Gorilla Harambe's killing at Cincinnati Zoo

[sc_rufctr]

Wow... Not an easy decision and I'm glad I didn't have to make it. The kid's OK so that's a good thing. Sad about the Gorilla.



I can understand why it was done. The video in the linked article the kid being dragged around.

Gorilla Harambe's killing at Cincinnati Zoo to save boy sparks outrage - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

[jyl]

Really sad. Crowd may have agitated the gorilla. Too bad mother didn't supervise the kid. Too bad the kid didn't stay out of the enclosure.

[black_falcon]

Didn't look like the kid was in any immediate danger but I guess I understand why they couldn't take the risk, and a tranquilizer would have taken too long and possibly provoked the gorilla. Had the kid been killed, the backlash would be order's of magnitude worse.

Idiot parent/s, I hope they get charged with child endangerment and have to pay civil damages to the zoo. Probably too busy on their phones and a rare majestic silverback who did nothing wrong had to die because of it. Makes me rage.

[aap1966]

Regrettable, but priority was the kid.

Now of course, we have the arm chair experts coming out saying how they would have done it differently. Tonight on the Australian ABC (our version of PBS) there was some academic 'animal behaviour specialist' arguing that the kid was in no real danger, and that at worst the shooting should have been to "wound, rather than kill" the gorilla.

Seriously.

Supposedly an agitated, wounded, 200 kg gorilla in an enclosure with a crying toddler was, according to this 'animal behaviour specialist', going to be a satisfactory outcome.

Why do we only ever get one end of the Bell Curve on Public Radio?

[DanielDudley]

It's regrettable. Now people will use it as a platform to say anything they want.

Try to resist.

[masraum]

Anyone remember this?

[Baz]

How ironic. Humans are the most dangerous species on the planet.

Yet this despicable act was done in order to "save" one of their kind.

Not surprising in the least.

He said the gorilla didn't appear to be attacking the child, but he said it was "an extremely strong" animal in an agitated situation. He said tranquilizing the gorilla wouldn't have knocked it out immediately, leaving the boy in danger.

Maynard said it was the first time that the team had killed a zoo animal in such an emergency situation, and he called it "a very sad day" at the zoo. The lowland gorilla is an endangered species.

[Scott Douglas]

This makes me appreciate the gorilla enclosure at the San Diego Zoo all the more. Stupid humans can't fall into it. The gorillas are much safer.

[bob deluke]

7 billion a$@holes on the planet, a couple hundred highland gorillas left in the world. Idiot parents didn't pay attention to the brat, gorilla paid the price for their stupidity. Time to cull the herd...

[dad911]

I'd like to see barrier/fence. How did kid get in? Sure, parents are responsible for child, but by code I can't build a deck/stair rail that a sphere larger than 4" can pass through.

[Scott Douglas]

^^^That would obstruct the view of the gorillas way too much I'm sure.

These parents should have to wear t-shirts that say "We had the gorilla killed to save our kid" whenever they visit ANY zoo, not just that one.

[Steve Carlton]

I got to believe the zoo is ultimately responsible for not having a secure enclosure. Kids go to zoos and kids are kids. There's nothing new about that.

[911dean]

I'm truly saddened by this. An absolutely beautiful animal payed the price for this.

[Steve Carlton]

Originally Posted by Scott Douglas

^^^That would obstruct the view of the gorillas way too much I'm sure.

These parents should have to wear t-shirts that say "We had the gorilla killed to save our kid" whenever they visit ANY zoo, not just that one.

Seriously???

[Steve Carlton]

Originally Posted by bob deluke

7 billion a$@holes on the planet, a couple hundred highland gorillas left in the world. Idiot parents didn't pay attention to the brat, gorilla paid the price for their stupidity. Time to cull the herd...

Torch and Pitchfork much? So, by your reasoning, a zoo doesn't have to make a gorilla enclosure 4-year old proof?

[impactbumper]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

Torch and Pitchfork much? So, by your reasoning, a zoo doesn't have to make a gorilla enclosure 4-year old proof?

they should. Also piece of **** parents need to learn how to keep a leash on their brats

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

Seriously???

Sure, why not. Keep your kids under a watchful eye or at least control when you are in what could be a dangerous place whether from human predators or wild animals.

They were probably too busy tweeting and checking in on facebook to notice little Jimmy climbing a fence.

Or maybe they have notmyresponsibilityfluenza. Others or the govt needs to protect me and mine from things because I don't want to be troubled by it.

Hell, they'll probably end up suing the zoo.

Now get off my lawn!

[Scott Douglas]

Originally Posted by Steve Carlton

Seriously???

Absolutely.
No way is the zoo responsible for this. I've been to enough zoos in my lifetime to bet dollars to donuts there were/are signs posted around that enclosure warning people not to climb on the barricades/fences.

This was a senseless killing that could have been averted if the parents had been doing their job as parents.

[Steve Carlton]

Sure the parents could have prevented the kid getting in. Thinking the zoo doesn't have the responsibility to keep the enclosure secure is laughable.

[Tervuren]

For a kid, take the most effective action to save the kid's life.

If it'd been a young adult, they knew the risks, maybe take the risk with tranquilizers.