View Single Post
Old November 13, 2012, 07:36 PM   #96
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
hal post# 79 is first quote only

My bet would be the sound of gunfire would be enough to stop the (trained) zoo people dead in their tracks and they'd just hunker down until the police arrived.
Hal, I'm not arguing with you here & I might be misunderstanding your post but who cares if the zoo people hunker. Many of the zoo employees are animal experts...others are just highschool or college kids, they're not trained for these type of emergencies plus by that time the child is history anyways. Sometimes one must realize that there is no time to wait for someone else. You kight have been just making an observation so i apologize ifso, i just hope your statement isn't more justification or another reason why someone shouldn't act? Maybe I was thrown off because of the post directly before yours and I thought you all agreed....tyme, not trying to focus on you:

tyme's quotes start:
Perhaps the zookeepers ought to have had guns, and ought to have been the ones to use them, since they were most familiar with the dogs' behavior, and most likely to take appropriate action if gunfire could have helped the situation.
but the child didn't have this luxury. this isn't a time to worry about such things, board meetings or the like in the aftermath investigtion is more appropriate.

Consider another plausible scenario: you decide to attempt to shoot at the dogs (but shoot wide of the child) from the observation deck. The two parents and others are probably screaming incoherently, "Help!", "Help our child!", etc. You're shooting at something. Suppose there's an off-duty anti-gun Philadelphia police officer close behind you, unaware specifically that a child has fallen into the exhibit, only aware that there's a child in danger, lots of screaming, and that you're shooting at something. I wonder what happens next.

Worst case, you could end up dead along with the 2-year-old, the parents feel even more guilty because you died trying to rescue their child, and maybe 3rd parties feel guilty or traumatized if they were involved or involved through inaction in your fate. While they'd be happy that you tried to rescue a child, your loved ones would have lost you. If you have kids yourself, would you jump into that exhibit at the risk of leaving your own children without a parent?
lots of whatifs, should we not help the child due to this possible risk?? that seems upsurd to me and just another excuse via speulation. now of course nobody is obligated to act. I respect the post that replied to me saying they would act. That means something to me. DNS made a very very valid point too...this child might not have died instantly, lots of variables and the longer one ponders or just chalks a rescue up as futile takes away this boy's future chances. Almost every CCW encounter holds risk(and no reward without it) unless it is literally your life automatically unless you use your CCW....that is what it is for, but sometimes someone else might need your help.
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Page generated in 0.03606 seconds with 7 queries