Welcome to Thunderdome

Maybe the parents should be watching their children when they're around large, undomesticated animals in open enclosures. Perhaps maybe they shouldn't bring along a child who can't behave.

Kids get away, it happens. However, I don't think the parents are without blame.

Also, the design on the enclosure seems very easy to get through, so the zoo bears some responsibility (and I'm SURE the parents are going to file a lawsuit).

But did you watch the video? I don't think that gorilla meant that kid harm. They should have tried something else before a kill shot.

Malcolm wrote:Maybe the parents should be watching their children when they're around large, undomesticated animals in open enclosures. Perhaps maybe they shouldn't bring along a child who can't behave.

Shit happens, Malcolm, not everyone can be as perfect as you 24 hours a day.

According to my Facebook feed, I know many more zoologists than I thought.

The ape flung him 20 feet, twice. Shit was going downhill fast.

Malcolm wrote:The ape flung him 20 feet, twice. Shit was going downhill fast.

He was just playing!

In other news, it didn't take long to replace that moron at the top of moron hill...

Blind man suing McDonald's because their drive-thru is discriminatory.

A class action complaint? This should be amusing.

Investigation into gorilla incident. Goddamn, most people shot by the cops don't get this much attention.

Imagine of the gorilla had been a white albino.... but of course then it wouldn't have been shot in the first place.

GORDON wrote:Imagine of the gorilla had been a white albino.... but of course then it wouldn't have been shot in the first place.

That joke made the rounds above five minutes after he got shot.

Malcolm wrote:

GORDON wrote:Imagine of the gorilla had been a white albino.... but of course then it wouldn't have been shot in the first place.

That joke made the rounds above five minutes after he got shot.

Your mom made those same rounds.

I was in Alabama last week not paying attention to shit. Consider it original humor.

I swear, we need a separate thread for "when armchair zoology goes wrong."

Malcolm wrote:I swear, we need a separate thread for "when armchair zoology goes wrong."

And Elk

Malcolm wrote:I swear, we need a separate thread for "when armchair zoology goes wrong."

What about when armchair zoology goes right?

Based on the guy who raised the silverback and Jane Goodall saying Harambe was clearly protecting the child (something I said) and other expert opinions about Harambe possibly acting aggressive due to the way the enclosure was designed and NOT meaning harm to the boy, it seems like all those FB people being mocked have a leg to stand on in this case. (Granted that typically they don't...)

The enclosure issue is apparently about being down in that moat makes the gorilla scared of the people above. It makes them look threatening and larger, and the way they were screaming and everything else made the gorilla think he, and possibly the boy, were in danger.

What about when armchair zoology goes right?

Confirmation bias of those two sources. Did you see the kid get dragged 25 feet by the gorilla? Even if he didn't mean to harm to the child, the risk was certainly there, and the right thing was done.

It makes them look threatening and larger, and the way they were screaming and everything else made the gorilla think he, and possibly the boy, were in danger.

Which I think just goes to the point that the kid was in danger, and the gorilla may have been unpredictable.

I don't think that gorilla meant that kid harm. They should have tried something else before a kill shot.

OK, Mr. Zookeeper. What should they have done? And just remember, if you get it wrong, and anything bad happens to that kid, the outrage will be 100x what it was for the gorilla. Including you getting fired, the zoo being sued, etc, etc.

Even if he didn't mean to harm to the child, the risk was certainly there, and the right thing was done.

Yes.

Harambe possibly acting aggressive due to the way the enclosure was designed and NOT meaning harm to the boy...

Dude, listen to yourself. He was acting aggressive and that doesn't up his chances of losing his shit with dozens or hundreds of gawking couch potato Steve Irwin fanbois pointing their fingers and cameras at him? They said they didn't tranq him because then he'd be exceedingly pissed and have a higher chance of turning violent. It doesn't matter why the 400-pound gorilla is angry, the fact that it is should be enough to warrant alarm. Once he fails to return to the enclosure, he's exactly one bad move away from getting clipped. He made two, the end.

Ape dude says shit could have gotten real at any point in time.

Much of his reaction may have been triggered by public noise and yelling.

Maybe the public that proclaimed to love the gorilla so much should have backed the fuck away instead of exacerbating the situation.

I honestly don’t know what I would have decided under the circumstances—it would have depended on the precise information that would have reached me -- but at the same time can’t help but wonder what would have happened had the public been moved out of the way, and also the veterinary and security staff would have been held back, so that only animal care staff familiar to Harambe would have been left around. Under such circumstances, calm might have returned and, who knows, the child might have been left unharmed.

Under such circumstances, calm might have returned and, who knows, the child might have been left unharmed.

The "who knows" part of this indicates they needed to shoot the ape. Hate it. They are magnificent creatures. Even if the ape isn't trying to hurt the kid (which I don't think he was), a 450 lb male silverback can snap a kid in two quite unintentionally.

After further thought, the only circumstances under which I'd argue against shooting the gorilla all involve Trump falling into the pit instead of the kid. In those cases, I'd go out for a few drinks, come back, maybe fire a dart or two, then see what happens.

Malcolm wrote:After further thought, the only circumstances under which I'd argue against shooting the gorilla all involve Trump falling into the pit instead of the kid. In those cases, I'd go out for a few drinks, come back, maybe fire a dart or two, then see what happens.

The dart into Trump?

TheCatt wrote:

Malcolm wrote:After further thought, the only circumstances under which I'd argue against shooting the gorilla all involve Trump falling into the pit instead of the kid. In those cases, I'd go out for a few drinks, come back, maybe fire a dart or two, then see what happens.

The dart into Trump?

I'd tranq the slobbering, uncooth, out of control primate with one of the lowest body mass to dick length ratios in nature that also probably eats his own shit. However, I'd tranq the gorilla first.