Police: Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting

[Artegal 1]

Here we go again blame the victim, You know for example: what where you doing or wearing to get raped? Or why were you in that part of the city at that hour to get robbed? Etc. now we want to blame a 19 year old who has had a little too much to drink for being eaten alive by a tiger in a zoo. So its another case of blaming the victim. Excuse me but people taunt animals all the time drunk or not in zoos. The problem is the animals should not be able to escape their enclosures. Beer and wine are sold inside the San Francisco Zoo, even my local zoo--Zoo Atlanta has bartenders setup through out the Zoo grounds serving beer, wine, and cocktails. So if drinking was the problem then why serve drinks in the first place--well that's just it its not the problem its the poor design of a tiger enclosure. Lets stop blaming the victim.

[Skeeter211 2]

Here we go again blame the victim, You know for example: what where you doing or wearing to get raped? Or why were you in that part of the city at that hour to get robbed? Etc. now we want to blame a 19 year old who has had a little too much to drink for being eaten alive by a tiger in a zoo. So its another case of blaming the victim. Excuse me but people taunt animals all the time drunk or not in zoos. The problem is the animals should not be able to escape their enclosures. Beer and wine are sold inside the San Francisco Zoo, even my local zoo--Zoo Atlanta has bartenders setup through out the Zoo grounds serving beer, wine, and cocktails. So if drinking was the problem then why serve drinks in the first place--well that's just it its not the problem its the poor design of a tiger enclosure. Lets stop blaming the victim.

Assuming everything you have read in the media is true.......

I understand your point, but at the same time....people should be responsible for their own actions. There is surely some cupability by the zoo as there should be no way that this animal could get out......period. Secondly, if the zoo served ANY of the alcohol to the 19 year old, then they have another reason for blame.

At the same time, to say that the drunk 19 year old that was taunting a WILD animal has no responsibility for his own actions is simply not a responsible statement. The 19 YEAR OLD should have been responsible enough not to drink in the first place as he is not of legal drinking age. To excuse him simply because of his age and the "boys will be boys" attitude is an incorrect response as well. This is no doubt a very tragic event, but blame falls on both sides of the fence here.

The difference in your scenarios above is that a tiger is a wild animal with animalistic instincts and prey drives. It is not the human rapist or robber that has a criminal intent, so you can't compare apples to oranges.

Just my opinion of course......

Scott

[Kez/JWolf 6]

How in the hell can you say its not the victims fault...... he was drunk, he was teasing a wild animal, he may have climbed into the enclosure, as for the boys will be boys #######... we all have to accept responsibility for our actions, drunk or not...

Yes the Zoo has to take some of the blame for inadiquate enclosure... but if the victim had not been drunk and had not being just "one of the boys" he might still be alive...

Kez

[Nagishkaw 510]

I totally agree, Kez.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Here we go again blame the victim, You know for example: what where you doing or wearing to get raped? Or why were you in that part of the city at that hour to get robbed? Etc. now we want to blame a 19 year old who has had a little too much to drink for being eaten alive by a tiger in a zoo. So its another case of blaming the victim. Excuse me but people taunt animals all the time drunk or not in zoos. The problem is the animals should not be able to escape their enclosures. Beer and wine are sold inside the San Francisco Zoo, even my local zoo--Zoo Atlanta has bartenders setup through out the Zoo grounds serving beer, wine, and cocktails. So if drinking was the problem then why serve drinks in the first place--well that's just it its not the problem its the poor design of a tiger enclosure. Lets stop blaming the victim.

That's true - regardless of how sober the guy was, or how stupidly he behaved, it shouldn't be possible for that to happen.

Regardless of whether the particular kid was taunting or otherwise baiting the animal - the fact that the tiger was able to escape its enclosure is the key issue IMO. The fact that it was able to do so, and presumably could have done so at any time - effectively means that members of the public at large who visited that zoo at any time were being put at an unjustifiable risk.

In other words - an accident waiting to happen.

