The Cincinnati Zoo killed a gorilla to protect small child who fell into enclosure. Do you think the parents are at fault?

  • Yes yes yes

    Y y y y y y y y y y y y y e e e e e e ee e e e e e e e e e e ee e s s s s s s s s s s s s s s ss s s s

  • Parents should pay to replace Gorilla, their child caused the damage.

    If the child would have broken something in a store, would there not have been a "you break it, you bought it" talk. Essentially the child is (AT LEAST) depriving the Cincy community of an animal display. This is even if you overlook the fact that it was a live creature, and an endangered one at that.

  • Yes and No, But More Yes.

    I say no because the exhibit should have been secured to the point where absolutely no one could get in there. I mean, if a child that size can get in there, then there's no telling how many other kids this could happen to because the majority of the people that go to the zoo are small children. BUT! I lean more towards yes because the parent(s) should have been watching their kid, especially with how small he is. If you're going to go to a large area with lots people and a potentially dangerous surrounding with a small child, then extra attention should be required. There is no excuse for the parent(s) as to how this child got away from them. If anything, the parent(s) should have been holding this child's hand the entire time.

  • A tragedy on earth

    The innocent gorilla killed to save a human that put the gorilla in captivity. Will there ever be a time that humans think another
    species has just as much right to live as humanity? So we save a human life to deny a rare species to life. What is our future?

  • The parents are at fault for their small child getting into the gorilla enclosure.

    Yes, the parents of the small child who fell into the gorilla enclosure of the Cincinnati Zoo are at fault. The child certainly should have been supervised and should not have been allowed by the parents to enter the enclosure. The Cincinnati Zoo should not have had to kill the gorilla however to protect the small child. They should have tranquilizing guns at their disposal for immediate threats to the public.

  • Yes, parents should be watching their children.

    Yes, the parents are at fault. The child's fall was the cause of death for the gorilla in the Cincinnati Zoo that was killed in order to save the child. Parents of any child, especially in an area with wild animals or other dangerous conditions, should keep a sharp eye on their children and make sure that they remain safe.

  • Manage your children.

    I do feel that it is the parents fault because they couldn't watch their child properly. That gorilla didn't know any better and now he's dead because these parents couldn't take better care of their child. I really think these parents should have to pay for the dead gorilla since it is their fault he is now dead.

  • Parents should shoulder blame for child entering gorilla enclosure

    The parents of a child who entered a gorilla enclosure at The Cincinnati Zoo bear some of the blame. A gorilla is a dangerous animal, and the child should have been watched closely. Small children move quickly and want to play with animal. Even if he didn't get into the enclosure, he could taunt the gorilla.

  • Its not the fault of the parents

    Parents cant always Watch children, you now, accident happen. Att this moment the parents is depressed about all that, and ppl putting the fault on them. If you voted yes, you have clearly no experience in adulthood. I would put the fault on the zoo, not the parents, the fence wasnt correct. Thats it

  • It was the right thing to do by shooting the gorilla.

    The gorilla was 17 years old and had a child fall into his habitat at a zoo in Cincinnati. The kid was then dragged around the habitat by the gorilla like a ragdoll. Many people say that the gorilla was protecting the child, but in any case, it simply does not matter. Just by the gorilla dragging the child around at 20 or more miles per hour, the child could have been killed. Any injury that could have occurred to the child would likely result in death. If the animal had hit the child, due to its massive amount of strength, the child would immediately have been murdered. The boy is very lucky to be alive. It was the right thing to do by shooting the gorilla with a rifle, they simply had no other option but to do so. If they shot a dart at the animal, it would not act immediately and the gorilla would most likely freak out and kill the boy due to its sudden pain. It was the right thing to do to shoot the gorilla because if they had not, the boy would probably be dead right now. The parents could be to blame, but after the constructors of the fence, the habitat, the zookeepers, and even the people around the parent could have been to blame. The mother was immediately attacked by the media because of her responsibility of her child but most three year olds know not to crawl their way through a fence to meet a giant 400lb beast. The parent should not be the first one to blame because the event never would have taken place if the people had just built the fence correctly to keep the viewers out of the habitat. End of story.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.