Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why? What's wrong with wearing a body harness for toddlers in zoos? Clearly this kid has found a way to sneak pass his guardian, crawl through bushes, railings, fences and then fell over the ledge into the enclosure. It's like he went on a huge big adventure thanks to his negligent mother. So why should all toddlers not be required to wear body harnesses at zoos? Is it not PC enough for you?
Ok. You can't possibly be real with these comparisons.
Of course I am, stone-cold serious. If someone is distracted and in doing so fails at a task (although I argue against such having occurred here), unless the distraction was something on the order of hearing that their mother had a heart attack or such, what difference does it make why they were distracted? The point is that they were distracted, period. That's all that matters. It matters not WHY they were distracted, and to make it a special thing because a phone or camera may have had something to do with it is absolutely a form of bigotry.
Once again, it's interesting that the name and faces of the parents are not even shown in the media. Obviously there is a concerted effort to protect that info out of being PC.
It has nothing to do with being PC. It has everything to do with protecting people from a witch-hunt mentality driven by (a) a ridiculous assessment of the value of an ANIMAL'S life and (b) ridiculous expectations that parents are on 24/7 watch-tower duty like they're in charge of a prison and if one single solitary second exists which they can't account for and an unforeseen incident occurs we should burn them at the stake, fine them $1,593,234,297 dollars, adopt their children out to people who ARE willing to be on 24/7 watch-tower duty and have them fired from their jobs and have them be the first name on the National Scarlet Letter Registry.
Might want to read up on something before you post it.
But they're capable of killing and they occasionally kill their own offspring so who's to say it wouldn't have killed the child?
The bottom line is NOBODY knows what this gorilla would have done with this child. I'm sorry the gorilla had to die. It's not the gorilla's fault. Maybe mom shouldn't have been taking pictures and spent more time watching her child...
But I don't see the zoo having any other option but to kill him. We'd be having a very different conversation if that gorilla had ripped that boy to pieces. Thankfully, we're not.
Why? What's wrong with wearing a body harness for toddlers in zoos? Clearly this kid has found a way to sneak pass his guardian, crawl through bushes, railings, fences and then fell over the ledge into the enclosure. It's like he went on a huge big adventure thanks to his negligent mother. So why should all toddlers not be required to wear body harnesses at zoos? Is it not PC enough for you?
So because one child (only 1!) has ever somehow managed to get past the barriers because of a negligent mother, all parents and toddlers must be punished?
It's quite normal, just not common. Ironically, the primate species where infanticide occurs most commonly and plays the biggest role in reproductive strategy is ours. But it's also been well documented in chimpanzees and in langurs.
It's quite normal, just not common. Ironically, the primate species where infanticide occurs most commonly and plays the biggest role in reproductive strategy is ours. But it's also been well documented in chimpanzees and in langurs.
The young gorilla was the most intelligent person in the situation. But the men were like animals - inattentive, stupid, fearful and very cruel.
Children under the age of seven years shouldn't go to zoo. And to circus performances with animals too.
Some time ago I was in an orthodox church. And someone came together with several little children about two-four years old. Constantly we all had to hear their cries .
Gorillas don't have the intelligence that humans do, never will. I'm sure you're confused with Hollywood and it's portrayals of intelligent apes, sadly, they aren't as smart. If they were, we wouldn't be able to keep them as pets.
I agree that zoos can be inattentive of their pets most of the time (exceptions are for shows, feeding, medical exams, etc), stupid: not sure how you judged this one. Perhaps the parent of the child was stupid for letting his/her 3 year old out of their sights but that's really hard to know, fearful: yes, I'm sure the zoo employees and the mother were both afraid that the gorilla may harm the child. and cruel? Perhaps it could be considered cruel what we do to young apes in order to charge admission, but that's for the great debate forum.
But they're capable of killing and they occasionally kill their own offspring so who's to say it wouldn't have killed the child?
The bottom line is NOBODY knows what this gorilla would have done with this child. I'm sorry the gorilla had to die. It's not the gorilla's fault. Maybe mom shouldn't have been taking pictures and spent more time watching her child...
But I don't see the zoo having any other option but to kill him. We'd be having a very different conversation if that gorilla had ripped that boy to pieces. Thankfully, we're not.
Humans do more damage to their children then any animal species does to their offspring. You can see the video of the Gorilla putting & standing over the child. Again IF the Gorilla wanted the boy dead he could of done so long before they shot him. So why didn't he?
Why didn't he just snap the child's neck? Or slam him up against the wall?
Yes, thankfully the child is alive we should be thankful for that.
Wiki? Come back & try again with a link that can't be edited by just anyone.
The primary sources in that wiki article are cited, and you can look them up and read them. Your link was to an undergraduate anthropology lecture which gives no author name and which cites no primary references, and which treats the subject in a very cursory way. Decide for yourself which is more reliable.
Your postings in this thread have made it clear you know very little about animal behavior, and hold a rather romanticized view of their actions. Real animals are more complex than that, and not romantic at all. The more intelligent species especially (such as gorillas) can be deliberately downright nasty. Check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
Animals aren't worse than us. But they aren't better than us, either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
