Opinions on Gorilla killed at Cinn. Zoo

[stracci2000]

I feel really bad about the death of Harambe, the silver back lowland gorilla killed over the weekend by zoo officials after a child got into his enclosure. I feel that the mom holds some responsibility here. What do you think?

 

[Queenie60]

Personally I do not like zoo's or circus animal acts. It's cruel that we take these wild animals out of their natural habitat and cage them for our selfish entertainment. The zoo should hold most of the responsibility as it's obvious that there were gaps in the barrier - had it been more secure, the child would not have been able to fall in. I am not an expert but it seems that the gorilla's behavior was unpredictable when he began to drag the child around. I'm very sad that the gorilla had to be killed.

 

[chrono]

Who am I to judge whose responsibility it is? I did not witness the incident firsthand, I do not have both sides of the story, and I am not the parent. That said, I am deeply saddened by the killing of Harambe. It is a very tragic incident, no matter which way one looks at it.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Absolutely the mom was not watching her child apparently for several minutes, because he had to go over some obstacles to get to where he ended up. A 3 year old has to be watched every second in a crowded place like a zoo! Someone could have snatched him and she would have been oblivious. But, in addition, the zoo apparently needs to make the enclosure impossible to get through. I have not seen how he got in and I do not understand why no one saw him do it. It was Memorial Day weekend so it had to be crowded. I am sure the crowd screaming didn't help the gorilla be calm, either. Everything that could have gone wrong did.

I think the whole thing is extremely sad. But I support zoo experts like Jack Hanna who said the zoo 1000% made the right decision because the child's life was at risk. And regardless of the negligence of others, they had to save the life of that child. I am sure it grieved them more than anyone else to have to make that decision.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jack-hanna-cincinnati-zoo-decision-to-kill-silverback-gorilla-harambe-justified/

 

[chrono]

Here's a question that nobody wants to ask and answer, and I will probably be flamed for asking this:

We humans have captured and put animals in captivity for many reasons. Why is a child's life worth more than what we have done and continue to do to endangered animals?

 

[stracci2000]

I agree Chrono. Why do we humans keep thinking we are so special? We think we are smarter, but if we could ever actually communicate with an animal, I'd bet we would be very surprised.
It's such a horribly conceited concept, to think that we humans are so very far above animals.

 

[msop04]

Here's a question that nobody wants to ask and answer, and I will probably be flamed for asking this:

We humans have captured and put animals in captivity for many reasons. Why is a child's life worth more than what we have done and continue to do to endangered animals?

Sooooo... just to clarify... You feel that the gorilla's life was more important than the child? I'm shocked and saddened by your statement... and hopefully, just confused because you meant something else??

 

[msop04]

Absolutely the mom was not watching her child apparently for several minutes, because he had to go over some obstacles to get to where he ended up. A 3 year old has to be watched every second in a crowded place like a zoo! Someone could have snatched him and she would have been oblivious. But, in addition, the zoo apparently needs to make the enclosure impossible to get through. I have not seen how he got in and I do not understand why no one saw him do it. It was Memorial Day weekend so it had to be crowded. I am sure the crowd screaming didn't help the gorilla be calm, either. Everything that could have gone wrong did.

I think the whole thing is extremely sad. But I support zoo experts like Jack Hanna who said the zoo 1000% made the right decision because the child's life was at risk. And regardless of the negligence of others, they had to save the life of that child. I am sure it grieved them more than anyone else to have to make that decision.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jack-hanna-cincinnati-zoo-decision-to-kill-silverback-gorilla-harambe-justified/

This. 100%.

 

[chrono]

msop,
Who are we to play God to decide whose life is worth more? Is a whale's life worth more than an eagle's? Is a cat's life worth more than a dog? We are a part of nature too, and as such, humans are also animals. Why are humans placed above all other lifeforms? What gives humans the right to control all other lifeforms and decide their fate?

 

[msop04]

msop,
Who are we to play God to decide whose life is worth more? Is a whale's life worth more than an eagle's? Is a cat's life worth more than a dog? We are a part of nature too, and as such, humans are also animals. Why are humans placed above all other lifeforms? What gives humans the right to control all other lifeforms and decide their fate?

