Community Chat

[lyn61]

TO CHRYSTALTREE;

I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOUR COMMENT.  THE GORILLA WAS NOT HURTING THIS CHILD,  THE GORILLA WAS IN ITS OWN ENVIROMENT, WHY NOT TRY THE DART GUN FIRST??  THEY HAD TIME. HUMANS!!  THE ZOO WAS WRONG!  BECAUSE OF A STUPID, PATHETIC MOTHER, THIS INNOCENT GORILLA DIED FOR NO REASON---PERIOD.  ANIMALS TO ME ARE AS IMPORTANT AS A HUMAN!!! THATS MY OPINION. NY 

THE GREATNESS OF A NATION CAN BE JUDGED BY THE WAY ITS ANIMALS ARE TREATED. (GHANDI)

YEP.AND HUMANS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB HA????

[lyn61]

TO CHRYSTALTREE;

I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH YOUR COMMENT.  THE GORILLA WAS NOT HURTING THIS CHILD,  THE GORILLA WAS IN ITS OWN ENVIROMENT, WHY NOT TRY THE DART GUN FIRST?  THEY HAD TIME. HUMANS!  THE ZOO WAS WRONG!  BECAUSE OF A STUPID, PATHETIC MOTHER, THIS INNOCENT GORILLA DIED FOR NO REASON---PERIOD.  ANIMALS TO ME ARE AS IMPORTANT AS A HUMAN!!! THATS MY OPINION. NY 

THE GREATNESS OF A NATION CAN BE JUDGED BY THE WAY ITS ANIMALS ARE TREATED. (GHANDI)

YEP.AND HUMANS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB HA?

[clista]

Why wasn't the mother hanging on to her kid.  She is to blame. In a public place you do NOT let your child wander off. Idiot mother.

[Tique]

---

@Frosted Cake wrote:

---

---

Very true.   

I used to tell the kids when visiting the Grand Canyon "We need to be very careful because it's very steep and dangerous." or a zoo "We need to remember that the animals are not to play with or bother but to look at," or even a butterfly exhibit, "Let the butterfly land on you, but don't swat or scare them."    It helps to educate kids to know the dangers and consequences of their actions and respect nature.

---

@Frosted Cake mentioned a very good point. There needs to be some kind of education or instruction given to children before they go to places like the zoo and then a reminder when they arrive. Of course it should be age appropriate. When the little boy said he wanted to go in, his mother could have explained why he couldn't go in rather than just saying "No". She could have told her son that the animal was big and he was little and that animals are very strong. Even though he wouldn't mean to, he could hurt him. Then she should have kept her eye on him and got him away from that area as quickly as possible even if it meant a little bribe. "Let's go get some ice cream" or whatever his favorite treat is. Most four years olds have a short attention span; with a little thought, she could have distracted him.

[qualitygal]

I too have my own feelings about this gorilla. Years ago in our travels, we stopped at the zoo and saw these animals. I don't know what would have happened to the little boy. I'm sorry they couldn't just tranquilize the gorilla and not kill him. But I wouldn't want any harm to come to the child either. The first question of course is Why weren't the parents keeping an eye on this child. This all could have been prevented. Too late now.

[Bird mama]

@Say Nay

Just popping in to say, I adore your avatar.

[Say Nay]

The problem is the kid crawled through the barrier then crawled through bushes after he said he wanted to get into the water with the gorillas and the mother told him, "Oh no you're not...".

If the kid said he wanted to get into the water the mother at that point should have made sure he wasn't going anywhere. Saying "no" to a 4 year old is not enough.

And the media is doing a very poor job of accurately reporting this story. Jamie Yuccas of CBS covered the story yesterday and said the gorilla's behavior turned "threatening" and claimed the zoo's president said the gorilla "became violent" which was not what he said in the press briefing. Yuccas created her version of what happened to sell the story to viewers.

[Say Nay]

---

@Bird mama wrote:

@Say Nay

Just popping in to say, I adore your avatar.

---

Thanks @Bird mama : )

[JeanLouiseFinch]

I remember the incident at Chicago's Brookfield Zoo very well.  It was impressive how the gorilla reacted and carried the little boy to a door where she knew humans came and went though.  That child was darn lucky.  In rewatching a news video of that yesterday, it was suggested that the reason that child was saved was because the gorilla was a new mom and her mothering instincts kicked in.  That wasn't the case with the Cincinnatti Zoo incident. The mom absolutely should have been holding onto her child, no arguement there.  If he were mine and continued to create a fuss or try to get away from me, he would've gotten a little pop on the fanny and told to knock it off.  Nowadays I'd probably get hauled off for that, but I digress.  This time wasn't anything like the Chicago story other than the basics of a small child falling into the gorilla pit.  It was a male gorilla who encountered the toddler and started violently dragging him through the water (saw it on tv) completely opposite of how the female acted in Chicago.   My initial though was that they could have tranquilized the gorilla, but then I saw on the news that they believed it would take too long to work and the child would remain at risk in a dangerous situation.  Shooting the gorilla, as sad and unfortunate as that is, was their only option in this particular instance.  It's sad that the event even happened at all, but in the face of those kinds of circumstances, I can't condemn the zoo's actions.  

[Miranda1550]

Day  1128  Well said...............................