Tcali Posted May 29, 2009 Share Posted May 29, 2009 Great reading comprehension here. The thread title says Tiger(which it was) and the latest people are talking about lions. they are different?...........................oops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 We all got it coming, kid. Nice quote from Unforgiven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbeau Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 900 Grand to a couple kid s who should be taken out back and beaten. Ahhhhh...the American Dream, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 900 Grand to a couple kid s who should be taken out back and beaten. Ahhhhh...the American Dream, Well, after a minimum of $300K to lawyers and probably $300K in taxes, they'll be lucky to split a third of it. So it's not as great as it sounds. Plus, they'll have the lifelong distinction at every party of being "the dumbasses who threw sh-- at tigers." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted May 30, 2009 Author Share Posted May 30, 2009 Yeah--but the problem is some completely innocent people could have been killed as well. Those lions did and could get out of the enclosure. There were reports of the lions jumping up and getting a paw over the fence before. The zoo did nothing. The tiger only went after those kids. She knew who was responsible. After killing all three she might have been dangerous but she was only dangerous to those stupid effing kids before they tranquilized her. Great reading comprehension here. The thread title says Tiger(which it was) and the latest people are talking about lions. Link 900 Grand to a couple kid s who should be taken out back and beaten. Ahhhhh...the American Dream, I think I'll go taunt some dangerous animals at the zoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 The tiger only went after those kids. She knew who was responsible. After killing all three she might have been dangerous but she was only dangerous to those stupid effing kids before they tranquilized her. . the tiger was dangerous to the woman(and several others) who reported the tiger(s) getting a paw up over the enclosure on previous occasions and who reported it to the zoo. You think the tiger wouldnt have attacked some innocent bystander if they were there as well???-That the tiger would have said to himself--"oh thats not the person who was taunting me--you run along and have a nice day" ?? I'm not defending the moron kids. But the reason they won the verdict(and not a big one really after its divided up minus legal fees) is because the zoo should have had barriers that the tiger couldn't leap over.-Something else could have provoked the Tigers at some other time---and completely innocent people could have been hurt or killed. Food poisoning or a bad infection or the very beginning of some spinal or brain disease(before it is detected by he vets) can also make a tiger go berserk. -And it would take the tiger about 5 seconds to kill or maim someone--well before any help could arrive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 -And it would take the tiger about 5 seconds to kill or maim someone--well before any help could arrive. Only if the person got a 4 second head start. Tigers can literally cut you in half with one paw swipe. The "Rescue" place I went to had one of those PVC "Pools" that they swam in. One of the tigers picked the thing up and flung it with his mouth. It was about 10 feet across, a couple of feet deep, and full of water. In the process it "ripped" the edge with his fang. The edge was as smooth as silk. For comparison they cut it with a circular saw - which left jagged edges. The PVC pool was over an inch and a half thick. The other thing they had was a tractor tire attached to a garage door spring. It simulated prey so they could play. Tigers will pull until whatever they have in their mouths go limp. The largest male (about 700 pounds) pulled the garage door spring completely straight. Think about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 No matter what the kids did, the Zoo is at fault. They didn't have the regulated enclosure specific restraints, and as a result, someone was injured. It is simple law. The Zoo has a duty to provide sufficient protection to the public who pay admission to see the animals. Zoo doesn't hold up their duty, person is hurt, person receives compensation for damages. Had the bastards thrown shiit at the Tiger, and the Tiger busted out of the up to par regulated enclosure, I'd laugh my ass off. The fact that the Zoo's enclosure didn't meet the standards is what gives this case life. It doesn't matter what those kids did, the bad enclosure is what kills the Zoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 1, 2009 Share Posted June 1, 2009 Just saying... We got a new kitten (12 weeks old) a week ago... That little bugger jumped all the way down from the top of our balcony to the first floor... 8 foot drop. And loved it! Remind me not to walk under the balcony! After I saw that, I stopped fearing for its safety from our older cat (13 years old) and started worrying the older cat's safety! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts