Tiger attack at SF Zoo - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

NorCal Cat · 12-28-2007, 05:23 AM

As soon as the ages, and pictures of the victims of this attack were released I figured they probably taunted the tiger. As more info comes out, it is becoming more and more likely they were not just there to observe. Apparently the two survivors are not being entirely forthcoming with the police during interviews. Surprise, surprise...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...5G80.DTL&tsp=1

8ballrollin · 12-28-2007, 05:38 AM

I'm sure they taunted her. 17-year-olds do stupid things all the time. It doesn't mean they deserved to die - not most of the time anyway.

Quote:

Earlier this week, zoo officials said the moat's wall was at least 20 feet tall. Today, they said it was little over 12 feet. Since the investigation began Tuesday, officials have given at least five different measurements for the enclosure, which is surrounded by a moat, two walls on either side of the moat, a small patch of grass and then another waist-high fence. Experts say that the depth of the moat and height of the walls could have a large impact on the animal's ability to escape the enclosure.

Tigers do have hops. This dude's on top of an elephant...Go to the .50 mark (slow mo):

NorCal Cat · 12-28-2007, 06:11 AM

Local news report on right now is saying the punks were combative and swearing at the ER people that helped them after the attacks. They wouldn't even give the name of their friend that was killed by the tiger. Their neighbor was interviewed and said these two brothers are trouble makers in the neighborhood, are often loud and drunk, and fight a lot. Sounds like this punks are a bunch of a-holes that got what was coming to them.

8ballrollin · 12-28-2007, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NorCal Cat

Local news report on right now is saying the punks were combative and swearing at the ER people that helped them after the attacks. They wouldn't even give the name of their friend that was killed by the tiger. Their neighbor was interviewed and said these two brothers are trouble makers in the neighborhood, are often loud and drunk, and fight a lot. Sounds like this punks are a bunch of a-holes that got what was coming to them.

It sounds like this was the case; the guys were jerks and morons.

The zoo, as good managers of their assets, must protect the public from being harmed, but they also need to protect the animals (their assets) from idiots. In this case, it sounds like they did neither. You have one dead idiot and one dead tiger. The tiger being one the biggest assets the zoo needs to complete its charter.

woot · 12-28-2007, 05:13 PM

My first thought was also sadness at the loss of the tiger, having assumed that the zoo patrons had provoked it. There's a youtube video of a father being eaten alive by a lion while his family looks on, because the father was not educated enough to properly respect what he was trying to take pictures of. Sad for his family, but you have to know what you're up against in these situations.

non sequitur · 12-28-2007, 06:57 PM

I don't understand why the focus of this story has turned to whether the tiger was taunted or not. Who gives a shit whether the tiger was taunted? The only question that should be asked is why the zoo had a tiger enclosure that couldn't enclose its tiger.

woot · 12-28-2007, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by non sequitur

I don't understand why the focus of this story has turned to whether the tiger was taunted or not. Who gives a shit whether the tiger was taunted? The only question that should be asked is why the zoo had a tiger enclosure that couldn't enclose its tiger.

I certainly agree in principle, as the fence seems to have been a good 4 feet too low, but I still think it's worth wondering what those kids did to piss off that tiger that no one else had done in the 67 years since the fence was built.

Venkman · 12-29-2007, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by non sequitur

I don't understand why the focus of this story has turned to whether the tiger was taunted or not. Who gives a shit whether the tiger was taunted? The only question that should be asked is why the zoo had a tiger enclosure that couldn't enclose its tiger.

Amen

Venkman · 12-29-2007, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woot

I certainly agree in principle, as the fence seems to have been a good 4 feet too low, but I still think it's worth wondering what those kids did to piss off that tiger that no one else had done in the 67 years since the fence was built.

I'd be surprised if they did anything that hasn't been done before. They just pissed off the Michael Jordan of Tigers.

BarbaraGordon · 12-29-2007, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woot

I certainly agree in principle, as the fence seems to have been a good 4 feet too low, but I still think it's worth wondering what those kids did to piss off that tiger that no one else had done in the 67 years since the fence was built.

The same tiger attacked a zoo worker a year ago. The zoo subsequently made some improvements to protect the employees, but apparently didn't foresee any problems with the general public.

12-28-2007, 05:23 AM	#1
NorCal Cat Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Where do you think? Posts: 1,201	Tiger attack at SF Zoo As soon as the ages, and pictures of the victims of this attack were released I figured they probably taunted the tiger. As more info comes out, it is becoming more and more likely they were not just there to observe. Apparently the two survivors are not being entirely forthcoming with the police during interviews. Surprise, surprise... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...5G80.DTL&tsp=1

12-28-2007, 06:57 PM	#6
non sequitur Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,964	I don't understand why the focus of this story has turned to whether the tiger was taunted or not. Who gives a shit whether the tiger was taunted? The only question that should be asked is why the zoo had a tiger enclosure that couldn't enclose its tiger. __________________ ...You've been under attack for days, there's a soldier down, he's wounded, gangrene's setting in, 'Who's used all the penicillin?' 'Oh, Mark Paxson sir, he's got knob rot off of some tart.'" - Gareth Keenan

12-28-2007, 06:11 AM	#3
NorCal Cat Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Where do you think? Posts: 1,201	Local news report on right now is saying the punks were combative and swearing at the ER people that helped them after the attacks. They wouldn't even give the name of their friend that was killed by the tiger. Their neighbor was interviewed and said these two brothers are trouble makers in the neighborhood, are often loud and drunk, and fight a lot. Sounds like this punks are a bunch of a-holes that got what was coming to them.

12-28-2007, 05:13 PM	#5
woot Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Denver Posts: 1,502	My first thought was also sadness at the loss of the tiger, having assumed that the zoo patrons had provoked it. There's a youtube video of a father being eaten alive by a lion while his family looks on, because the father was not educated enough to properly respect what he was trying to take pictures of. Sad for his family, but you have to know what you're up against in these situations.