Boy killed after falling into African wild dog exhibit - Page 5 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

afc wimbledon · 11-05-2012, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valo403

You prove it by pointing to the act of placing a toddler in a standing position on top of a 5ft high railing over a pit full of wild animals. You're a relatively reasonable person, what do you foresee happening in that scenario?

Assuming the mother didn't eff of for a doobie leaving the kid on the edge or the like I would assume her lawyer would argue she was standing next to the kid to make sure he didn't fall and lost her grip or it happened in an instant or the like.
I can remember letting my kid ride in a safeway shopping cart when she was 3 or so, and only just catching her by the ankle as she lunged out to grab a candy bar by the checkout.

puckluck2 · 11-05-2012, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Puckluck which episode was it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...st_48_episodes

I'm still looking, Pinner.

undercoverbrother · 11-05-2012, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iginla

I'm still looking, Pinner.

Pinner who is that?

puckluck2 · 11-05-2012, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Pinner who is that?

Your old account on CP.

undercoverbrother · 11-05-2012, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iginla

Your old account on CP.

No, sadly, that is not me. Feel free to PM a Mod, and ask what my old account is.

And now back to the topic at hand.

valo403 · 11-05-2012, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Assuming the mother didn't eff of for a doobie leaving the kid on the edge or the like I would assume her lawyer would argue she was standing next to the kid to make sure he didn't fall and lost her grip or it happened in an instant or the like.
I can remember letting my kid ride in a safeway shopping cart when she was 3 or so, and only just catching her by the ankle as she lunged out to grab a candy bar by the checkout.

And that may well be the case, but there's a strong argument that reasonable people don't place their toddlers on 5ft high barriers above pits of wild animals. This isn't a kid standing up in a shopping cart.

Tinordi · 11-05-2012, 02:24 PM

This episode presents a perfect opportunity for the internet to feel self-righteous.

I'm glad it hasn't wasted that opportunity.

Locke · 11-05-2012, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinordi

This episode presents a perfect opportunity for the internet to feel self-righteous.

I'm glad it hasn't wasted that opportunity.

Speaking of self-righteous people taking their opportunities.......

polak · 11-05-2012, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fotze

I wonder if this is a photo of the thing:

EDIT: NVM I was wrong. Thats it.

pylon · 11-05-2012, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fotze

This is the problem with today's society. They are over babying the kids. In my day, we used to lay in the back window ledge while my father drank a six pack of beer driving to wherever we were going on vacation. They never did stupid crap like this lady and her overprotective dog exhibit dropping.

I am sitting in a very quiet doctors office waiting room right now, and just went full ###### laughing at that comment. Now everyone is staring at me. Thanks.

doctajones428 · 11-05-2012, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

But how do you prove negligence though in this case? if it is proved by the kid dying then any parent who's kid runs into a road and gets run down is negligent. The womans lawyer will obviously argue that although foolish the woman could not forsee the accident happening, thought it was safe and so therefore it wasn't negligent.

Standing a 2 year old child (You know how much balance kids have at that age? Next to none) on a 5 foot tall fence, 14 feet above a pit of 11 killer dogs is complete negligence.

If you turned your back on a child near a busy street and they run into the street, that would be negligence. If the child somehow got loose and ran into traffic, that wouldn't be negligence.

I can't believe you compared a child in a shopping cart to someone placing a child on a rail

_Q_ · 11-05-2012, 02:46 PM

Looks like the kid actually died from the mauling and not the fall:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/n...,0,45834.story

This is absolutely tragic. Can't imagine what it would be like for the parents to have to watch that. With that said, the mom is definitely at fault here.

polak · 11-05-2012, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

I doubt it. Look how low the railing is on the one side. A dog like that could easily jump up and bite any hands. No way any zoo would leave that little of a buffer between dangerous animals and the guests.

The reports said 12-15 feet. Thats 3.6 meters minimum. I'm suprised a few people didn't jump in to be perfectly honest. A few adults could easily fight off a pack of wild dogs that are smaller then a golden retriever.

