Originally Posted by Amy Jade (Post 8673465)

I think shooting the Gorilla was ultimately the right decision, it was clearly not protecting the child and had the animal been tranquilized it could have lashed out and killed the kid.

I do blame the parent, she should have been aware of where her child was at all times, it's not about keeping an eye on him 24/7 as some have said it's about being a good parent and bring responsible. On facebook a woman who visits the zoo frequently said the child must have crawled through shrubbery and over railings to even get close to the edge of the edge of the enclosure. The stupid bitch clearly took her eyes off her child for more than a few seconds for him to do that.

Originally Posted by Amy Jade (Post 8673470)

When I used to go to Chester Zoo when I was little I remember my mum holding my hand at the open exhibits, it's not solely down to the zoo to babysit, a little common sense is surely expected?

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 8673475)

I wouldn't call making sure enclosures are secure baby sitting :laugh:

Originally Posted by Amy Jade (Post 8673500)

And I wouldn't call watching your child closely in a zoo much to ask, undoubtedly the enclosure wasn't as appropriate as it should have been but if the mother had put his interests first and actually taken care of him none of this would have happened.

Originally Posted by DigitalSid (Post 8673242)

The mother's an idiot and the Gorilla should have been tranquilised.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 8673523)

In a zoo, looking at a massive gorilla, in an open pen situation, you dont ever take your eye off a kid, even for 1 second

Originally Posted by Amy Jade (Post 8673500)

And I wouldn't call watching your child closely in a zoo much to ask, undoubtedly the enclosure wasn't as appropriate as it should have been but if the mother had put his interests first and actually taken care of him none of this would have happened.

Originally Posted by _Tom_ (Post 8673528)

The right thing was done as far as I am concerned. It's humans before animals, end of story. No sane person could sit there and watch a 4 year old boy get killed by an animal. If they hadn't have stepped in, and the boy had died, everyone would be up in arms that they didn't shoot the gorilla.

For a kid to be able to in the first place get into a gorilla enclosure is a safety issue at the zoo you would think.

I just don't get the uproar about it, the gorilla's dead which of course is sad, but hello - we've got a 4 year old boy who's safe and sound.



The parents have more than one kid, it's tough to keep your eye on every kid. If you turn your eye for a second, anything can happen. Parents make mistakes, no parent is perfect.

Originally Posted by _Tom_ (Post 8673528)

The right thing was done as far as I am concerned. It's humans before animals, end of story. No sane person could sit there and watch a 4 year old boy get killed by an animal. If they hadn't have stepped in, and the boy had died, everyone would be up in arms that they didn't shoot the gorilla.

For a kid to be able to in the first place get into a gorilla enclosure is a safety issue at the zoo you would think.

I just don't get the uproar about it, the gorilla's dead which of course is sad, but hello - we've got a 4 year old boy who's safe and sound.



The parents have more than one kid, it's tough to keep your eye on every kid. If you turn your eye for a second, anything can happen. Parents make mistakes, no parent is perfect.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 8673535)

so by that token I hope you are not one of those who criticise the Mccanns?

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 8673527)

omg I'm sorry but this coming from the guy who defended the McCanns decision to leave three babies alone in an unlocked apartment while they went out drinking :o

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 8673559)

Astonishing new footage shows gorilla 'PROTECTING' boy and holding his hand before being shot dead



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...orilla-8082168

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier (Post 8673587)

There's a good chance that the gorilla was trying to protect the boy, it certainly sounds like it, however it would take a split second for it to kill him even completely unintentionally... especially in a situation where people are starting to panic and the animal is becoming confused. It's tragic, and maybe they could have gotten him out without incident, but in my opinion, it's simply not worth risking the child's life in that way.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 8673612)

I dont buy "she only took her eye off him for a second"

It does not take a second to get into a dangerous animal pen - it takes a second to run off to the ice cream van but go under the rail, through wires and over the moat wall?

If it so easy it would happen all the time surely? I would be very interested to see the video footage of the bit prior to him entering..

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier (Post 8673634)

I agree and I wouldn't take my eyes off my kids for a second if there was any risk at all of something like that happening (dangerous animals and fences that aren't basically sky-high)... however I have to say, like others, I do find it a bit confusing that you particularly have such an issue with it LT...

Anyway, HOW he got in there doesn't really affect my thinking on whether or not they should have killed the gorilla. No matter whose fault it was (parents or park... it was definitely someone's) it happened, and from that point there was really only one outcome.