edwards ([personal profile] edwards) wrote2007-12-26 09:56 pm

Poor Tiger

Today, I am mostly sad that a tiger was shot dead after attacking/mauling some people in a zoo. It seems silly that the animal couldn't be sedated. If i had been mauled by the animal, I'm somewhat worried that I'd be inclined to try and take the bullet for it :(

Tigers. They kill people. Big surprise. I can't help suspecting that three youths aged 19/20 were utterly innocent regarding getting a mauling...

[identity profile] hellsop.livejournal.com 2007-12-26 11:41 pm (UTC)(link)
Per the radio bit I heard this morning, at least one youth was about as innocent as is possible for youths to be: the one being mauled at the time the tiger was shot (and therefore lived) was having a coffee at a snack stand on his way out of the zoo.

The real question in all of this is how or by whom the tiger got out in the first place.

And the trouble with tranquilizer darts is that they don't work like they do in films. Anything that's gentle enough not to kill the beast outright is going to take minutes to set in, which would be plenty of time to finish killing that fellow and see whom else is around.
ashbet: (XsForEyes)

[personal profile] ashbet 2007-12-27 04:01 am (UTC)(link)
*nodnod* Agreed -- I don't know the circumstances of the other attacks, but the tiger was shot while mauling someone in the zoo cafe.

I wonder if they'll ever figure out howinhell the tiger got OUT? The other three in the cage were still behind closed doors . . . hopefully they have some kind of video surveillance.

I agree that the tiger was just being a tiger, and that it's a damn shame it had to be shot, but since it was in the process of killing someone . . . it's a tough decision. And, yeah, tranquilizers would NOT just knock it out instantly -- the last guy could have easily been killed and half-eaten before the tiger started conking out :/

-- A *sad on all accounts*

[identity profile] edwards.livejournal.com 2007-12-27 12:46 pm (UTC)(link)
They didn't put that bit in the reports in the UK. It has to be said that if I heard that 3 "youths" were mauled by a tiger here, I'd automatically assume they had managed to put themselves in a position whereby the tiger COULD maul them. Usually I credit Americans with more common sense, but I can't help wondering if those killed were in some way part of how it got out...

I know they're slow, I didn't have the information that the tiger was actually mauling someone when shot, but I still think it's terrible that they had to shoot it.

[identity profile] hellsop.livejournal.com 2007-12-27 01:44 pm (UTC)(link)
Completely reasonable assumption; that's what USUALLY happens to make someone get et. A nearby zoo lost a grizzly bear to a cage invasion, and the general opinion was that the police officer shot the wrong critter.

[identity profile] edwards.livejournal.com 2007-12-27 01:50 pm (UTC)(link)
Eeek. I think I'd rather share a cage with a tiger...