Comments by "cchris874" (@cchris874) on "Gorilla Killed After Child Falls Into Zoo Habitat" video.

  1. Well there was at least a little bit of justice. The petition to prosecute the parents failed. You have to be mentally unbalanced to sign a petition like that.
    31
  2.  @kalechips5972  I am grateful not everyone is a moron here. Could you imagine the sh-t we'd be in if Youtube ran society?
    14
  3. Ridiculous. A 3-year-old can slip away in seconds. Have you ever been a parent??? The primary cause was the zoo's negligence. Especially when you are operating a child-centered business, you have an obligation to make it safe. The zoo was negligent. Businesses have far more of an obligation to create a safe place. Because you are the paying customer.
    9
  4.  @elfamosoabraham5880  And the purpose of signing the petition, I suppose, is that even very conscientious parents could never ever lose track of their child, that only bad parents make mistakes. And every time someone behaves imperfectly, we should make a million assumptions about their motives, and rush to sign a petition. This is the dark side of humanity.
    7
  5.  @elfamosoabraham5880  The thing you seem to have terribly wrong is saying "she isn't watching her child." It doesn't follow that watching your son carefully means you are perfect, any more than being a great driver proves you cannot ever be responsible for an accident. In case you didn't know, careful people also make mistakes. Am I wrong?
    6
  6.  @elfamosoabraham5880  Well if there's dangerous creatures all over the place, why did the zoo have such defective enclosure? I would say that while I respect your position, the zoo, being a kid-oriented place, has an obligation to cover up the holes in its system. By contrast, a parent does not have an obligation to be perfect 100% all of the time, because that's the nature of kids. I hope you at least would agree that criminal charges are unwarranted here.  I would use an airplane analogy. If a child gets out of his seat while mom's back is turned, and then slips out through a hole in the plane, is that mommy negligence, or should the mom assume that a plane is safe from having holes in it?
    5
  7.  @elfamosoabraham5880  Would you have still signed the petition if she hadn't been on the phone?
    4
  8. ​ @ganondorf66  I wouldn't disagree. But who do you think has greater responsibility, the zoo building a child-proof enclosure, or a parent never making a mistake? Similarly, if a toddler is able to open an emergency door in flight, does that speak more to a parent, or to the airline? This is why I feel theses discussions are not prioritizing the hierarchy of responsibility.
    3
  9. And it was the zoo's fault. If we can make commercial flight virtually 100% safe, then there's no excuse for a hazardous gorilla exhibit. If a small child managed to open an airplane door in flight, would we blame the mom or the airline?
    2
  10.  @Freefs1  She did not "leave her child unattended." She momentarily lost track of him. Have you ever lost track of your kid even once? Have you ever even had kids? How is she supposed to know the zoo was a safety hazard? This is why sensible people prevailed. The DA explained that's why no charges were filed against the mom. Have you ever read an NTSB accident report? They don't blame the victim. Their probable cause would have been a hazardous exhibit. Hands downs.
    2
  11.  @a.l.m.o.  But you are making an unrealistic assumption. You are assuming absolute parental perfection at all times and places. Have you ever been a parent? You are holding someone liable for being human.
    2
  12. The zoo got the gorilla killed. It was responsible in creating a fool-proof enclosure, which it failed to do. With 5-year-olds all over a zoo, it's pure negligence.
    2
  13. "The family should keep better watch of their child. " Not always realistic. The emphasis should be on the zoo. It's child centered. It needs to be fool-proofed. Zero-fault tolerance is a concept that should apply to a business at least as much as to a mother who loses track of her child for a brief moment. Here's an airplane analogy: if a child is able to wiggle out of his seat and open an emergency exit, would you blame the mother or the airline/manufacturer?
    2
  14. Sensible people prevailed here. They recognized the fact it's impossible to be a 100% perfect parent. That's precisely why the DA refused to press charges. Where's your common sense? The zoo was the negligent party. The exhibit was unsafe. Wake up to common sense.
    2
  15.  @elfamosoabraham5880  I'll bet you were one of the crazed people who signed the petition.
    2
  16. ​ @xxalienxx9541  Actually you're the one who doesn't get it. In the real world, parents cannot be perfect. That's why the prosecutor and the primate expert Jane Goodall, did not blame the parents. You lack a sense of tolerance and real world wisdom. Some people have it, some don't.