Well, to answer the best way I know how... it's simply survival of the fittest. And humans have shown to be superior to other animals. My personal feeling is that God blessed us with superior skill sets and the ability to think and reason. In this particular situation, the human child was endangered, regardless of how or why he was able to get inside the gorilla's enclosure. If it meant killing a wild animal to save my child, I would have it done 1000x over and never blink an eye. This is only my opinion, of course.

 

[rainydaze]

The thing is, this wouldn’t be a tough question if it were pretty much any other scenario involving saving the life of a child. All animals' instinct is to save their children, and most would probably fight to the death to do it. And yes, humans typically have more resources than most other animals to win in a survival situation. I’m walking in the woods with my kid and a bobcat attacks us, yup, I’m going to do what it takes to save my child and if that means killing the bobcat, I probably won’t feel too badly.

The problem here is that the gorilla did not provoke an attack. He was not where he shouldn’t be. He was in his (albeit not natural, which is a whole other issue) home. The child was the intruder, and the child likely intruded because the child’s parent was not paying proper attention to him - that’s not the gorilla’s fault. The gorilla did nothing wrong. The child, the child’s parent(s), the zoo - some combination thereof - did something wrong, and yet the gorilla got killed for it. It’s hard not to feel the injustice of that.

I would save the child’s life, yes. And I wouldn't have waited longer for absolute intent that the gorilla meant harm, because, well, that could mean it's too late for the child. But I feel really uncomfortable saying it. For the reasons above. The way this happened, it was all humans doing things wrong and the gorilla ended up dead for it.

I don't believe we are superior to animals, we exist alongside them and we happen to have some advantages.

 

[msop04]

The thing is, this wouldn’t be a tough question if it were pretty much any other scenario involving saving the life of a child. All animals' instinct is to save their children, and most would probably fight to the death to do it. And yes, humans typically have more resources than most other animals to win in a survival situation. I’m walking in the woods with my kid and a bobcat attacks us, yup, I’m going to do what it takes to save my child and if that means killing the bobcat, I probably won’t feel too badly.

The problem here is that the gorilla did not provoke an attack. He was not where he shouldn’t be. He was in his (albeit not natural, which is a whole other issue) home. The child was the intruder, and the child likely intruded because the child’s parent was not paying proper attention to him - that’s not the gorilla’s fault. The gorilla did nothing wrong. The child, the child’s parent(s), the zoo - some combination thereof - did something wrong, and yet the gorilla got killed for it. It’s hard not to feel the injustice of that.

I would save the child’s life, yes. And I wouldn't have waited longer for absolute intent that the gorilla meant harm, because, well, that could mean it's too late for the child. But I feel really uncomfortable saying it. For the reasons above. The way this happened, it was all humans doing things wrong and the gorilla ended up dead for it.

I don't believe we are superior to animals, we exist alongside them and we happen to have some advantages.

I agree. It's sad that the gorilla was killed. I'm sure if there was another way to guarantee the child would've been unharmed without killing the gorilla, that would have been the obvious choice and the action taken. We can go back and forth all day as to why the gorillas were in the zoo and/or why any animal should be caged or out of its natural habitat... but the situation is what it is.

I can't imagine a parent who would not want to guarantee the safety of his/her child if they were in the same boat, regardless of the fate of the animal.

We are clearly superior to other animals in the intellectual sense. Otherwise, we'd be the ones hunted and/or caged. This is our advantage.

 

[CJ2008]

The problem here is that the gorilla did not provoke an attack. He was not where he shouldn’t be. He was in his (albeit not natural, which is a whole other issue) home. The child was the intruder, and the child likely intruded because the child’s parent was not paying proper attention to him - that’s not the gorilla’s fault. The gorilla did nothing wrong. The child, the child’s parent(s), the zoo - some combination thereof - did something wrong, and yet the gorilla got killed for it. It’s hard not to feel the injustice of that.

