Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Criptfeind]

I mean, if they are old enough to walk unaided it really would seem odd to me to hold their hand that much. And sure. Be... You know, aware of your kids. But that's a whole league away from it being not possible to happen without some greater failing.

[Frumple]

... 'bout the only way I can think of it would be if someone actually shoved the kid through the bars or somethin', tbh. And even that would be questionable. I can't really think of much else that doesn't boil down to an explicit parental screwup.

Far as the hand holding goes, kid small enough to fit through those kind of fences are almost certainly still well in the hand holding range when around something like a fairly open fence, age wise. Mostly 'cause, y'know, they do stuff like what we're discussin'.

Maybe it's a bit different where you're at? There wouldn't be any askance looked at a parent keeping a kid in hand in a potentially dangerous situation 'round here.

[Criptfeind]

Sure, it wouldn't be weird to hold a kids hand in a potentially dangerous situation, but this sorta possibility isn't super uncommon, and probably not thought of as dangerous. Like, you can look back in hind sight and say it was dangerous, but really you'd probably have to hold the kids had for the whole day to avoid this sorta thing.

[Frumple]

Mm... not in any zoo I've been in. Most of 'em have well enclosed areas in a lot of places, and plenty of room to walk by and not be in idiot-dash range of a fence. There's usually only a few spots that have fences someone can potentially squeeze through, which is where the extra attention is warranted.

If that kinda' thing (approaching an area with a potential drop and animals that aren't particularly harmless) isn't thought of as dangerous, though... there's bigger problems happening in this situation. And vis a vis it not being common... maybe it's not, but there's whole heaps of not uncommon stuff we bring down hammers on people when they do it and stuff goes wrong. Not really what I'd call a mitigating factor.

Maybe clear things up a bit, I wouldn't be calling for much in the way of culpability, m'self... probably some kind of fine, or a long ban from the zoo itself (maybe nearby ones in general, I'unno). Some sort of renumeration for damages incited and/or prevention type deal... probably the former more than the latter, really, since the party that actually came out worse damaged is the zoo, unless the reported concussion is false/significantly downplayed. Parent'll already be paying for the damage done to the kid, after all. No need to double down in that arena unless there actually is sign of something beyond temporary negligence.

[Antioch]

fun fact: apparently the mother tried to jump after her child but was stopped by zoo personnel.

[Frumple]

... good? That would be one of the more right things that happened, here, assumin' it's true. If she'd gotten in there, it'd been significantly more likely to go from an injured kid to a dead one, and likely dead or crippled mother, too.

[Criptfeind]

Mm... not in any zoo I've been in.

Maybe zoos just differ a lot in different areas. The zoos I go to, yeah. Thinking about it, someone determined or stupid enough to kill themselves wouldn't find it particularly hard to find an area to do so. Especially in any of the more sorta open free rangy exhibits.

Not really what I'd call a mitigating factor.

I dunno man. I think it really sorta is. At least so far as saying that this was some sort of horrendous failure. Sure. Punish her or whatever, punishments or the lack there of don't need to be even a little fair. That doesn't mean it's totally not understandable that something like this just sorta happened.

[mainiac]

fun fact: apparently the mother tried to jump after her child but was stopped by zoo personnel.

Well she was probably just trying to get closer so she could egg the gorilla on.[/sarcasm]

[nenjin]

Counter-suit saying the Zoo didn't do enough to prevent people from entering the enclosure when?

[Shadowlord]

To respond to Frumple's posts:

He didn't slip through. He didn't slip through. He didn't slip through.

He climbed over. The fence is supposedly only three feet high, but still "exceeds standards."

[Morrigi]

So Trump just said: "You're a sleaze because you know the facts, and you know the facts well."

Hah, wow. I thought you were paraphrasing, but that is verbatim. Amazing.

The clear implication is that he knows the facts and lied about them, which is accurate. Also, the video is hilarious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g__NPFmz1Z0

[MarcAFK]

I love America, I can shoot drivers on the highway with a sniper rifle as long as I throw some children on there first, "protecting the innocent bitches!" It's like the first amendment!

[Frumple]

To respond to Frumple's posts:

He didn't slip through. He didn't slip through. He didn't slip through.

He climbed over. The fence is supposedly only three feet high, but still "exceeds standards."

Fair enough. That... kinda' makes it worse, though. That's a hell of a lot harder to miss.

[Shadowlord]

Spoiler: Dead people can't brake or swerve to avoid things in their car's path.

[Wolfhunter107]

So Trump just said: "You're a sleaze because you know the facts, and you know the facts well."

Hah, wow. I thought you were paraphrasing, but that is verbatim. Amazing.

The clear implication is that he knows the facts and lied about them, which is accurate.

You have any proof of that?