    2
  17. @Mongol ForLife "you are mentally imbalanced." Perhaps I am. So let me ask you a balanced question. Do you think a zoo is safe if a child can come face to face with a gorilla in mere seconds? Is that a kids safe environment? A zoo is designed around kids after all. You tell me.
    2
  18. I think you miss the bigger picture. A zoo is a child-oriented place. No parent is perfect. Have you ever been a parent? So, even if you are right, the zoo has a much greater responsibility to make the Gorilla exhibit child-proof. If I ran that zoo, I would never have allowed this to happen, period.
    2
  19. I am getting tired of these absurd posts. So here's a question for you: A 3-year-old boy slips out of his airplane seat while his mom momentarily glances away. He manages to open an emergency door. Would you blame the mom or the airline? (Hint: the NTSB would hold the airline responsible. not the parent.)
    2
  20.  @TheRealBigPearl  Think you are missing the point of the airplane analogy. If an emergency door can be opened in flight, then the airline has a defective product. That part is beyond dispute. So why is that any different than the zoo? If a 3-year-old can slip away and come face to face with a frigging gorilla in mere seconds, how is that any different in principle? You must be aware how often toys are recalled because of various child hazards. Think if the gorilla exhibit at Cincinatti Zoo (at that time) were a product you could buy. No doubt it would be recalled in two seconds. I rest my case :)
    2
  21.  @SamFindley-zt7mt  Interesting. I think this view is off base for one basic reason. As any parent knows, keeping an eye on your child at all times is not practical. The mom took her eyes off her child for a brief moment. In mere seconds the child came face to face with a gorilla. We cannot expect 100% perfection from a parent who may let go of her child for a second to sneeze, or to adjust her glasses. But don't we have a right to expect a child proof exhibit? cheers
    2
  22. No, the zoo killed the gorilla. If your gorilla exhibit is so flawed that a child can slip into it in mere seconds, you have a negligent zoo, pure and simple. Blaming the mom assumes parents, even great ones, are always perfect. That's a stupid assumption, and goes against the experience of anyone who's ever had a child.
    2
  23. The more important lesson is, if you are going to create a flawed exhibit where a child, the main customers after all, can so easily get in, that's pure negligence. The zoo is far more accountable because it had no excuse. By contrast, no matter how perfect a parent is, a 3-year-old can slip away from time to time. That's just the nature of the beast. This is why they refused to prosecute the mom.
    2
  24. Yes, this obsession with parents-not-being perfect is the oddest part of this affair. The ZOO was the negligent one. Zoos are children oriented. They have an obligation to make them safe, and to anticipate imperfect parents, as no parent is perfect. Another example of the absolute absurd times in which we live.
    2
  25.  @a.l.m.o.  “She had three other kids with her and turned her back. … And if anyone doesn’t believe a 3-year-old can scamper off very quickly, they’ve never had kids.” -the Ohio prosecutor There you go.
    1
  26.  @a.l.m.o.  And finally, “Had she been in the bathroom smoking crack and let her kids run around the zoo that’d be a different story,” he told reporters on Monday. “She was attending to her children by all witness accounts and the 3-year-old just scampered off.”
    1
  27. You are espousing a lower order opinion. Even Jane Goodall weighed in on this. She, the prosecutor and indeed all realistic parents the world over know that parental imperfection is impossible. What causes you to make such a glaring error of judgement?
    1
  28. If this has happened so many times, what does that tell us about the failure of zoos?
    1
  29.  @stacyliddell5038  Well that's a bad opinion in my opinion. Parents aren't perfect. Have you ever had kids?
    1
  30.  @stacyliddell5038  Well here's my reasoning. Especially if you have been a parent, you would know how even the most careful parents have had plenty of incidents where their kids slip away in an instant. As the prosecutor of the case stated:
    1
  31.  @stacyliddell5038  As the prosecutor of the case stated: "I've never seen the attention given to a family-endangering case as this," Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said. "If you don't believe a 3-year-old can scamper away that quickly, you've never had kids. They do just that."    Jane Goodall, the primate expert also weighed in and said much the same. I'm with the prosecutor and common sense on this one. It's a sign of unrealistic thinking to ascribe the level of parental perfection you are assuming exists.  By contrast, any responsible zoo has the luxury of time and forethought to identify child hazards. I'm not saying for sure if I blame the zoo, but zoos are child oriented businesses. Thusn they have job to identify in advance hazards like this. That's very different than the unrealistic assumption of perfect parents. So your view on this contradicts basic logic: you cannot take a single instance of a parent's mistake and generalize from it. So your opinion is mathematically unsound. IMO
    1
  32. Irresponsible zoo. Its gorilla exhibit was not child proof. That's pure negligence. Have you ever been a parent? Even the most attentive parents cannot be 100% perfect. That's why sensible people agreed it would be wrong to charge the mom.
