Members ivanthetrble Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 Hard to tell at this point but starting to sound like there may be more to the story than the tiger simply getting out and mauling 3 people. http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/27/tiger.attack/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Emprov Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 Why the heck would you climb a fence and sit on it when there's something that can easily kill and eat you (not necessarily in that order), just on the other side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ivanthetrble Posted December 27, 2007 Author Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 Fans of the Darwin Awards maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mytola Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 If it is true, it definately qualifies to Darwin-Award of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bassordeath Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 I am sure that we are going to find that these rocket-scientists did something really stupid and got bit in the ass (or the head) when it went wrong. If they were taunting those Tigers (english pig-dogs), they were asking for it. If they were actually sitting on the fence and fell in, that is just sweet irony. "ohhhhh, look.....fireworks" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bholder Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 The first reports made it sound like the victims were just sitting in a cafe. But now they say "A shoe and blood were found between the fence and the moat, the Chronicle reported, and a footprint has been found on a metal fence at the zoo." So someone had to have gone in to the tiger's enclosure. Sounds like Darwinian selection in action to me. Sad they had to kill the tiger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ivanthetrble Posted December 27, 2007 Author Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 My first reaction to this story was that there was going to be a lawsuit against the zoo for the death and injuries. If the victums were actually in the enclosure and the zoo's tiger ended up being shot because of the subsequent events could the zoo sue the survivors for the loss of the tiger? Zoo would probably still get sued no matter if they were in the enclosure or not. Same thing as a swimming pool being an enticement to little kids who falls in and can't swim. There is a term for this but it escapes me at the moment. Attractive something or other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Joey Joe Joe Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 It sounds like a kid was sitting on the fence, and the tiger used his body to get out of the cage. I just can't imagine having 500lbs of teeth and claws wanting to rip me apart. Too bad they had to kill the tiger, it wasn't doing anything that wasn't instinct. Doesn't the zoo have any tranquilizers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members thelurker Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 It sounds like a kid was sitting on the fence, and the tiger used his body to get out of the cage. I just can't imagine having 500lbs of teeth and claws wanting to rip me apart. Too bad they had to kill the tiger, it wasn't doing anything that wasn't instinct. Doesn't the zoo have any tranquilizers? The police were involved by that time, and they aren't known for carrying tranqs. Also, it would take a VERY brave soul to stand in front of a full grown tiger and try for a tazer shot. They're big, but they're quick, too. You might hit him after he'd laaunched himself, and you'd still have 350# of sharp edges headed your way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted December 27, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 27, 2007 My first reaction to this story was that there was going to be a lawsuit against the zoo for the death and injuries. If the victums were actually in the enclosure and the zoo's tiger ended up being shot because of the subsequent events could the zoo sue the survivors for the loss of the tiger? Zoo would probably still get sued no matter if they were in the enclosure or not. Same thing as a swimming pool being an enticement to little kids who falls in and can't swim. There is a term for this but it escapes me at the moment. Attractive something or other. Attractive nuisance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bholder Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 Attractive nuisance. Sounds like an ex-girlfriend of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ivanthetrble Posted December 27, 2007 Author Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 Attractive nuisance. Yeah, that's it! Kind of like a Lug mp3, you know you should stay away from it because it is dangerous but you are just sooo attracted to it to see what it is like that you can't help yourself. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Thumper Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 F*cking idiots. The world is full of them. Too bad they're not endangered, instead of the tiger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members georgestrings Posted December 27, 2007 Members Share Posted December 27, 2007 The first reports made it sound like the victims were just sitting in a cafe. But now they say "A shoe and blood were found between the fence and the moat, the Chronicle reported, and a footprint has been found on a metal fence at the zoo." So someone had to have gone in to the tiger's enclosure. Sounds like Darwinian selection in action to me. Sad they had to kill the tiger. Agreed... - georgestrings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators isaac42 Posted December 28, 2007 Moderators Share Posted December 28, 2007 Sounds like an ex-girlfriend of mine. Yeah, I dated one or two of those, way back when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members misterhinkydink Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 Hard to tell at this point but starting to sound like there may be more to the story than the tiger simply getting out and mauling 3 people. http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/27/tiger.attack/index.html It's looking like that was the case. The wall is only 12.5 feet, much shorter than they claimed. An 8 foot tiger can reach 12.5 feet standing up. If it can get its paws over the edge it can pull itself up and over. {censored}ing terrifying!!!! Height of zoo's tiger exhibit wall doesn't meet national standard S.F. Zoo official overstated height of tiger enclosure's walls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members funkymonk77 Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 better than being mauled by emprov's avatar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 animals. We should kill them all so stuff like this doesn't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members J. Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 They always kill the animal in situations like this. There was a situation at the Henry Vilas Zoo in Madison, WI a few decades ago. They had a big polar bear named "Chief" there, and some retard (an actual mongoloid, not just a stupid person) climbed into the enclosure and got killed. What did they do? They shot the bear in the head and killed it, of course. It's just like the Meerkat debacle that took place last year here in the Twin Cities. Girl sticks her hand in Meerkat enclosure and gets nipped. Meerkats are vaccinated for rabies, but just to be 100% they kill all four Meerkats in the enclosure to test them. Of course, the results are negative. The parents of the stupid little {censored} that climbed on the rocks and stuck her hand in there refused to get their girl vaccinated for rabies as a precaution, so they had to chop off the heads of all the Meerkats in the enclosure 'cause they couldn't be sure which one nipped at her. Stupid {censored} and her cocksmoking parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members coyote-1 Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 And the tiger was OUTSIDE... they had to secure the safety of others and therefore, unfortunately, they had to kill the tiger. The police were involved by that time, and they aren't known for carrying tranqs. Also, it would take a VERY brave soul to stand in front of a full grown tiger and try for a tazer shot. They're big, but they're quick, too. You might hit him after he'd laaunched himself, and you'd still have 350# of sharp edges headed your way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Optimus Prime Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 Wouldn't it take a bigger bullet than whatever cops carry to kill a big ass tiger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitargod0dmw Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 Wouldn't it take a bigger bullet than whatever cops carry to kill a big ass tiger? Most cops carry a .40 SW +P+ hollowpoint...which a well placed round is more than enough to take out most things. Granted most cops that I know can't shoot for {censored}, so knowing that...I'd be willing to bet they opened fire on the poor thing and put quite a few into her. I remember there was a rabid skunk in my yard a few years back. My neighbors called the cops & animal control to shoot it. The cop took aim from maybe 30 yards away...and missed...9 {censored}ing times!!! I was laughing at him. EDIT: From part of the story... All four fired their .40-caliber handguns, hitting the tiger an unknown number of times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members misterhinkydink Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 Wouldn't it take a bigger bullet than whatever cops carry to kill a big ass tiger? Next question.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zomawia Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Crescent Seven Posted December 28, 2007 Members Share Posted December 28, 2007 Next question.... Seriously. Maybe they used lasers. C7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.