- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Zoo Kills Gorilla to Protect Small Child in Enclosure
Posted on 5/31/16 at 8:57 am to slackster
Posted on 5/31/16 at 8:57 am to slackster
quote:
Helicopter parents are universally hated on this board and others, yet that is the ONLY way to prevent freak accidents.
Getting inside a Gorilla enclosure isn't the easiest thing in the world. It isn't a "Walk right in" situation, at least not at the zoo I grew up with.
1
Posted on 5/31/16 at 8:58 am to Festus
quote:
I've raised 4, and keeping track of a 4 year old at all times, at a zoo, should be parenting 101, not helicoptering. I get it if you're talking about an older child. But 4 years old? You think it's helicoptering to keep eyes and hands on them at all times at a gorilla exhibit? Or actually, anywhere else in a public domain crowded with strangers?
I don't get that line of thinking.
I mean a leash is the only thing that would prevent this without a doubt, and I consider that to be a bit much.
That being said, if you've raised 4, then you know damn well they can get away in the blink of an eye. If that just so happens to occur in a zoo, this is a possible result. The parents could end up being at fault for being negligent, but I also know that this could happen to almost anyone.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 8:58 am to Salmon
quote:
I let my 3 year old run ahead at the zoo, as long as I can see her. She gets really excited at some of the animals.
If its super crowded I'll make her hold my hand at all times, but if its a normal crowd with families, I'm not making her hold my hand at all times
I solved this by putting them on my shoulders when at somewhere like the Zoo when they're that age. No chance of losing them and they love riding on my shoulders and get a clear view of everything. It's a win/win.
This post was edited on 5/31/16 at 8:59 am
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:02 am to Salmon
quote:
I let my 3 year old run ahead at the zoo, as long as I can see her. She gets really excited at some of the animals.
If its super crowded I'll make her hold my hand at all times, but if its a normal crowd with families, I'm not making her hold my hand at all times.
Same here. But that doesn't apply to a gorilla exhibit. I'm gonna be "helicoptering" with a 4 year old where that kid can even remotely possibly climb into the exhibit.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:04 am to sicboy
quote:
Again, helicopter parenting really has nothing to do with infants and toddlers. It's more to do with trying to control every aspect of their lives as they get into their teen and college years. You can't be TOO protective of a child. They're not learning life lessons at that point. You're just trying to keep them alive while they learn to stop shitting their pants.
Helicopter parenting may have been a poor choice of words, but I liken it to that because I've got friends who seem to be well on their way to that style of parenting. Don't get me wrong, I'm scared for my children every damn day, but the only way to get through it is to understand what you can and cannot control. I think most can agree that it is entirely plausible for a 4 year old to escape your view for 5 seconds in public. With that in mind, do you never go in public or never go to the zoo to prevent anything bad from happening in those 5 seconds? I don't think that is the way to approach it.
I will never argue that a child's safety is anything but priority #1, but I also believe there are practical and reasonable precautions that should be taken. My kids never leave my sight except for the 3 seconds that they do. I'd be devastated if something happened to them in that time frame, but I think criminal or civil penalties are a bit much when most of us can relate to how quickly it could happen.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:07 am to slackster
quote:
I mean a leash is the only thing that would prevent this without a doubt, and I consider that to be a bit much.
False. Holding their hands at that particular exhibit would have done it. And you wouldn't have to hold it the entire zoo trip. Just constant eye contact with the child whenever nearing any dangerous exhibit and being close enough to halt them and grab their hand before you arrive.
quote:
That being said, if you've raised 4, then you know damn well they can get away in the blink of an eye. If that just so happens to occur in a zoo, this is a possible result. The parents could end up being at fault for being negligent, but I also know that this could happen to almost anyone.
I couldn't disagree more. And you don't know my ex-wife. I assure you, we weren't hovering parents and dealth with more injuries than you can shake a stick at. But at 4, in a public place? I can say with confidence none of mine at 4 would have been at that exhibit without a hand held. No leash. Just hand held.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:10 am to Festus
Oh I love a good responsible parenting discussion on the internet. There just aren't enough of those.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:16 am to Winkface
Not sure if serious.... 
And to be clear, I'm not completely faulting the parent, and bad things can and do happen to good parents. I think they've already received their punishment and probably learned a great deal from the episode. I would bet nothing like this ever happens to them again.
But at 4 years old, you HAVE to hover them in large public venues, such as a zoo. Older kids? not so much. But all I can say, is at 4 years old, that child should not have been alone long enough to climb and fall into the exhibit. Or, should not have been sitting on the railing without a parent holding tightly to them. That's not hovering. That's parenting 101. (Not sure exactly how this child fell in).
And to be clear, I'm not completely faulting the parent, and bad things can and do happen to good parents. I think they've already received their punishment and probably learned a great deal from the episode. I would bet nothing like this ever happens to them again.