    1
  33.  @chicochris3062  Well, you're way off base. Youv'e obviously never had kids.
    1
  34. Yes she did. Taking care of a child doesn't mean 100% perfection. Maybe you've never been a parent. Why is no one criticizing the zoo for letting children into a hazardous environment? It's such an astonishing feat of illogic to blame the parent and not the zoo. Seriously.
    1
  35.  @klif4755  Yeah I mean, I can go as far as understanding why some people will hold the parents responsible. But signing a petition?? So if I accidentally run a red light, should there be a national petition to make sure I am arrested? It's beyond nuts. And where is the corresponding outrage at the zoo for having glaring holes in its safety? By never mentioning that, it shows again the one-sided obsession of these posters.
    1
  36. Another absurd comment.
    1
  37. You are absolutely wrong on this one,
    1
  38. ​ @adelinalva3906  You're going against the nature of the real world.
    1
  39.  @Freefs1  I can only say, I am grateful sensible people prevailed here. God forbid if the Youtube mob were running society.
    1
  40. Only about one in 10 comments here make any sense. They blame the parent but not the obviously hazardous exhibit? That's totally backwards reasoning - as if there's ever been a parent in the history of the world who never ever lost track of their child even once? We do indeed live in the age of the absurd.
    1
  41. You are as stupid as they come if you think gorillas are more valuable than innocent children. Absolutely insane.
    1
  42.  @Tylnorton  That's an example of short-sighted thinking. The parents were no letting their children roam around. The mom lost track of her son for a brief few seconds. You don't think the zoo was irresponsible for allowing a 3-year-old to gain access to a gorilla exhibit? We've all but lost common sense in our society. And these kinds of comments are about as clear as an example as you can find.
    1
  43. This is why there was a petition to prosecute the mother. To some Green extremists, the gorilla is more important than the child.
    1
  44.  @CorpusGreed  Well how do you know that the mother knew the child could get into the exhibit? The district attorney refused to prosecute because you and others keep making this weird assumption that parents can be 100% perfect at all times. That's a defective paradigm. And, as witnesses stated, the mom WAS watching her kids, but all it takes is one second to move your head away, and a child can slip away. I recommend reading the many comments of parents who are 100% meticulous but conceded that anything can happen, even to them. Like the thread below with 174 replies.
    1
  45.  @HYDROCARBON_XD  But that assumes that loosing track of your child is always negligence. By all accounts, the mom turned her head away for a brief instant. The idea of the perfect parent is a defective paradigm. And you don't expect your child will be be able to drop in front a of a gorilla in mere seconds. That's why the DA refused to prosecute. That's just my view, and I appreciate your sharing yours,
    1
  46. I said she took her EYES off of him for an "instant." In an instant you can lose track of a child. I did not say the child "took an instant"to go from being lost track of into the exhibit. But he did so rather quickly.By all accounts he was in there in mere seconds. i.e. less than a minute. Please don't be overly literal. If I am in error, kindly quote the part of the story that says otherwise.
    1
  47.  @kirikiti5425  Once again, you are approaching the issue with the defective paradigm that human beings can always be 100% perfect. Where did you ever get that idea from? Certainly not the real world. Where human infallibility has been refuted time and again. Even people who "have 100 percent attention" are not immune from error, period.
    1
  48.  @ItsYoBoyJesusPreacher  And I know the results of the police investigation, which involved several witnesses. On that basis no charges were filed.
    1
  49.  @ItsYoBoyJesusPreacher  Well that's quite a bit of speculation.
    1
  50.  @StaleArt  You are asking for a world in which none of us inhabit: absolute perfection.
