he could enter the Gorilla's cage, she actually said no, and he got quite angry.

Also, this links explain the shooting of the Gorilla quite well:

http://archive.is/uuIX7

http://archive.is/oOrzz

There really was no option other than killing the Gorilla.

I've read that the mother had other kids with her at the time, too. That adds a whole new layer of Murphey's law when going out with the kids.

[Tetragrammaton]

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/22/americas/chile-zoo-lions-naked-suicide-trnd/

It's somehow similar to this case.

A man wanted to kill himself, jumped off the lion cage, then the zoo staff killed the lions to save him.

My opinion, it's the zoo's fault to not use a sleep gun.

The lions, the gorilla did not do anything wrong, but they had to pay their lives for human's fault.

Edited June 1, 2016 by hanhnn

[Pepperyena]

I guess part of the outrage comes from the idea that the gorilla's death was unnecessary. I even feel that way. I'm the type who'd go for the option to save both of them. I know that isn't possible in a lot of situations, possibly even this one, but still. It might explain the logic behind some of the thinking.

[blah the Prussian]

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/22/americas/chile-zoo-lions-naked-suicide-trnd/

It's somehow similar to this case.

A man wanted to kill himself, jumped off the lion cage, then the zoo staff killed the lions to save him.

My opinion, it's the zoo's fault to not use a sleep gun.

The lions, the gorilla did not do anything wrong, but they had to pay their lives for human's fault.

Well in the gorillas case it refused orders to go back in its enclosure and then grabbed the kid and started dragging him around. It did plenty wrong.

[Rezzy]

I'm not happy that animals get killed in these cases, but I'm of the opinion that human life always comes first, especially if it is a child.

I don't want to come across as condescending, but most people don't understand how anesthesia works. For the tranquilizer argument, there isn't a tranquilizer around that works fast enough to drop a gorilla instantly. I don't even think there is one that works fast enough on humans. For a tranq gun, it's going to be working intramuscularly; that's one of the slowest ways to release medication into the body. I'm in surgery all the time, and even the inhaled and IV agents usually take time to put somebody under. Occasionally, it will put them under pretty quickly, but that is the exception, rather than the rule, and that's a 200 lbs human under ideal circumstances, not an uncooperative 500 lbs primate. If we had quick and accurate tranquilizers, we'd being seeing SWAT teams use them regularly. Source: Med school and hundreds of hours in the operating room.

Edited June 1, 2016 by Rezzy

[Time the Crestfallen]

I'm not happy that animals get killed in these cases, but I'm of the opinion that human life always comes first, especially if it is a child.

I don't want to come across as condescending, but most people don't understand how anesthesia works. For the tranquilizer argument, there isn't a tranquilizer around that works fast enough to drop a gorilla instantly. I don't even think there is one that works fast enough on humans. For a tranq gun, it's going to be working intramuscularly; that's one of the slowest ways to release medication into the body. I'm in surgery all the time, and even the inhaled and IV agents usually take time to put somebody under. Occasionally, it will put them under pretty quickly, but that is the exception, rather than the rule, and that's a 200 lbs human under ideal circumstances, not an uncooperative 500 lbs primate. If we had quick and accurate tranquilizers, we'd being seeing SWAT teams use them regularly. Source: Med school and hundreds of hours in the operating room.

But that's not how it works in the movies!

Seriously, a lot of people who advocate for tranquilising the gorilla seem to be under the impression that it'd be dropped instantly and not being aware of how many things could go wrong between the gorilla being hit with the dart and the gorilla being knocked out.

[Naughx]

For the tranquilizer argument, there isn't a tranquilizer around that works fast enough to drop a gorilla instantly. I don't even think there is one that works fast enough on humans. For a tranq gun, it's going to be working intramuscularly; that's one of the slowest ways to release medication into the body.

You probably have to aim for the big muscular tissues too no? Not that easy with a moving gorilla.

Edited June 1, 2016 by Naughx

[Rezzy]

You probably have to aim for the big muscular tissues too no? Not that easy with a moving gorilla.

IM (Intramuscular) would just be the biggest target, especially on a gorilla. Nurses with years of experience can sometimes have trouble starting on IV on stationary patients, which would be the ideal way to drop the gorilla quickly, but just isn't viable.

Also to nitpick, when I say anesthesia, I'm referring to the whole field of putting people to sleep, because that's what we call the field, but technically, there's three main groups of agents. Anesthesia by definition only applies to medicines that provide numbness. Sedatives put you to sleep and paralytics keep you from moving. It's just awkward to say sedation in general situations, because it bring to mind the connotation of trying to offer the gorilla sleeping pills or something.

[Elieson]

I guess part of the outrage comes from the idea that the gorilla's death was unnecessary. I even feel that way. I'm the type who'd go for the option to save both of them. I know that isn't possible in a lot of situations, possibly even this one, but still. It might explain the logic behind some of the thinking.

The logic behind not saving them both came from the documented idea that if they tranq'd it, Harambe could've easily taken the kid over to the pool and lost consciousness in the pool, resulting in the child drowning and the gorilla potentially drowning. That, and firing darts at a gorilla is a fantastic way to agitate it even further than it clearly already was.

[CyborgZeta]

I would criticize the mother for not keeping better control of her kid; but this incident was unfortunate, and I can't blame the zoo for their decision.

[Alertcircuit]

Yeah, this is both the mother's fault and the zoo's fault. The zoo's fault for making it easy for that kid to get in, and the mother's fault for not watching her kid.

Edited June 2, 2016 by Alertcircuit