December 28, 2007
Attacking Tiger Attack Victims - (Un)just?
(Ah, the year of the tiger. OK, month of the tiger. But still.)
A reader brings up an interesting point -- thanks, reader! -- who asks, "The boys had it coming. True, but can they be buried/released from the hospital before we start pointing fingers. Did this happen before 24/7 news channels existed?"
(S)he makes a good point. Surely something similarly maul-related has happened before at a zoo somewhere, yes? Happened on busier news days as well, we imagine. Animal taunting must occur on a daily basis at SF Zoo. Seeing as how the zoo must already prepared for ill-mannered youths or men who visit the place every day, the problem here is that the tiger exhibit wall "doesn't meet national standards."
And, sure, the belligerence of the now hospitalized boys raises some fingers all too easy to point. But they were scared, possibly hungover, and just witnessed the loss of a good friend in a most violent way. (Not to mention how pain killers affect one's manners. Greatly.) We don't know. We just feel bad for pointing too many fingers - righteous or not - at a couple of patients who are still surely in a Vicodin haze.
But in the end, said keen reader makes a good point in that there will most likely be an out-of-court settlement. Aw. A televised trial that could inevitably involve "[p]unk kids, zoo officials, cops, PETA, Discovery Channel, Court TV, FOX News SF bashing, Kimberly, Gavin, animated re-enactments, book/movie rights for sale, Marcus Allen, a previously mauled zookeeper, misplaced pinecones, on and on...?" While we would love such a gross display of spectacle, we can't imagine it would be good for either the zoo or the Sousa family.
Anyway, is le media being too hard on them? Not hard enough? Can we wait before we start publicly hanging in Union Square anyone related to the SF Zoo/tiger attacks?
|
Considering that they have a record of such belligerence (and worse) with police, no, I don't feel bad at all about pointing my finger.
But you're a nicer person than I am.
No little birdhouse in your soul for the tiger taunters, bluecanary?
I think we should let Tony eat them.
I don't feel bad. Poor tiger.
I will withhold any (further) judgment based on whether or not any of the three assisted Tatiana in her escape by dangling an appendage or something. You no what, no. I will wait until we know if they taunted her or not. I don't think the taunting of zoo animals is that common. Maybe after dark, after closing hours...why wasn't the zoo closed when it was supposed to be closed?!?!
The boys had it coming. True.
I wouldn't even go that far. I don't know if zoo officials intentionally lied or there was just some misunderstanding somewhere, but this whole "we found a shoe in the cage, oh nevermind, there was no shoe in the cage" business has me wanting to wait for some actual facts before blaming anyone.
Plumpy, this is off-topic, but i really love your name. Plumpy!
What is wrong with you children?
No one deserves to be mauled by a tiger or killed by one. Of course, it's a shame that the tiger got killed but what would you have them do? Stand by and allow the beast to kill the other two young men? And, apparently, the young men in question wouldn't be my first choice for progeny. But, nevertheless, no one, young or old, well or ill-behaved, goes to the zoo expecting to be put in peril by an inadequate animal "enclosure."
I doubt if any of you would be making these comments if the victim had been a darling little five-year-old girl with golden ringlets, dressed in her best red velvet dress.
Shame on those of you who are blaming the victims.
Atthebeach, (sigh), you'd be surprised at how low we can go.
i wouldn't be blaming the victims if they weren't from san jose, need i say more? if they weren't wanna be dj's and lastly, weren't criminally inclined and dishonest.
how much more do we need to hear to convict them?
i wouldn't be blaming the victims if they weren't from san jose, need i say more? if they weren't wanna be dj's and lastly, weren't criminally inclined and dishonest.
how much more do we need to hear to convict them?
Would I stand by and allow the beast to kill the other two men?
From what I've read of these two, no, I wouldn't *allow* it. I'd throw meat sweaters onto the two men and demand the tiger eat up.
And the enclosure has been "adequate" enough to contain the tigers for what, 60 years? That sounds adequate to me, unless you factor in the amazing leaping abilities of a tiger who is mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
I wouldn't say that I'm "blaming" the victims. A tiger is a tiger, and cannot be held responsible for it's nature. People, on the other hand, can be held accountable for their actions. I do not believe for a moment that this tiger attacked these boys unprovoked, therefore, I believe what happened is exactly what any person with any common sense would expect to happen, which makes it humourous albeit sick humour.
In terms of fault, it's the zoo's responsibility to make sure that all safety requirements are met and there is proper surveillance. They need to be held accountable for their actions just as much as any idiot dangling a warm juicy limb in front of a wild animal does.
And on a third note, personally I wish mankind would learn to just leave and love these animals in their natural habitat. There is nothing to be gained by ruining the natural order of things and it is our constant thirst for power and control that will eventually lead to our own demise.
I don't think it's so much that these dummyheads deserve to get killed for what they seem to have done. It's that if someone does stupid things like climbing over a few fences to dangle their legs in a tiger enclosure they have to expect that they might not walk out of there.
I mean, it's like if someone shot themselves while playing Russian roulette. Did they deserve to be killed? If the gun were defective would it be the gun-makers fault?
"...and just witnessed the loss of a good friend in a most violent way."
Apparently not *that* good of a friend, seeing as how the two brothers high-tailed it out of there once the tiger turned its attention toward Sousa. Then again, I guess blood is thicker... and all that.
Oh, and Deborah, as I understand it the zoo was closed for new admissions. They stop allowing new patrons in at 5pm and try to have existing patrons out of the zoo at 6pm.
Another datapoint
"Apparently not *that* good of a friend, seeing as how the two brothers high-tailed it out of there once the tiger turned its attention toward Sousa."
And also refused to identify him -- the hell?
I understand what Brock is saying about the pain, the painkillers, the shock, etc. but it seems as though these guys knew they had done something wrong -- whatever it was/is -- why else would they refuse to give their names to police and paramedics and/or tell them who Sousa was?
When you're being treated for severe injuries, I'd think you'd be fairly forthcoming about all information requested of you to keep the lifesaving moving along.
Or something.
I nominate Aventius for the 2007 Dick Cheney "Bedside Manner" Award.
"No one deserves to be mauled by a tiger or killed by one."
This goes both ways, as no one deserves to spend her life in a cage (or should I use the current PC term, "enclosure"). I can't say that I derive any satisfaction from the deaths, but I despise zoos, and if I was locked up and exhibited for life without crime, this is how I would want to go. Escape and be shot dead if it has to be, but at least take a few of the motherf*ers with me as well. Okay, the tiger wasn't thinking this. But I just can't suffer all the talk about how to prevent this in the future, i.e. build better cages for these wild animals, etc. How about not exhibiting them anymore? It's a shame.
Does a wildebeest "deserve" to be killed by a tiger? I know a wildebeest could never give the world a miracle like "The King Of Queens," but the emerging story may not be so far from the wild.
when an animal escapes, that is evidence of substandard design or care or procedures.
this leads me to expect a pretty substantial lawsuit against the zoo and it's insurance carrier on behalf of the victims.
and... expect an overhaul of the zoo.
i don't visit the animal jail anymore.