Parents Sue Zoo - For or Against?

Katina3333

Because theres always something more that could have been done by somebody other that the person actually responsible.


Seems people don't want to be responsible for their own actions anymore... I think its called we're going to hell in a hand basket syndrome! lol Only cure is responsible parenting, but I believe it may be too late for some.

Mustang_Susie

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

umm if youre not already dating someone id like to marry you

thanks

Jerry you're shameless...

Mustang_Susie

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

THANK YOU!

I thought you bailed on us IC.
And, yes, good point from a valid source.

Jerrypeoples

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

umm if youre not already dating someone id like to marry you

thanks

Jerry you're shameless...

can we pretend you didnt see that??

Mustang_Susie

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

umm if youre not already dating someone id like to marry you

thanks

Jerry you're shameless...

can we pretend you didnt see that??

See what?

InnerConflict

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

THANK YOU!

I thought you bailed on us IC.
And, yes, good point from a valid source.

I left work and had a very active evening. Doesn't seem like any common ground was found between the two sides.

It baffles me that some people believe the zoo should make every exhibit 100% idiot proof regardless of the cost. Sadly the big winners on this one are going to be the lawyers.

Mustang_Susie

I left work and had a very active evening. Doesn't seem like any common ground was found between the two sides.

It baffles me that some people believe the zoo should make every exhibit 100% idiot proof regardless of the cost. Sadly the big winners on this one are going to be the lawyers.

It is sad, for many reasons.

GiGiBeans

For it. Children need to be protected from stupid parents.

InnerConflict

If any of you are interested, the family did start a charity in memory of their son. Their son loved playing with trucks, so they formed Trucks For Maddox. They collect toy trucks for needy kids. I am completely against this lawsuit, but their charity is a worthwhile cause.

https://www.facebook.com/TrucksForMaddox

craigmandu

Nothing is truly "safe" if people disregard the rules that govern the location/activity. Is it the Grand Canyon National Park's problem if people allow their kids to get "too close to the edge" and fall into the canyon?

Is it the Hotels fault if parents let their kids dive into the 4' end of the pool and break their necks?

Is it Yellowstones problem if you "fed the bears" and they in turn mauled you to death?

Is it the Cruise ships fault if you let your kids climb on the rail and fall overboard into the ocean?

The list of things that require adult supervision to ensure they are safe has no bounds. It is when the adults themselves "encourage" or create the risk of extreme injury by breaking the rules that govern the activities that needs to really be addressed.

If I have a sign that says "beware of dog", and you hung your child over my fence to "look" and the dog jumped up and bit the child...is that my fault?

I feel so strongly for this woman, and cannot imagine the horror she witnessed. I'm simply sorry that she made a very grave mistake and took her child's life into her own hands and failed in keeping the child safe.

Do I wish that the zoo had done something to prevent it? Of course...do I think they are responsible for the death because they didn't? Not really.

InnerConflict

I agree 100% Craig. I really wish the family kept their focus on the charity and never pursued this ridiculous lawsuit.

MizTerry

Against.
No amount of money is going to bring that child back.

jonnythan

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

THANK YOU!

I thought you bailed on us IC.
And, yes, good point from a valid source.

I left work and had a very active evening. Doesn't seem like any common ground was found between the two sides.

It baffles me that some people believe the zoo should make every exhibit 100% idiot proof regardless of the cost. Sadly the big winners on this one are going to be the lawyers.

It baffles me that people need to set up ridiculous straw men to argue their point.

No one said anything remotely like that.

InnerConflict

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

THANK YOU!

I thought you bailed on us IC.
And, yes, good point from a valid source.

I left work and had a very active evening. Doesn't seem like any common ground was found between the two sides.

It baffles me that some people believe the zoo should make every exhibit 100% idiot proof regardless of the cost. Sadly the big winners on this one are going to be the lawyers.

It baffles me that people need to set up ridiculous straw men to argue their point.