    1
  51.  @krazedsuperman  Omg, calm down why don't you. There's no need to be yelling. That said, thank you for your replies. I see your point. I think my main point boils down to this: we live in a world where there is no such thing as 100% perfection. If you agree with that, then what is there to be arguing about? cheers
    1
  52.  @krazedsuperman  Translation: everyone must agree with me, the superior krazedsuperman, or they are i-diots, which would include the county prosecutor, and Jane Goodall I suspect, who weighed in too. YOU ARE SUPERIOR IN VIRTUE OF YOUR BEING YOU. Got it
    1
  53.  @SamFindley-zt7mt  Or if the zoo had built a safer enclosure.
    1
  54.  @SamFindley-zt7mt  Curious whom you think had the greater responsibility to protect this child. Zoo or parents?
    1
  55. Especially the ones who blame the parent.
    1
  56. What about the zoo? Don't they have a responsible to make sure a child-oriented business is safe for children?
    1
  57. I don't either. But the zoo itself is the primary cause here: if a child found a way to open an emergency door inflight, the NTSB would rightly blame the airline, not the child. That's the absurdity of so many comments above. Common sense has been amputated in this age of the absurd.
    1
  58. That's totally normal for a kid. What's disturbingly abnormal is blaming the parent for not being perfect. And not blaming the zoo for an obvious hazard.
    1
  59. Let's celebrate that the petition failed. People with nothing better to do than harass a parent for being human come off the worst in this whole saga.
    1
  60.  @adaptwt8250  I think the petition to charge the mom was also driven by people who detest human beings in general. They think humans are destroying the planet, so let's stick it to them. Maybe a cover for racism too.
    1
  61. But far more the zoo's.
    1
  62. Question: If a 3-year-old managed to open an emergency door in flight, would you agree the NTSB would rightly hold the airline accountable, and not the mom?
    1
  63. Your name says it all.
    1
  64. It was the zoo's fault. Parents have an excuse: they aren't perfect. Zoos have plenty of time to think about making their gorilla enclosures safe. Where's your common sense?
    1
  65.  @melaniewood3506  It happened in an instant. I suspect you have never had kids. As the prosecutor said: "I've never seen the attention given to a family-endangering case as this," Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said. "If you don't believe a 3-year-old can scamper away that quickly, you've never had kids. They do just that."
    1
  66.  @melaniewood3506  So why is it more the mother's fault than the zoo's? Mothers are suppose to be perfect and zoos are not? Is that your argument?
    1
  67.  @melaniewood3506  OK got it, parents must be perfect, but a zoo's enclosure can be imperfect. You don't know how to carry out a logical conversation, but that's fine, this is Youtube after all.
    1
  68.  @melaniewood3506  Well I have 3 questions for you then, and I'd like to get an honest answer to these if you would care to. 1) Do you agree that even the most conscientious parents in the world can recall times when they momentarily lost track of their children? 2) Have you ever been a parent? 3) If you were building a gorilla enclosure, wouldn't you want to make it kid-safe, in case a kid accidentally strays from his parents/guardian?
    1
  69.  @melaniewood3506  OK, thank you for your answers. However, you didn't;t answer my last question, and no one ever blamed the gorilla. Don't you think a zoo has a duty to identify places where a child could get, and get rid of the hazard too? I am not singling you out, I have posed this question to many others too. I can only say that while I respect your point of view, I am glad that people with greater wisdom, like Jane Goodall, like the country prosecutor whom I quoted, carry more weight than unforgiving Youtube viewers. Just my opinion of course. :)
    1
  70. The kid was not retarded, it's your response and the 100s like it that's retarded. Sane adults don't think like this.
    1
  71. Thank you for holding the zoo accountable. Not many posters seem to care one wit about that. However, I take issue with "doesn't parent as she should." The assumption of 100% perfect parents at all times and places is unrealistic. Have you ever been a parent?
    1
  72. The zoo's at fault because a zoo is a child-oriented business, and therefore has an obligation to eliminate child hazards such as this. What don't you get here? On the other hand no parent is perfect. Maybe you've just never been a parent?
    1
  73. Well that's actually a nice proof she was watching her child and lost track if him only briefly. Had she truly been a bad parent she wouldn't have had a clue where he was.
    1
  74. No, that's normal for a kid that age. What's stupid is your comment. Unless you're a teenager, you should know better than to post garbage like this.
    1
  75. Where was the f-ing child-resistant gorilla enclosure?
    1
  76. An unsafe zoo is even dumber. Did you forget about that?
    1