Tiger Shot Dead After Attacking SF Zoo Visitors

Pages: 1 2 3 … 7

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Tiger Shot Dead After Attacking SF Zoo Visitors

Poll

Was It the right thing to Do?

Yes	64%	64% - 86
No	35%	35% - 48
Total: 134

2007-12-26 03:39:32

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

One person has been killed and two others injured after a tiger escaped from its cage at San Francisco Zoo. The Siberian tiger, named Tatiana, was the same one that mauled a keeper just before Christmas last year. It has now been shot dead.

Now the tiger is dead. GG assholes. Was it her fault? Is it right to shot a tiger? They have a wild animal living in a cage, and then when it finds the way out with the zoo full of visitors, the tiger kills one person, but you can't blame the tiger. I know it's sad that a person was killed. But it's not the tiger's fault, it's a wild animal. I say fuck you SF zoo. What do you think?

2007-12-26 03:42:04

Tetrino: International OMGWTFBBQ; +200|7165|Uhh... erm...

Haven't they ever heard of tranquiliser dart rifles?

2007-12-26 03:43:02

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Tetrino wrote:
Haven't they ever heard of tranquiliser dart rifles?

Even Saddam had a "fair" trial.

2007-12-26 03:46:53

Defiance: Member; +438|7106

It was police that shot the animal. I don't think tranq darts are carried around the clock by SFPD, and a tiger that had attacked a keeper, 2 visitors and killed another was advancing on to them.

They had no other choice. No doubt they would have rather kept the animal alive, but after all that's happened the tiger would have likely been put down anyways.

2007-12-26 03:54:20

Kurazoo: Pheasant Plucker; +440|7119|West Yorkshire, U.K

They shouldn't have let it escape in the first place, its the zoo's fault for not having enough protection around the enclosure

2007-12-26 03:57:49

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|7056|London, England

I remember reading in The Sun the other day (no I didn't buy it) that a similair thing happened in Sri Lanka, maybe there's a world wide Tiger revolution?

2007-12-26 03:58:33

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6845|'Murka

The zoo will pay for this, no doubt.

Defiance is correct on both counts. Cops don't carry tranq guns and the time it would have taken to get a tranq gun ready could very well have resulted in the maiming/death of more people. Additionally, it is common practice to kill an animal that has killed a human. Not out of revenge, but just in case it has decided that human flesh is its new favorite appetizer.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2007-12-26 04:01:24

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Defiance wrote:
It was police that shot the animal. I don't think tranq darts are carried around the clock by SFPD, and a tiger that had attacked a keeper, 2 visitors and killed another was advancing on to them.

They had no other choice. No doubt they would have rather kept the animal alive, but after all that's happened the tiger would have likely been put down anyways.

The zoo should have trained veterinarians with darts. Why did the police shoot the tiger? It was the zoo who should have caught the tiger. I'm very pissed off at the zoo. They're supposed to protect wildlife not to kill tigers.

Last edited by sergeriver (2007-12-26 04:03:31)

2007-12-26 04:02:45

Gawwad: My way or Haddaway!; +212|7119|Espoo, Finland

What the hell?
What other options did they have besides shooting her?
She was attacking someone and was now going for the police men.
They can't really tell her to behave...

2007-12-26 04:04:03

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Gawwad wrote:
What the hell?
What other options did they have besides shooting her?
She was attacking someone and was now going for the police men.
They can't really tell her to behave...

Use a fucking dart Ffs.

2007-12-26 04:04:37

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7109|Canberra, AUS

Gawwad wrote:
What the hell?
What other options did they have besides shooting her?
She was attacking someone and was now going for the police men.
They can't really tell her to behave...

None, the question is why they used bullets in contrast to TQ darts.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2007-12-26 04:05:42

Gawwad: My way or Haddaway!; +212|7119|Espoo, Finland

sergeriver wrote:
Gawwad wrote:
What the hell?
What other options did they have besides shooting her?
She was attacking someone and was now going for the police men.
They can't really tell her to behave...
Use a fucking dart Ffs.

Yeah, better go find that dart when a tiger is charging you.
You rather have that person the tiger was next to killed?

2007-12-26 04:05:56

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

FEOS wrote:
The zoo will pay for this, no doubt.

Defiance is correct on both counts. Cops don't carry tranq guns and the time it would have taken to get a tranq gun ready could very well have resulted in the maiming/death of more people. Additionally, it is common practice to kill an animal that has killed a human. Not out of revenge, but just in case it has decided that human flesh is its new favorite appetizer.

I know about that, but it's the SF zoo's fault. The tiger paid with its life coz of the incompetence of the zoo.

2007-12-26 04:07:12

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Gawwad wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Gawwad wrote:
What the hell?
What other options did they have besides shooting her?
She was attacking someone and was now going for the police men.
They can't really tell her to behave...
Use a fucking dart Ffs.
Yeah, better go find that dart when a tiger is charging you.
You rather have that person the tiger was next to killed?

No, I don't blame the police. I blame the damn SF zoo for letting her scape, and for not having the guards with darts at the scene when needed. They are to blame.

2007-12-26 04:13:21

Defiance: Member; +438|7106

sergeriver wrote:
Defiance wrote:
It was police that shot the animal. I don't think tranq darts are carried around the clock by SFPD, and a tiger that had attacked a keeper, 2 visitors and killed another was advancing on to them.

They had no other choice. No doubt they would have rather kept the animal alive, but after all that's happened the tiger would have likely been put down anyways.
The zoo should have trained veterinarians with darts. Why did the police shoot the tiger? It was the zoo who should have caught the tiger. I'm very pissed off at the zoo. They're supposed to protect wildlife not to kill tigers.

