i totally agree
2007-12-26 08:36:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by 100%angelic 3
·
4⤊
5⤋
Yes, the tiger was being a tiger. I think those guys were taunting her. I can't believe the zoo did not have surveillance cameras in that area. I once saw some people throwing rocks at hyenas at the Oakland zoo. There has to be more security at these zoos and there should not be so many of these poorly run zoos. Why not have just a few top-notch zoos in the world, with tons of space in the enclosures so the animals don't pace and go crazy.
2007-12-26 18:10:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think killing it was really the wrong decision. A tranquilizer dart would have stopped just as well, if not better, than a bullet. It's true it killed someone, a 17-year-old boy, who probably didn't deserve to die either, but the tiger's nature is to attack and defend itself. Considering it attacked a zoo-keeper earlier, the zoo should have taken note that the animal was dangerous. He shouldn't have been punished for the zoo's lack of ability to contain it.
Other options would have included releasing the tiger into a wilderness preserve, where it's activities could be monitored by specialists.
2007-12-26 11:32:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by marginallydevious 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Nope. I love animals too but the tiger had to be shot down. Now, we will know later on if the tiger was somehow assisted out of the cage. Zoos play an important role in preserving different species, but if it comes down to animal vs. human, as a society, we have a duty to protect our own.
2007-12-26 20:37:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by closetcoon_fan 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
It happened because the zoo did not have the right holding cages for animals. Hell yes,I would have shot it, about 3 times in the head.A good cat is a flat cat.
2007-12-27 00:35:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dustndwind 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
He wasnt caged up... but there is someting suspious about this case,,, there is going to be more than what meets the eye,,, how did the tiger get one freind and got get the other one 300 feet away,,, i think they did something intentionally
2007-12-26 15:59:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by John N 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a crying shame.
But try having a little more respect for humanity. I suppose you exclude yourself from that 5.5 billion? What makes you so special? Go live in Ethiopia for a while and see if you still have greater concern for animals than humans.
2007-12-26 08:39:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by E. F. Hutton 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
So they should what, have had Tatiana write 1000 times on a blackboard "I will not bite the faces off of any more tourists" ??
I honestly think that the reason city folks hate humans so much is that they are so dang tired of being cooped up with so many of'em. Makes them seem kinda tetched.
2007-12-26 08:38:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by Jim P 4
·
4⤊
1⤋
No, no one is outraged. There's only one place for a beast like that, and that's mounted on the wall of the hunting lodge. Unfortunately THAT one should have been put there several years ago.
2007-12-26 15:52:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by gunplumber_462 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It is sad but considering it mauled 2 people and killed one in that escape and just a year before mauled a zookeeper- what do you suggest they do?
It was sitting next to a human it had just mauled when they shot it dead (before it had a chance to finish the guy off, I might add).
Your logic here is people's lives are worth nothing but tigers lives are?
I hope you don't feel that away about your children.
2007-12-26 08:39:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by tnfarmgirl 6
·
6⤊
1⤋
so your saying, never mind the lives of the boys, the tiger should live. yes, i am sad that the police had to shoot it. the tiger was outside of his cage, no one knows how she got out. so before you start slamming the zoo tourists, why don't you wait and see what the news has to say. and if i remember right, zoos usually have barriers that stop people from reaching in, throwing things etc.... take a chill pill dude!
2007-12-26 08:46:47
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