Have you seen the local MP's comments about it? (Crocodile related tourism is quite important to the area and it's part of him saying they shouldn't go daft and start getting rid of the crocs) “You can’t legislate against human stupidity. This is a tragedy but it was avoidable. There are warning signs everywhere up there.You can only get there by ferry, and there are signs there saying watch out for the bloody crocodiles. If you go in swimming at 10 o’clock at night, you’re going to get consumed.”
Surely, if a four year old can find his way into a deadly animals cage, it's the zoo at fault? It should be impossible for that to happen?
If you swim in croc infested water you are not an idiot - you're a complete ****ing moron They're looking for her body - Seems a bit pointless as it will be in some croc's belly
The child was heard saying to his parents he wanted to go in there. What were they doing? Watch the video the gorilla seems fascinated by him being protective and holding his hand. It really is sad.
Try and have a look. I am a bit of a softie about these things but forced myself. Remembering those scenes of the group of gorillas with Attenborough and their gentleness and interest in him it makes it even sadder as I don't think it would have harmed him and a tranquilliser dart would possibly have done the trick.
Can't really point fingers at the zoo staff. There was a little boy's life on the line and had he got pummelled to death by a gorilla, they would have a lot more to answer for. Whether you agree with it or not, legally and morally an innocent child's life and wellbeing takes priority. Considering he was in there 10 minutes im sure the staff would have thought about every possible option and felt they had no choice. They wouldn't have wanted to shoot him any more than you would.
Tranq was never an option for that obvious reason but I did wonder about a rubber bullet to the head to knock it out cold with a rifle pointed at its head finger on the trigger if it didn't work. But as stated above the zoo wouldn't have wanted to shoot it any more than anyone else would and if after 10 minutes they decided to shoot him, the likelihood is there really was no other option. And let's face it, they know gorillas far better than any of us.
After 10 minutes of it looking at him, holding his hand and appearing protective it appeared it wasn't going to be a threat. A tranquilliser dart might have done the trick. Having said all this, would you have let your 4 year old out of your sight oblivious to what he was doing? They have questions to answer.
I certainly agree the Gorilla had to be shot. But like I said earlier, it should have been impossible for the child to get in there?
