Endangered Gorilla shot to protect young boy
- Thread starter fuji
- Start date
To quote Rush Limbaugh (cough, cough): Animals don't have rights. There is no Constitution for wildlife. Look at what they do to each other in the jungle - they tear each other limb from limb. This is not to mean that humans can't or shouldn't care for them or safeguard a species. But we mustn't forget what the Bible says - that God gave man dominion over all living things. (Cough, cough).
Right!
At the end of the day, the zoo must ensure that its enclosures are idiot and child proof. When accidents happen, they should go back to the drawing board and improve on safety, if possible.
CBC news did a segment last night including interviewing Toronto Zoo officials. Interestingly, the Cincinnati Zoo barrier would not pass Canadian Zoo standards. Nor would the barrier pass any Ontario municipal standards for deck or stair railings.
Here's a picture of the "fence" at the Cincinnati Zoo's gorilla enclosure:
Source URL: https://www.reddit.com/r/cincinnati/comments/4lpdhw/the_fence_at_the_gorilla_enclosure/
** Note: I tried to verify this is indeed the Cincinnati zoo, it does look like the newscast, but it may actually be a picture from the San Francisco zoo that the Cincinnati Zoo is modeled from.
This isn't the exact location that the child fell from, but it's built the same way. You can see the 2.5' high guardrail with loose cables, ~18" of bushes and then the moat.
The Cincinnati Zoo has had problems in the recent past with enclosure failures allowing animals to escape including a pair of polar bears, a gibon and a chimp. At no time did the animals get to a public area and no-one was ever endangered.
All crap aside, I believe the only relevant question is: Do zoo patrons have a reasonable expectation that the gorilla viewing area was safely designed, built and maintained and there was no danger to viewers? It could be argued that we must all be responsible to keep our eyes open and continually evaluate our surroundings for danger, which I agree with. In this case, would you expect an average person to evaluate this particular area as safe? If yes to either question, how could you possibly blame the mom?
Here's a picture of the "fence" at the Cincinnati Zoo's gorilla enclosure:
Source URL: https://www.reddit.com/r/cincinnati/comments/4lpdhw/the_fence_at_the_gorilla_enclosure/
** Note: I tried to verify this is indeed the Cincinnati zoo, it does look like the newscast, but it may actually be a picture from the San Francisco zoo that the Cincinnati Zoo is modeled from.
This isn't the exact location that the child fell from, but it's built the same way. You can see the 2.5' high guardrail with loose cables, ~18" of bushes and then the moat.
The Cincinnati Zoo has had problems in the recent past with enclosure failures allowing animals to escape including a pair of polar bears, a gibon and a chimp. At no time did the animals get to a public area and no-one was ever endangered.
All crap aside, I believe the only relevant question is: Do zoo patrons have a reasonable expectation that the gorilla viewing area was safely designed, built and maintained and there was no danger to viewers? It could be argued that we must all be responsible to keep our eyes open and continually evaluate our surroundings for danger, which I agree with. In this case, would you expect an average person to evaluate this particular area as safe? If yes to either question, how could you possibly blame the mom?
Last edited:
When animals tear each other limb from limb ut is usually for food. Fighting over dominance tends to be less lethal.... mind you that varies from species to species.
We are the creators of all value. Right vs wrong, good vs evil, worthwhile vs worthless: all made up by us. Without us there's no morality, no ethics, no value judgement. We made it all up.
Things have value, rights, meaning, only because we say so.
We invested ourselves with rights to create an orderly society, enabling us to cooperate at a large scale, enabling us to work with and trust strangers.
We have no reason to invest animals with rights and we haven't. We value human life over animal life 100 times out of 100 all week long including on Sunday.
Quote from an apekeeper which has been making the rounds, defending the shooting of the silverback.
http://www.edge.ca/2016/06/01/so-about-that-gorilla/?sc_ref=facebook
http://www.edge.ca/2016/06/01/so-about-that-gorilla/?sc_ref=facebook
I've avoided reading this thread till now.
The loss of the gorilla is a tragedy of epic proportions. The animal did not deserve to be shot. He had done nothing to warrant it. The zoo officials were simply covering their asses to avoid possible legal issues should the kid have been hurt.
In my opinion, there are billions of humans on this planet. Too many in fact. There are only a few thousand gorillas.
The gorilla was innocent in all of this.
The loss of the gorilla is a tragedy of epic proportions. The animal did not deserve to be shot. He had done nothing to warrant it. The zoo officials were simply covering their asses to avoid possible legal issues should the kid have been hurt.
In my opinion, there are billions of humans on this planet. Too many in fact. There are only a few thousand gorillas.
The gorilla was innocent in all of this.
No, this animal was an innocent victim of stupid people.
But if it makes it easier for you to comprehend, the people who killed him are guilty of destroying one of God's magnificent and beautiful creatures.
Fuuuuuuuuuuck Limbaugh
He says look at what animals do to each other in the jungle like survival instinct is something to frown apon. As if a man living in the jungle wouldn't tear an animal apart
just the same for the same reasons. If a species of barbaric behavior doesn't deserve the right to survive then mankind is at the top of that list. Our species is learning new ways to
torture and kill each other on a daily basis. Scientists trained and hired to create biological weapons of mass destruction. They take animals from the wild to test deadly gasses that are not designed for them but specifically to kill our own species. Should we go through all
the torture devices that our non savage species have made in for the sake of religion? lol
It is our duty as the dominant species to protect and preserve the life on our planet and so far with all the pollution and extinction we have failed miserably.
No animal is ever guilty of anything. No animal is ever innocent, either. They're animals--the concept of guilt and innocence doesn't apply to them. They don't know right from wrong, they don't have morals, they don't have ethics. They aren't people.
It's possible to talk about guilt here -- that gorilla was somebody's property, and now their property has been destroyed. Who is responsible for that destruction of property? It wasn't the zookeepers who shot the gorilla--they were acting correctly to save the life of the child. I think we can talk about whether the people who designed the fence, wether the parents, etc., were negligent in a way that resulted in traumatizing the child and the destruction of the zoo's property.
Your right about the fence, Its the design that put some responsibility in the public to stay out, some responsibility is too much responsibility when dealing with an endangered species. To protect the animals the zoo cant rely on the publics responsibility, those enclosures should be impenetrable.
I don't agree how you see animals as just animated objects without emotions. Animals can learn right from wrong. They have different moods, and can communicate with
each other and humans if you take the time to learn the language. I can tell you've
never raised a pet before or you would see them very differently. You would see them as individuals, their trust, affection, intelligence, and cleverness. It takes a while to see the soul in an animals eyes and alot are impossible to see because some have souless lifeless eyes, but when you stare long enough over time with all the eye contact you will see its there.
You may indeed develop an emotional attachment to your pet. Some people get emotional about their car, too. That doesn't make them capable of right and wrong which means they can't be guilty or innocent. They just are.
I think we've agreed that there's some liability around failing to protect an endangered species. While that gorilla is just property, an endangered species is pretty valuable property which we have a shared cultural interest in preserving, like old growth forests, etc.
So yes they should look into what changes are necessary to ensure such things don't happen again.
I think we've agreed that there's some liability around failing to protect an endangered species. While that gorilla is just property, an endangered species is pretty valuable property which we have a shared cultural interest in preserving, like old growth forests, etc.
So yes they should look into what changes are necessary to ensure such things don't happen again.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/21/elijah-marsh-frozen-to-death_n_6726476.html
3 year old boy freezes to death. Whose fault is it?
3 year old boy freezes to death. Whose fault is it?
