Let's start out with the situation in Cincinnati. There has been a lot of talk about how bad a parent the mother was. I can't say that I wasn't part of that, though not nearly as bad as most of the people out there. I wasn't calling for her to be arrested because I listened to several reports. Some of them stated that the child really wanted to get into the water. And any parent knows that what a 3 year old wants, they are going to try to get. Where I agree that it was bad parenting is that she took 9 children to the zoo alone! Obviously they weren't all 3 years old so why didn't she have an older child helping keep an eye on the younger one?
Now, let's talk about the decision to put the gorilla down. If you watch the video that was taken (be sure not to mute it), you will notice that the gorilla appears to actually be protecting the child somewhat. That is until the adults started screaming. At that point, the gorilla started to get agitated and a little violent. At that point, the child was in danger. They had 3 options, The first was to tranquilize the animal but they realized that it would take too long and the child may be killed. The second option would have allowed the first to work, get the public out of the area so that the animal calmed down. The problem there is that people nowadays (especially Americans) can't move away and allow the staff to do their job. We need to film everything just in case it could help someone in a lawsuit. Completely ridiculous! The last option was to put the animal down. The zoo staff was in a tough place because if the child was injured, there would have been a lot of people calling for their removal because the child was hurt. And the option that they chose seems to have caused a lot of people to complain and call for their removal. You can't please everyone.
So how about this crocodile attack? Let me remind you that the child willingly crawled into the exhibit without his mother's knowledge. My beef with the crocodile attack is that it's not getting the coverage or outrage that the gorilla situation did. With this, the parents willingly ignored the no swimming signs that were posted and allowed the child to get in the water. They were at Disney people, there's pools and safe beaches all over the place! Why are they allowing the child to wade in this water? We aren't we talking about charges against these parents? Personally, I think it's because we're talking about an event that happened at Disney and they've promised to put up more signs with stronger warnings. Wow, those signs really helped with this child didn't they? I can't believe that they think stronger wording on the signs is going to make a difference. It doesn't matter how strong the wording is if the people walking past the signs don't read them! Signs won't help, you need people to be there to warn visitors. And with all the cash that Disney has, they can certainly afford to pay a few security folks to warn people. And why aren't we seeing a lawsuit? My guess is that ABC News was told by Disney (it's parent company) that they were to focus on the fact that there are signs all along the beach stating not to swim there to prevent a lawsuit.
And that leads to one more thing about this. If you don't want to go to a pool or beach that is crowded with people, why are you going to Disney? Seriously, if you want a semi-private beach go somewhere else!
Do I feel sorry for the parents? Well yes! But as much because they aren't smart enough to know that there are crocodiles all over Florida as I am that their child was killed by one of those crocodiles. If you're going to go to a completely different area of the country, you should use extra caution and read signs!
No comments:
Post a Comment