But at 4 years old, you HAVE to hover them in large public venues, such as a zoo. Older kids? not so much. But all I can say, is at 4 years old, that child should not have been alone long enough to climb and fall into the exhibit. Or, should not have been sitting on the railing without a parent holding tightly to them. That's not hovering. That's parenting 101. (Not sure exactly how this child fell in).
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:18 am to Festus
quote:
I couldn't disagree more. And you don't know my ex-wife. I assure you, we weren't hovering parents and dealth with more injuries than you can shake a stick at. But at 4, in a public place? I can say with confidence none of mine at 4 would have been at that exhibit without a hand held. No leash. Just hand held.
Slackster would lose sight of his kid at a subway terminal in NYC.
After somewhat reading the thread since it started, there doesn't seem to be a video of the kid going in. Tbh, we may never know but I would bet on the parents being negligent.
From my short time working in a zoo, I saw way too many parents just letting their kids run around like animals. Adults putting themselves in danger. Even adults putting their kids in danger.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:20 am to Festus
quote:
I couldn't disagree more. And you don't know my ex-wife. I assure you, we weren't hovering parents and dealth with more injuries than you can shake a stick at. But at 4, in a public place? I can say with confidence none of mine at 4 would have been at that exhibit without a hand held. No leash. Just hand held.
Fair, and I've done/will do the same with mine. But they're not even 3 yet and there has been at least one moment where they got away when they shouldn't have done so.
Look, there are tons of shitty parents out there, but the difference between many of us is simply luck, or the lack thereof, IMO. The precursors that lead to a tragic event such as this are not uncommon, even for good/great parents. Having the misfortune to be the parents of the child who is harmed or loses their life as a result is not indicative one way or the other of bad parenting IMO.
I may be too light on these parents, and perhaps I'm naive, but I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:21 am to Darth_Vader
The chance of dying from falling off of your shoulders is greater than the chance of being killed by a gorilla.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:22 am to GenesChin
quote:
Getting inside a Gorilla enclosure isn't the easiest thing in the world. It isn't a "Walk right in" situation, at least not at the zoo I grew up with.
Apparently it's easy enough for an unsupervised toddler to get into
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:22 am to Deactived
Well, CptBengal, or whatever his name is, started a thread on the parents. The dad has a criminal record a mile long, and from reading the article, I'm gonna go out on a limb and state there was probably no helicoptering going on. Slackster should be pleased.
I think you might be right.
quote:
Tbh, we may never know but I would bet on the parents being negligent.
I think you might be right.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:26 am to Deactived
quote:
Slackster would lose sight of his kid at a subway terminal in NYC.
Dear God no, and I "err" on the side of caution 100% of the time, but my point is that despite all of our efforts to protect our kids, they've hurt themselves at times. They've found themselves in situations that, although incredibly unlikely, could have been much worse for them. I'm probably a lot like Festus with respect to raising/parenting/protecting a 4 year old, and they wouldn't be out of my sight around a gorilla enclosure either, but I guess I just sympathize with parents who may have the slightest lapse because it can happen to the best of us.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:28 am to Festus
quote:
Tbh, we may never know but I would bet on the parents being negligent.
I think you might be right.
Maybe it is because I'm still relatively young and my kids are young, but I tend to give the parents the benefit of the doubt because I like to believe that the majority of parents - even if it is only 50.1% - are trying to do right by their kids and would not consciously put them in harm's way.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:29 am to slackster
quote:That's probably because we don't know exactly what happened.
I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
I get why people are made at the mom even though I disagree with them. What I really don't get are the people who are sooooooooo upset about the dead gorilla. Sorry folks humans>animals. Always. The "outrage" over killing the gorilla is ridiculous.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:30 am to Festus
The negligence of the parents is almost irrelevant to me because of the nature of the risk. If you're going to start a zoo, you anticipate risk, ESPECIALLY the risk of unsupervised children.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:31 am to slackster
Word. I just joke around with Festus. Wasn't specifically saying you're a bad parent.
Yea you gotta sympathize here because of the situation.
I also sympathize with the zoo though. If you make the enclosures completely fool proof, people will complain that they look like prisons. You try to please the public by making it as natural as can be and something like this happens.
Yea you gotta sympathize here because of the situation.
I also sympathize with the zoo though. If you make the enclosures completely fool proof, people will complain that they look like prisons. You try to please the public by making it as natural as can be and something like this happens.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:32 am to genro
quote:
Yes, the animal locked in a cage for our amusement should be allowed to kill children who fall in
lol
that wasn't his point.
Posted on 5/31/16 at 9:34 am to Winkface
quote:
Sorry folks humans>animals. Always.
I'm definitely going to go with Not Always. Not with this particular instance in mind, just overall.
Page 16 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News