NVM, looks like I'm wrong:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-railings.html

Thats it.

I can't believe that the mom didn't jump in after the child out of pure instinct. Thats a tiny drop.

Really it's 11 dogs that are smaller then a Golden Retriever. Not that anyone besides the mom had time to react but 4 or 5 men jump in there and they would have probably backed off.

doctajones428 · 11-05-2012, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

A few adults could easily fight off a pack of wild dogs that are smaller then a golden retriever.

Would you jump into a pit of 11 hellhounds?

polak · 11-05-2012, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doctajones428

Would you jump into a pit of 11 hellhounds?

If it was my kid or sibling then yes I would. I wouldn't even think twice. I'm pretty sure it would be an instant reaction. I'm not a parent but I have a sister that is 13 years younger then me and I know that if that happend to her I would be in there before she hit the ground.

I understand that it all probably happend to fast for bystandards to react but hypothetically, I don't think a group of guys would have too much trouble scaring those things off. You don't need to kill them or anything. Grab the kid and GTFO. Also, the keepers and maybe other bystandards would be in there pretty quick once they saw someone else go in and an adult would survive a mauling a lot longer then a toddler.

doctajones428 · 11-05-2012, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

If it was my kid then yes I would.

I understand that it all probably happend to fast for bystandards to react but hypothetically, I don't think a group of guys would have too much trouble scaring those things off. You don't need to kill them or anything. Grab the kid and GTFO.

I don't think a few guys will scare off a pack of wolves (that's what they essentially are) that are in the middle of tearing a 2 year old to shreds. They get aggressive while defending grub. Also, how would they get out? Toss the baby 14 feet in the air and hope someone behind the 5 foot fence catches him?

It's a good thought to jump in and try to save the child but they said the dogs were on him within seconds of hitting the ground

polak · 11-05-2012, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doctajones428

I don't think a few guys will scare off a pack of wolves (that's what they essentially are) that are in the middle of tearing a 2 year old to shreds. They get aggressive while defending grub. Also, how would they get out? Toss the baby 14 feet in the air and hope someone behind the 5 foot fence catches him?

It's a good thought to jump in and try to save the child but they said the dogs were on him within seconds of hitting the ground

Look at the pictures. The railing is no more then a meter high at some point and these ARE NOT wolves. They're smaller then a labrador.

Like I said, you're not in a battle royale here. You get the kid and you get out or at least try and get away. You only need to survive long enough for others to come in and help.

Locke · 11-05-2012, 03:09 PM

Yeah, its not like its a few dogs at the park, these are pack animals.

Sure an adult would last longer than a 2 year old, but would that even be long enough?

valo403 · 11-05-2012, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

Look at the pictures. The railing is no more then a meter high at some point and these ARE NOT wolves. They're smaller then a labrador.

Like I said, you're not in a battle royale here. You get the kid and you get out or at least try and get away.

They aren't that much smaller than a gray wolf, neither is a labrador. They also have some pretty serious teeth and are apparently known to be pretty aggressive. This isn't a threaten it with a rolled up newspaper and it'll run off situation.

octothorp · 11-05-2012, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polak

If it was my kid then yes I would.

I understand that it all probably happend to fast for bystandards to react but hypothetically, I don't think a group of guys would have too much trouble scaring those things off. You don't need to kill them or anything. Grab the kid and GTFO.

Fascinating (and frightening, given the circumstances) to read a bit about these things: they have one of the highest kill rates of any african predator (about 80% of their hunts end in kills). They have been known to hunt and kill humans, as well as large mammals such as zebras, warthogs, buffalo, and even giraffe calves. They have the third highest bite force quotient of any animal. Their preferred method of killing is for one pack member to go for the face, while the others attempt to disembowl the prey. These things are bad-ass.
Imagine you've just read all that on a placard, and then you see a kid fall in and you need to make a snap decision! I think you're right, a large-enough group of guys could probably get in, scare these things off long enough to the kid out, especially given that this pack wouldn't have much live hunting practice. But if it's just one or even two guys? I think the likely result is they get serious injuries and are still unable to save the boy.