I would save the child’s life, yes. And I wouldn't have waited longer for absolute intent that the gorilla meant harm, because, well, that could mean it's too late for the child. But I feel really uncomfortable saying it. For the reasons above. The way this happened, it was all humans doing things wrong and the gorilla ended up dead for it.

I love this post rainydaze.

As much as I love animals I too would kill one if it meant that doing that would save someone I love from getting killed (like my DH).

That said, I would still feel terrible about it - I have a feeling you would too. Not because there's any doubt that you did what you had to do, but because...it's still killing an animal.

I hate that the gorilla had to die for all the reasons you mention above.

ETA: I believe we ARE superior to animals. Which is exactly why we should respect and protect animals and treat them humanely under any and all circumstances - we should use our superiority to figure out how to share the Earth with them.

 

[monarch64]

I detest zoos and circuses. That's really all I can say on the matter because it breaks my heart on several levels just reading the story, seeing the video, and reading people's reactions. And here's what: each evolved species with higher intelligence than any other always THINKS they are the be-all, end-all. Humans as a species will never get it through their thick, still-evolving heads that there will be something else to come along and devour us all or at least that we are doomed to destroy ourselves through our gross overconsumption of every damn thing. For example, this links to an excerpt of Daniel Quinn's Ishmael:

https://drew-shelton-portfolio.wikispaces.com/file/view/The+Origin+of+the+Jellyfish+(from+Ishmael+by+Daniel+Quinn).pdf

If only animals could talk. I wonder what they'd have to say about the way "God" designed everything to work out so great for humans.

 

[Karl_K]

ultimately it is the zoos responsibility to keep the animals and the people safe.
They failed on both accounts. They are responsible.
Having been around a few 3 year olds they are the masters of there one second and gone the next so I don't blame the mom.
Once the gorilla got hold of the child they had no choice but to kill it.

I would like to see a bunch of zoo officials get fired as well as anyone who knew about the hole the child got into and did nothing.
You want to bet it was known about before hand and someone said naw its to small no one would get in and it would cost money to fix so it was left alone.
That will be buried by the zoo and unless a whistle-blower talks it will never be proven.

 

[momhappy]

It was a difficult situation, but the answer was obvious. The child's life was worth more and the zoo took the appropriate actions. Tranquilizing an animal that large was not an option - if you think otherwise, Google the video of how Cha Cha the chimp reacted when he was tranquilized....
As a parent, I know that we can't have our eyes on our kids 100% of the time. However, after seeing/reading details of the gorilla enclosure, I feel that while it was an unfortunate accident, it could have been avoided had the mom been watching her child appropriately. Being in a crowded, public space (like a zoo) requires extra diligence and that is where the mother failed IMO. I feel saddened about the loss, but the video of that child being pulled through the water like a rag doll was truly terrifying. Some of the backlash has been particularly disturbing - I saw a tweet that said that the mother should have been shot instead of the gorilla

 

[momhappy]

ultimately it is the zoos responsibility to keep the animals and the people safe.
They failed on both accounts. They are responsible.
Having been around a few 3 year olds they are the masters of there one second and gone the next so I don't blame the mom.
Once the gorilla got hold of the child they had no choice but to kill it.

I would like to see a bunch of zoo officials get fired as well as anyone who knew about the hole the child got into and did nothing.
You want to bet it was known about before hand and someone said naw its to small no one would get in and it would cost money to fix so it was left alone.
That will be buried by the zoo and unless a whistle-blower talks it will never be proven.

I didn't read where the child got through a hole? I thought I read that he actually climbed the fence (or maybe even two), and crawled through several feet of foliage before eventually falling into the enclosure?

