Lord Herbert wrote on Jun 2
nd, 2016 at 8:47pm:
Aussie wrote on Jun 2
nd, 2016 at 6:48pm:
Quote:the zoo does have duty of care and if theiur care was not good enough I am sure they will pay...
With every post you make, cods, you are proving exactly my point. Toddlers can move like lightning. There one second and gone the next. Those who run Zoos, where toddlers and their animals ought not be in immediate proximity, have to take that very fact into account, and make sure that lightning toddler cannot get into danger.
Absolutely correct.
Vigilant mothers are a rare commodity and to me they're Folk Heroes as far as I'm concerned.
One of the best of these that I personally witnessed in action was the time I saw a mother pushing a pram, with a small daughter hanging onto her St Vinnie's dress - and then her small son ran across this empty road with no traffic either way - but quick as a whip she roared out in a Drill Sergeant's voice ...
"COME BACK 'ERE YOU F*CKIN" LITTLE C*NT!!" Unless the little f'ers are chained to you they are not safe. My oldest son climbed under an 8" railing and fell 4'. He was with my wife, someone stopped her in the street, she turned and responded, number one son goes, i'm go'ng there, slides under the rail an falls 4'.
Now I believe men are better carers as I have never had an accident like that on my watch.
Edit: Oh... Topic.
It didn't look like the gorilla was trying to hurt the kid. It looked like it was trying to help it. I bet all the howls and screams from above are what made it drag the kid away. At no time did it look like it was trying to hurt the kid, there was no malice. On the other hand, it one hell of a powerful creature and what it can do to a young gorilla, it cannot do do a human without potential serious harm.
I don't think it was trying to hurt the kid, quite the opposite. Choices must be made. They were.