No one said anything remotely like that.

No, you just keep beating the point that the costs to install a bigger net is trivial without providing anything to back it up.

What about the flashing walk/don't walk signs for a cross walk? Should there be a barrier preventing people from stepping off the curb when it is says don't walk?

moosegt35

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

We should sue apple because phones are capable of texting while driving even though its illegal and they say not to do it.

Again, totally different situation. There's no easy, cheap, simple, feasible way for Apple to actually prevent people from doing that.

The zoo could easily and simply have prevented this utterly foreseeable death. Apple can't easily and simply prevent people from texting while driving.

Actually they could, they could very easily and cheaply make smartphones not work while moving. Waze, the free GPS app, makes you agree that you are a passenger and not driving when you try to use it while moving. You telling me apple couldn't do something similar and make the phone not work at all. They could do it in an afternoon if they chose to. Texting and driving has killed way more than 1 person in the last 116 years also.

glovepuppet

.

moosegt35

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

We should sue apple because phones are capable of texting while driving even though its illegal and they say not to do it.

Again, totally different situation. There's no easy, cheap, simple, feasible way for Apple to actually prevent people from doing that.

The zoo could easily and simply have prevented this utterly foreseeable death. Apple can't easily and simply prevent people from texting while driving.

Actually they could, they could very easily and cheaply make smartphones not work while moving. Waze, the free GPS app, makes you agree that you are a passenger and not driving when you try to use it while moving. You telling me apple couldn't do something similar and make the phone not work at all. They could do it in an afternoon if they chose to. Texting and driving has killed way more than 1 person in the last 116 years also.

which would stop passengers making calls too. who would buy that phone? you can't call, or call for help, from a moving vehicle?

I am not saying they should do it, it's just an anology to compare to his asinine responses. If a zoo should go to the extent to make everything idiot proof in order to save 1 life in 116 years why shouldn't phone companies do something like that to save 100's of lives per year? Better yet, after I get in a drunk driving accident I will sue Jack Daniels and the bar that served it to me even though the bottle and the bar have signs saying don't drink and drive and I am paying them to see their "attraction". They need to make it so that I can't hurt myself.

Pookylou

I'm not comfortable letting the zoo throw its hands up in the air and say "OH WELL! THERE WERE SIGNS!" when they knew full well that parents ignored the signs all day long and a trivial amount of work and money could have prevented the death.

You keep saying this is a "trivial" and "inexpensive" thing to do. I'd love to hear your credentials/research to back that up. As an engineer, I'm very aware of the design requirements to hold a given amount of force/weight, and of the cost of the materials required - not to mention the cost of paying a person to design it, paying people to install it, the costs go on and on and pile up quickly.

I'm not saying that someone's life is not worth this cost, but please stop making it sound like all they needed to do was buy a $20 volleyball net and have an employee hang it up after-hours one evening. It is neither a "trivial" nor "inexpensive" process.

THANK YOU!

I thought you bailed on us IC.
And, yes, good point from a valid source.

I left work and had a very active evening. Doesn't seem like any common ground was found between the two sides.

It baffles me that some people believe the zoo should make every exhibit 100% idiot proof regardless of the cost. Sadly the big winners on this one are going to be the lawyers.

It baffles me that people need to set up ridiculous straw men to argue their point.

No one said anything remotely like that.

No, you just keep beating the point that the costs to install a bigger net is trivial without providing anything to back it up.

What about the flashing walk/don't walk signs for a cross walk? Should there be a barrier preventing people from stepping off the curb when it is says don't walk?

Yes, and it should be covered with foam rubber in case you don't notice it and walk into it..... In no way should you have to take responsibility for your own actions/health & safety.

missprincessgina

Against. I live in Pittsburgh and the zoo has clear warning signs about lifting children on top of exhibits. The zoo got rid of the exhibit too as if it were the African dog's fault.

ken_hogan

Definately against.