 

[msop04]

It was a difficult situation, but the answer was obvious. The child's life was worth more and the zoo took the appropriate actions. Tranquilizing an animal that large was not an option - if you think otherwise, Google the video of how Cha Cha the chimp reacted when he was tranquilized....
As a parent, I know that we can't have our eyes on our kids 100% of the time. However, after seeing/reading details of the gorilla enclosure, I feel that while it was an unfortunate accident, it could have been avoided had the mom been watching her child appropriately. Being in a crowded, public space (like a zoo) requires extra diligence and that is where the mother failed IMO. I feel saddened about the loss, but the video of that child being pulled through the water like a rag doll was truly terrifying. Some of the backlash has been particularly disturbing - I saw a tweet that said that the mother should have been shot instead of the gorilla

Good grief ...and this is yet another effed up thought process in our society. If that commenter had been in the same situation, I highly doubt he/she would've gladly taken a bullet to the head for his/her blame in the matter. Come. On.

 

[Puppmom]

In a situation like this, I think you have to allow the experts to make that call. There are all sorts of moral implications of course but there are moral questions about holding animals in captivity in the first place. It's easy for us to judge the decision they made after the fact without all of the information.

I do think there are instances that children become endangered because their parents are inept but I don't think we know that here. Toddlers can get themselves into quite the predicament in a very short span of time. I'm not saying we know this parent was paying close attention - we just don't know.

None of us really knows the whole story. I think it's a terribly tragic situation all around but I'm reserving my judgement because I just don't know exactly what happened.

My one annoyance/confusion with this is lay people insinuating (or flat out saying) that they understand what was going on in the mind of this gorilla. That's impossible to know. It's impossible for someone to predict what would have happened - especially for a lay person.

 

[momhappy]

It was a difficult situation, but the answer was obvious. The child's life was worth more and the zoo took the appropriate actions. Tranquilizing an animal that large was not an option - if you think otherwise, Google the video of how Cha Cha the chimp reacted when he was tranquilized....
As a parent, I know that we can't have our eyes on our kids 100% of the time. However, after seeing/reading details of the gorilla enclosure, I feel that while it was an unfortunate accident, it could have been avoided had the mom been watching her child appropriately. Being in a crowded, public space (like a zoo) requires extra diligence and that is where the mother failed IMO. I feel saddened about the loss, but the video of that child being pulled through the water like a rag doll was truly terrifying. Some of the backlash has been particularly disturbing - I saw a tweet that said that the mother should have been shot instead of the gorilla

Good grief ...and this is yet another effed up thought process in our society. If that commenter had been in the same situation, I highly doubt he/she would've gladly taken a bullet to the head for his/her blame in the matter. Come. On.

I agree. Sure, the mother could have been more attentive in that one moment in time, but accidents do happen and unfortunately, this particular accident had deadly consequences. The loss is sad and the gorilla didn't deserve to die, but it was the end result to an unfortunate accident.

 

[msop04]

I detest zoos and circuses. That's really all I can say on the matter because it breaks my heart on several levels just reading the story, seeing the video, and reading people's reactions. And here's what: each evolved species with higher intelligence than any other always THINKS they are the be-all, end-all. Humans as a species will never get it through their thick, still-evolving heads that there will be something else to come along and devour us all or at least that we are doomed to destroy ourselves through our gross overconsumption of every damn thing. For example, this links to an excerpt of Daniel Quinn's Ishmael:

https://drew-shelton-portfolio.wikispaces.com/file/view/The+Origin+of+the+Jellyfish+(from+Ishmael+by+Daniel+Quinn).pdf

If only animals could talk. I wonder what they'd have to say about the way "God" designed everything to work out so great for humans.

Regardless of how you feel about it, humans have the upper hand compared to all the other animals. Would you rather humans be lower on the food chain? I guess I'm confused by what seem to be anger and sarcasm in the above bolded lines. The fact that we can think and reason at all puts us higher than any other known species... well, ever.

What action do you feel would have been more appropriate, monarch? I'm not being snarky, I sincerely want to know how you feel killing the animal was the wrong thing to do in this situation.

 

[rainydaze]

The problem here is that the gorilla did not provoke an attack. He was not where he shouldn’t be. He was in his (albeit not natural, which is a whole other issue) home. The child was the intruder, and the child likely intruded because the child’s parent was not paying proper attention to him - that’s not the gorilla’s fault. The gorilla did nothing wrong. The child, the child’s parent(s), the zoo - some combination thereof - did something wrong, and yet the gorilla got killed for it. It’s hard not to feel the injustice of that.

I would save the child’s life, yes. And I wouldn't have waited longer for absolute intent that the gorilla meant harm, because, well, that could mean it's too late for the child. But I feel really uncomfortable saying it. For the reasons above. The way this happened, it was all humans doing things wrong and the gorilla ended up dead for it.

I love this post rainydaze.

As much as I love animals I too would kill one if it meant that doing that would save someone I love from getting killed (like my DH).

That said, I would still feel terrible about it - I have a feeling you would too. Not because there's any doubt that you did what you had to do, but because...it's still killing an animal.

I hate that the gorilla had to die for all the reasons you mention above.

ETA: I believe we ARE superior to animals. Which is exactly why we should respect and protect animals and treat them humanely under any and all circumstances - we should use our superiority to figure out how to share the Earth with them.

That's true CJ. I killed a chipmunk a few days ago while driving. I barely had time to register him running out in front of me, let alone react, and I still had a bit of a crisis of conscience over it.

 

[momhappy]

In a situation like this, I think you have to allow the experts to make that call. There are all sorts of moral implications of course but there are moral questions about holding animals in captivity in the first place. It's easy for us to judge the decision they made after the fact without all of the information.

I do think there are instances that children become endangered because their parents are inept but I don't think we know that here. Toddlers can get themselves into quite the predicament in a very short span of time. I'm not saying we know this parent was paying close attention - we just don't know.

None of us really knows the whole story. I think it's a terribly tragic situation all around but I'm reserving my judgement because I just don't know exactly what happened.

My one annoyance/confusion with this is lay people insinuating (or flat out saying) that they understand what was going on in the mind of this gorilla. That's impossible to know. It's impossible for someone to predict what would have happened - especially for a lay person.

Yes, and even if the gorilla never intended to hurt the child, he still could have accidentally injured and/or killed him simply based on his power, size, strength. That is not a risk the zoo was willing to take and rightfully so.

 

[msop04]

It was a difficult situation, but the answer was obvious. The child's life was worth more and the zoo took the appropriate actions. Tranquilizing an animal that large was not an option - if you think otherwise, Google the video of how Cha Cha the chimp reacted when he was tranquilized....
As a parent, I know that we can't have our eyes on our kids 100% of the time. However, after seeing/reading details of the gorilla enclosure, I feel that while it was an unfortunate accident, it could have been avoided had the mom been watching her child appropriately. Being in a crowded, public space (like a zoo) requires extra diligence and that is where the mother failed IMO. I feel saddened about the loss, but the video of that child being pulled through the water like a rag doll was truly terrifying. Some of the backlash has been particularly disturbing - I saw a tweet that said that the mother should have been shot instead of the gorilla

Good grief ...and this is yet another effed up thought process in our society. If that commenter had been in the same situation, I highly doubt he/she would've gladly taken a bullet to the head for his/her blame in the matter. Come. On.

I agree. Sure, the mother could have been more attentive in that one moment in time, but accidents do happen and unfortunately, this particular accident had deadly consequences. The loss is sad and the gorilla didn't deserve to die, but it was the end result to an unfortunate accident.

Agreed... and they are extremely fortunate that the child was unharmed. This could have been really sad for all involved. I feel the zoo employees made the best decision they could have, given the situation.

 

[msop04]

In a situation like this, I think you have to allow the experts to make that call. There are all sorts of moral implications of course but there are moral questions about holding animals in captivity in the first place. It's easy for us to judge the decision they made after the fact without all of the information.

I do think there are instances that children become endangered because their parents are inept but I don't think we know that here. Toddlers can get themselves into quite the predicament in a very short span of time. I'm not saying we know this parent was paying close attention - we just don't know.

None of us really knows the whole story. I think it's a terribly tragic situation all around but I'm reserving my judgement because I just don't know exactly what happened.

My one annoyance/confusion with this is lay people insinuating (or flat out saying) that they understand what was going on in the mind of this gorilla. That's impossible to know. It's impossible for someone to predict what would have happened - especially for a lay person.

