Parents Sue Zoo - For or Against?
Replies
-
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.
Seeing this would not fully prevent anyone from entering into the water.... so if said person is to enter the water, "ignoring the signs sings" as it was put, and a shark kills can one sue the city for not providing enough barriers to prevent people from entering in the water? Common sense bro.... common sense.
The local government who posted this sign didn't charge money to come see their sharks in an exhibit they are purporting to be safe.0 -
Actually, one of my friends' dads was developing an app that could prevent you from actually sending or receiving texts/emails/etc. while driving. He was Beta testing it with some close friends and relatives not too long ago. I can guarantee that if he could develop this, Apple could do something. But they won't because why are they going to waste money on something when it's been warned against. You can only protect humanity from its own stupidity to an extent. Eventually people need to figure out how to take responsibility.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.0 -
Could they have done more and had better protection/prevention for that? Sure. Are they responsible? Absolutely not.0
-
It sounds like the zoo had several options for viewing these animals, they had a railing and a netting and signs stating not to lift your child onto railings. We cannot protect the world against stupidity. I feel horrible for the family and friends of this boy, but it was a decision that the mother made to disregard the safety signs. Unfrotunately, a decision she will have to regret for the rest of her life. Blaming others won't change that.
A sign I recently saw. EVERYTHING HAPPENS FOR A REASON, BUT SOMETIMES THE REASON IS THAT YOU'RE STUPID AND MAKE BAD DECISION.
***Please note I'm not saying this mother is stupid...just that she made a bad decision.
The netting was for people dropping cell phones and cameras, not kids.
It would have been a trivial upgrade to make the netting strong enough to catch a child, but the zoo chose not to do that, despite the fact that they knew parents put their kids up on the railing multiple times a day.
I know this has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but please answer this honestly. you are a liberal, aren't you?
I think that dividing the political spectrum into an either/or single-dimension line is horribly stupid, and find that only people with primitive political positions and opinions have much use for the terms "liberal" or "conservative."
It was just your take on rewarding failure/ignorance and ignoring that people have a responsibility to themselves and their children that had me wondering. sorry to get off topic.
Wow.0 -
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.
Seeing this would not fully prevent anyone from entering into the water.... so if said person is to enter the water, "ignoring the signs sings" as it was put, and a shark kills can one sue the city for not providing enough barriers to prevent people from entering in the water? Common sense bro.... common sense.
That's not at all comparable. If the area with that sign could spend $1000 on a small device that would actually prevent anyone from getting eaten by a shark, that would be more similar.
Here is something more comparable. A sign at a local swimming pool. Warning sign posted.... Point is there are warning signs...it is up to us to adhere to them or be prepared for possible consequences.0 -
I am against most lawsuits it seems. This one included.0
-
In an exhibit they are purporting to be safe so long as you follow the rules, you mean.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.
Seeing this would not fully prevent anyone from entering into the water.... so if said person is to enter the water, "ignoring the signs sings" as it was put, and a shark kills can one sue the city for not providing enough barriers to prevent people from entering in the water? Common sense bro.... common sense.
The local government who posted this sign didn't charge money to come see their sharks in an exhibit they are purporting to be safe.
The kid would be safe if they weren't dangled over an exhibit containing wild animals and dropped. The same as the kid is safe from the sharks so long as you don't dangle it over the edge of the dock into a group or circling sharks.0 -
I'm against it. Apparently some people think that the government or other people need to tell us how to behave in a safe manner... where does it stop?0
-
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.0 -
QFTI'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.0 -
Zoos have wild animals. There are fences, gates, walls, and moats around them to protect both the animals and the general public. Being stupid enough to put your child somewhere dangerous and having something horrible happen does not give you the right to sue. I feel awful for the family, but grief and anger are not lessened with money. I'd feel differently if the zoo were negligent and the animal was out of it's enclosure.
Against. I totally agree with this comment....
Against also. Same reason.0 -
The lawsuit claims that zoo officials had ample warning that parents routinely lift their children onto a rail overlooking the exhibit so that the children can see the dogs better, according to the report.
If I understand correctly the lawsuit is stating that the zoo is responsible for the child's death because it was a common practice for parents to lift their children and seat them on the rail, and the zoo took no action (modifying the rail to make it impossible to lift a child up onto it, or zoo personnel did notverbally warning parents not to lift their children up to the rail, therefore by this "non-intervention" they (the zoo) are responsible? I am trying to understand the logic of plaintiff's claim.
As others have said, it is a tragedy and no doubt painful loss for the parents.
Against.0 -
Against. Not to sound too harsh, but it was the parent's actions that killed the child, not the zoo. Take some personal responsibility0
-
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!0 -
Against but only bc the parent shouldn't profit off their own stupidity.
Zoos should have better safeguards to protect children from their idiot parents.0 -
Against but only bc the parent shouldn't profit off their own stupidity.
Zoos should have better safeguards to protect children from their idiot parents.
this ^^^
both have equal resonsibility0 -
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.
In the context of the budget of a zoo, a safety net is a trivial and inexpensive thing to install.
How much do you think the settlement will be by comparison? They're going to end up building out new safety features because of this anyway.0 -
The lawsuit claims that zoo officials had ample warning that parents routinely lift their children onto a rail overlooking the exhibit so that the children can see the dogs better, according to the report.
If I understand correctly the lawsuit is stating that the zoo is responsible for the child's death because it was a common practice for parents to lift their children and seat them on the rail, and the zoo took no action (modifying the rail to make it impossible to lift a child up onto it, or zoo personnel did notverbally warning parents not to lift their children up to the rail, therefore by this "non-intervention" they (the zoo) are responsible? I am trying to understand the logic of plaintiff's claim.
As others have said, it is a tragedy and no doubt painful loss for the parents.
Against.
That seems to be it, yes. The zoo knew it was a dangerous situation, so they put up signs. However, parents routinely ignored the signs. Zoo officials were fully aware of this and did nothing about it.0 -
They didn't just have wild, carnivorous animals roaming about with signs saying be careful. They had safety precautions. I still fail to see why it's the zoos fault that parents chose to bypass and ignore the precautions.The zoo knew it was a dangerous situation, so they put up signs. However, parents routinely ignored the signs. Zoo officials were fully aware of this and did nothing about it.0 -
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
thanks0 -
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.0 -
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...0 -
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.0 -
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??0 -
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?
0 -
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.0 -
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.0 -
For it. Children need to be protected from stupid parents.0
-
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/TrucksForMaddox0 -
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.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions