Comments on: Victim admits yelling and waving at tiger but zoo still at fault

By: Lab SeniorINTJ

Lab SeniorINTJ — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 00:51:47 +0000

June 3, 2008 Yes, the way I see it, S.F. Zoo is at one-half fault. I’ve been there many times as a child and also as an adult. I really don’t know if I want to visit there anymore because of their lack of safety measures in the past to protect the public. I wonder how many other U.S. Zoos are lacking safety measures for the public?
The Daliwahls are also not Angels either, I do believe that while under the influence, they knowingly did whatever they could to aggravate Tatiana, the Tiger. By the way, after she jumped out, did she run off in any other direction to escape? Of course not, after attacking Carlos, she still had the scent of the two Daliwahl brothers and deliberately tracked them to the food shack & then retaliated. Also, I’ve never read anything about the Dhaliwals calling for anyone to get help because a Tiger just mauled Carlos! I just read that the shack’s occupants didn’t let them inside because it was closing time.
For the Courts part, I would make the S.F. Zoo fix all problems before anyone is ever let back inside & have a Federal inspection once a year on all the U.S. Zoos’ and if there’s a problem, shut them down until they fix it. Also, I would make the S.F. Zoo pay for all the Dahliwahl’s doctor bills past and current pertaining to this event. Next, pay all the funeral expenses and any others incurred for Carlos Sousa Jr.
For the Dhaliwal’s, they’re currently into big trouble with the Law prior to these aggravated killings at the S.F. Zoo and I would never give them any money for “pain and aggravation”! As the saying goes, “A man is known by the company he keeps!” They’re not boys but men and after reading about their current and past actions, I’d say they’re on the lookout now for some easy money.

By: Joan

Joan — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 18:00:07 +0000

It is interesting that so many people say “there was never a problem before with this tiger” as if that really means something. There are often big tragedies, like the Columbine massacre, and while there may be some warning signs, people and other animals will become homicidal without a lot of warning. And occasionally without a lot of provocation. The Roy Horn attack that occurred, as another reader mentioned, is an excellent example. This is why zoos have standards for barriers. I don’t want to visit a zoo with the assumption that the animals are kept happy enough that none of them make a heroic attempt at escape their enclosure. There are many occasions in breeding or using animals that their owners decide that it is too dangerous to keep them.

By: Charles_M_Johnson

Charles_M_Johnson — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:35:56 +0000

To all who feel the zoo is not responsible, would you go to that same zoo if there have not been any changes to that enclosure?

If your answer is “yes”, then Darwin was right.

By: Darin

Darin — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:48:50 +0000

Call of the Wild, Disney, etc… is at fault for our personification of animals. A good share of people have lost sight of what an animal is. They are not friends. They don’t reason.

By: JB

JB — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:04:19 +0000

So, if a person explains to us that the Zoo should expect the bahavior displayd by these three idiots be held responsible, then is that not similar to blaming gun companys for idividuals pulling the triger of a loaded gun in a crowded place. I think that it only takes common sense and repect to hold back from acting like a complete jerk in a Zoo. These men, not teens, behavoir should not be overlooked. They angerd the beast by invading its space, and now the city and zoo will pay the price. That is why, I think the zoo should fight this battle to the bitter end so that these punks do not get a dime from there lack of respect towards the animals.

By: laag

laag — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 05:01:14 +0000

What would Darwin say? Tiger did what she was supposed to do (eliminate threats) and the one kid wont be contributing the the gene pool. works for me

By: bhf

bhf — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 21:03:04 +0000

How much will you donate to the Zoo to make it SAFER? What we need is to not dwell on the past, but come up with a fix that we are all happy with. Perhaps, with a proper fix, we will all assume the risk of entering a Zoo that cannot be 100% fool proof. Especially when there are fools among us. One thing I believe is needed are surveillance cameras that monitor Zoo visitor behavior and security personel to patrol and quickly remove trouble makers.

By: Susan

Susan — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:01:58 +0000

How does one determine that something is “safe?” If the enclosure was safe for 50-60 years, and other enclosures of the same height holding big cats at other zoos around the world were safe for decades, how could anyone at the S.F. Zoo foresee this happening? This suit is like a person spilling a drink on the floor, then slipping on their own spill, and suing the building management for the slippery floor. Or smoking on a sofa, falling asleep with the cigarette, catching on fire, and suing the sofa manufacturer.

I’m so sick of people not taking responsibility for their own actions. And I’m really tired, as a taxpayer, of continuing to finance payouts on these frivolous lawsuits. You reap what you sow, and what goes around, comes around. It might just creep up and bite you in the butt! Arrrrrrrrrgh!

By: punks

punks — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:48:45 +0000

i wish all of them would have been killed. they deserve what the tiger got for what they did. i’m sure the tiger can feel the difference between a child’s excitement and being taunted moron.

By: Jon Council

Jon Council — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:09:14 +0000

Much will be argued in the upcoming months and perhaps years over the S.F. zoo incident involving a primal animal and a few even more primal behaving young men. What seemed lacking in all of it was an authentic respect for another living thing…not uncommon in today’s world, and unfortunately the real shame was that a majestic creature lost it’s life due to the lack of respect extended towards it..quite frankly, it was a difficult lesson to learn for the survivors, but I feel sympathy for the cat, and very little for the idiot who did plenty to bring about his own demise.
In the end, nature works as she always has, weeding out the weak and inept through natural selection, if you want to be particularly stupid, don’t be too shocked if your stupidity blows up in your face.