Yes... impossible to know how an animal would react. Those type things are probably impossible for anyone to predict, expert or otherwise.

 

[msop04]

I believe we ARE superior to animals. Which is exactly why we should respect and protect animals and treat them humanely under any and all circumstances - we should use our superiority to figure out how to share the Earth with them.

I love this post, and agree wholeheartedly...

 

[rainydaze]

The thing is, this wouldn’t be a tough question if it were pretty much any other scenario involving saving the life of a child. All animals' instinct is to save their children, and most would probably fight to the death to do it. And yes, humans typically have more resources than most other animals to win in a survival situation. I’m walking in the woods with my kid and a bobcat attacks us, yup, I’m going to do what it takes to save my child and if that means killing the bobcat, I probably won’t feel too badly.

The problem here is that the gorilla did not provoke an attack. He was not where he shouldn’t be. He was in his (albeit not natural, which is a whole other issue) home. The child was the intruder, and the child likely intruded because the child’s parent was not paying proper attention to him - that’s not the gorilla’s fault. The gorilla did nothing wrong. The child, the child’s parent(s), the zoo - some combination thereof - did something wrong, and yet the gorilla got killed for it. It’s hard not to feel the injustice of that.

I would save the child’s life, yes. And I wouldn't have waited longer for absolute intent that the gorilla meant harm, because, well, that could mean it's too late for the child. But I feel really uncomfortable saying it. For the reasons above. The way this happened, it was all humans doing things wrong and the gorilla ended up dead for it.

I don't believe we are superior to animals, we exist alongside them and we happen to have some advantages.

I agree. It's sad that the gorilla was killed. I'm sure if there was another way to guarantee the child would've been unharmed without killing the gorilla, that would have been the obvious choice and the action taken. We can go back and forth all day as to why the gorillas were in the zoo and/or why any animal should be caged or out of its natural habitat... but the situation is what it is.

I can't imagine a parent who would not want to guarantee the safety of his/her child if they were in the same boat, regardless of the fate of the animal.

We are clearly superior to other animals in the intellectual sense. Otherwise, we'd be the ones hunted and/or caged. This is our advantage.

I'm not sure I agree with this. I have watched too many documentaries (about dolphins, elephants, killer whales, etc.) to believe we know more than the tip of the iceberg about their own particular intelligences. I think there are different levels and kinds of intelligence particular to each species. I think our intelligence combined with our physical attributes have allowed us to dominate pretty much all other species. But I don't equate dominance with being superior. And I don't equate dominance with value; i.e. I don't think our lives are more valuable than that of an animal's because we can more easily dominate them, or overtake their societies with ours because our intelligence and skill set allow for 'advancements'.

However, I must sadly confess that my actions do not always reflect that thought process. For example, I can't claim value a mosquitoe's life over my comfort, because I don't hesitate to kill one when it bites me.

 

[marym]

msop,
Who are we to play God to decide whose life is worth more? Is a whale's life worth more than an eagle's? Is a cat's life worth more than a dog? We are a part of nature too, and as such, humans are also animals. Why are humans placed above all other lifeforms? What gives humans the right to control all other lifeforms and decide their fate?

Seriously???? That was an innocent CHILD. It's not playing God to put that child's life first. Do you have children? What if that were your son or daughter that fell in there?

 

[kenny]

Why is a child's life worth more than what we have done and continue to do to endangered animals?

The Bible says so.

Genesis 1:28. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

 

[chrono]

msop,
Who are we to play God to decide whose life is worth more? Is a whale's life worth more than an eagle's? Is a cat's life worth more than a dog? We are a part of nature too, and as such, humans are also animals. Why are humans placed above all other lifeforms? What gives humans the right to control all other lifeforms and decide their fate?

Seriously???? That was an innocent CHILD. It's not playing God to put that child's life first. Do you have children? What if that were your son or daughter that fell in there?

Yes, I have children and it would be MY responsibility, wouldn't it? Harambe was also an innocent, doing nothing wrong at all.