I agree with you, the zoo should have taken care of the matter.

2007-12-26 04:15:14

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Defiance wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Defiance wrote:
It was police that shot the animal. I don't think tranq darts are carried around the clock by SFPD, and a tiger that had attacked a keeper, 2 visitors and killed another was advancing on to them.

They had no other choice. No doubt they would have rather kept the animal alive, but after all that's happened the tiger would have likely been put down anyways.
The zoo should have trained veterinarians with darts. Why did the police shoot the tiger? It was the zoo who should have caught the tiger. I'm very pissed off at the zoo. They're supposed to protect wildlife not to kill tigers.
I agree with you, the zoo should have taken care of the matter.

Yes, it's very sad they had to shoot the tiger.

2007-12-26 04:17:08

Nintendogamer: Member; +72|7022|Chelmsford, UK

your all against shooting the tiger, but i think its right, coz its already killed someone, and it could do it again, and the zoo would get its ass sued. they did it to protect themselves and the public,

2007-12-26 04:19:54

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Nintendogamer wrote:
your all against shooting the tiger, but i think its right, coz its already killed someone, and it could do it again, and the zoo would get its ass sued. they did it to protect themselves and the public,

Please, don't think that the tiger would kill again because it killed once. Every damn tiger could kill at any second. They are wild animals, and it's the SF zoo responsibility to protect people. They're gonna be sued regardless of the tiger being shot.

2007-12-26 04:20:37

Gawwad: My way or Haddaway!; +212|7119|Espoo, Finland

sergeriver wrote:
Gawwad wrote:
sergeriver wrote:

Use a fucking dart Ffs.
Yeah, better go find that dart when a tiger is charging you.
You rather have that person the tiger was next to killed?
No, I don't blame the police. I blame the damn SF zoo for letting her scape, and for not having the guards with darts at the scene when needed. They are to blame.

Ok, you're OP is a bit missleading tbh.

2007-12-26 04:22:32

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Gawwad wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Gawwad wrote:

Yeah, better go find that dart when a tiger is charging you.
You rather have that person the tiger was next to killed?
No, I don't blame the police. I blame the damn SF zoo for letting her scape, and for not having the guards with darts at the scene when needed. They are to blame.
Ok, you're OP is a bit missleading tbh.

What part? The part saying fuck you SF zoo?

2007-12-26 04:23:03

Nintendogamer: Member; +72|7022|Chelmsford, UK

sergeriver wrote:
Nintendogamer wrote:
your all against shooting the tiger, but i think its right, coz its already killed someone, and it could do it again, and the zoo would get its ass sued. they did it to protect themselves and the public,
Please, don't think that the tiger would kill again because it killed once. Every damn tiger could kill at any second. They are wild animals, and it's the SF zoo responsibility to protect people. They're gonna be sued regardless of the tiger being shot.

yeh, but its got the tast of blood, so its gonna want to kill again. besides, the tiger came towards the armed police who shot it in fear of being attacked by the tiger themselves. they had no choice

2007-12-26 04:23:30

jord: Member; +2,382|7113|The North, beyond the wall.

I always like to think I could beat a Tiger. I wonder how the person got attacked in the cafe, could the 2 attacked not go inside it and close the door?

Anyway, when you get a report of an animal attacking people. You make sure to take some tranquilliser darts with you. It's like going into a hostage situation when you've forgot your flashbangs, so you just use a grenade instead..

2007-12-26 04:25:36

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

Nintendogamer wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Nintendogamer wrote:
your all against shooting the tiger, but i think its right, coz its already killed someone, and it could do it again, and the zoo would get its ass sued. they did it to protect themselves and the public,
Please, don't think that the tiger would kill again because it killed once. Every damn tiger could kill at any second. They are wild animals, and it's the SF zoo responsibility to protect people. They're gonna be sued regardless of the tiger being shot.
yeh, but its got the tast of blood, so its gonna want to kill again. besides, the tiger came towards the armed police who shot it in fear of being attacked by the tiger themselves. they had no choice

The police hadn't. But the damn zoo should have used their fucking darts. They are going to be sued and now their image is on the floor.

2007-12-26 04:27:04

Nintendogamer: Member; +72|7022|Chelmsford, UK

sergeriver wrote:
Nintendogamer wrote:
sergeriver wrote:

Please, don't think that the tiger would kill again because it killed once. Every damn tiger could kill at any second. They are wild animals, and it's the SF zoo responsibility to protect people. They're gonna be sued regardless of the tiger being shot.
yeh, but its got the tast of blood, so its gonna want to kill again. besides, the tiger came towards the armed police who shot it in fear of being attacked by the tiger themselves. they had no choice
The police hadn't. But the damn zoo should have used their fucking darts. They are going to be sued and now their image is on the floor.

yeh, the zoo should have had their darts ready, but it is justice for the family of the dead person.

2007-12-26 04:28:29

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7192|Argentina

jord wrote:
I always like to think I could beat a Tiger. I wonder how the person got attacked in the cafe, could the 2 attacked not go inside it and close the door?

Anyway, when you get a report of an animal attacking people. You make sure to take some tranquilliser darts with you. It's like going into a hostage situation when you've forgot your flashbangs, so you just use a grenade instead..

Let's put it this way. A tiger could easily take a 1000 lbs buffalo down. So what are your chances?

Pages: 1 2 3 … 7

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Tiger Shot Dead After Attacking SF Zoo Visitors

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Tiger Shot Dead After Attacking SF Zoo Visitors

Poll

Tetrino wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Defiance wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Defiance wrote:

Nintendogamer wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Nintendogamer wrote:

Nintendogamer wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Nintendogamer wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Nintendogamer wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

jord wrote:

Board footer