[DeadPoolX 9]

There are TWO areas to blame here:

1. A 19 year-old is not a child -- if in no other sense, a legal one. He should be able to figure out that drinking alcohol to the point of intoxication and then taunting dangerous, wild animals (even if they are in captivity) is a very foolish thing to do and could potentially end with disastrous results.

2. The zoo itself should make sure that all of it's animals remain safe for visitors to view, even the unruly ones. It's important to remember that a zoo is not an adult-only location; they are usually full of families, many of which can include pregnant women and young children. This isn't to say that adults are worth any "less" than those mentioned before, but an adult male or female might find it easier to either defend or flee than a pregnant woman or young child in the event of an animal escape.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well regardless of whether or not people do or have taunted zoo animals - it should not be possible for the animal to escape from its enclosure and cause mayhem. That's a clear health and safety issue for the zoo, and the only issue that really matters here. If the guy actually climbed over the fence into the enclosure... or was trying to let the animal out then yes he would be to blame. But even then - the zoo is supposed to have some sort of security to ensure that people can't do that. However you look at it, the core responsibility lies with the zoo for ensuring that their facility is safe for the general public.

[slim 1,525]

Darwinism at it's best.

Reminding us we're not always at the top of the food chain, at it's worst.

[Kazan' Tiger 1]

Don't mess with us TIGERS!

[Dan J 277]

There are TWO areas to blame here:

1. A 19 year-old is not a child -- if in no other sense, a legal one. He should be able to figure out that drinking alcohol to the point of intoxication and then taunting dangerous, wild animals (even if they are in captivity) is a very foolish thing to do and could potentially end with disastrous results.

2. The zoo itself should make sure that all of it's animals remain safe for visitors to view, even the unruly ones. It's important to remember that a zoo is not an adult-only location; they are usually full of families, many of which can include pregnant women and young children. This isn't to say that adults are worth any "less" than those mentioned before, but an adult male or female might find it easier to either defend or flee than a pregnant woman or young child in the event of an animal escape.

[no name 1]

Darwinism at it's best.

Reminding us we're not always at the top of the food chain, at it's worst.

[eric&gen 0]

Underage drinking hope they lose there liquor licensee.

[no name 1]

Those that say the zoo is at fault....

Sousa's father, Carlos Sousa Sr., said Dhaliwal told him the three stood on a 3-foot-tall metal railing a few feet from the edge of the tiger moat. "When they got down they heard a noise in the bushes, and the tiger was jumping out of the bushes on him (Paul Dhaliwal),"

and

All three also had marijuana in their systems, Matthews said. Kulbir Dhaliwal told police that the three had smoked pot and each had "a couple shots of vodka" before leaving San Jose for the zoo on Christmas Day the affidavit said.

Police found a small amount of marijuana in Kulbir Dhaliwal's 2002 BMW, which the victims rode to the zoo, as well as a partially filled bottle of vodka, according to court documents.

and

The affidavit also cites multiple reports of a group of young men taunting animals at the zoo, the Chronicle reported.

So the alcohol was in the car, along with illegal drugs & they stood on a 3' fence & taunted animals. Hardly the angels they painted themeselves to be.

Edited January 18, 2008 by devilette

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hmmm IMO it doesn't matter what they did short of climbing into or opening the enclosure - the animal should not have been physically able to escape.

That it could have suggests to me that any and everyone who visited that zoo was being put at risk. That's a clear health and safety issue - and the zoo will surely have some case to answer for it.

[Peikko 1,575]

Not sure who painted anyone as angels. Regardless, were these three teenagers acting like teenagers? Sure. Were they behaving recklessly? Perhaps. Did they 'deserve' to get killed by a tiger? Absolutely not. The Zoo is culpable for allowing the tiger to escape. That's the bottom line. There is no margin for error there. If the tiger could escape, what's to have stopped it from escaping when say a 5 year old taunted it? (Young kids often behave in a way that would be irritating to wild animals) The fact that some people don't 'like' the teenagers that were mauled is 100% irrelevant.