Posted on 01/01/2008 6:26:03 AM PST by barryg
Edited on 01/01/2008 6:31:30 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Plus all had previous contacts with the police. Plus they drove 50 miles on Christmas to visit the zoo. Did they get what they deserved?
If they provoked that poor animal, they deserve everything they got.
How to make $5 Million easy. Go to zoo. Get drunk, attack wild animals with a slingshot. Sue Zoo for $$$ when the tormented animal tries to escape.
Don’t take a slingshot to a tiger fight. This event is a disaster all the way around. 2 mauled guys, a death, the destruction of a rare tiger, and financial mess for the zoo and city. Lots of heads will role on this one.
I don’t think these three young men were thinking of money. They were drinking and decided teasing the tiger was a good idea. If they were drunk - say, if blood tests show alcohol in their system - then they are not going to get a dime from a reasonable jury.
If the evidence is true, they taunted the tiger while drunk.
It’s a shame the tiger had to die.
Kulbir is now bits?
NY Post material must be excerpted in all circumstances. Please make a note of it.
What else can you say? The Tiger was in his own environment minding his own business. Now he is dead because three people thought it would be funny to taunt him. How funny is it now with one dead and two severely injured???? Not so funny huh, guys? I’m sorry people are dead and injured but am sorry a beautiful, gorgeous wild animal had to be put down because of them. Who would go to a zoo and taunt animals anyway? Nothing better to do? OK ... let’s go to the zoo and tease one of the most dangerous creatures we can find. Sorry fellas, I think this might be something you brought on yourself if this article is factual.
They appear to be Punjabis from India, possibly Sikhs.
And the tiger rightly removed them from the gene pool. Taunting a tiger is a special kind of stupid.
I agree with your statement and screen name.
If in fact they did provoke the animal then the saddest thing is the tiger that was shot and killed for doing what any animal would do and most people also would do. She did not deserve to die for acting like the animal she was.
I have absolutely no sympathy for the boy killed or the ones injured should the provoking of these animals be proved.
Hold muh Vodka....
The police shot the wrong animal.
Yes, Natural Selection at work.
“Amritpal Dhaliwal, 19, and his brother, Kulbir, 23’
Sikhs, and from a very much honored clan of warriors in India. Not good at all!
SLINGSHOTS
Happy New Year, San Francisco Zoo
When I was a little girl, a friendly keeper at the San Francisco Zoo invited me into a cage and let me hold a koala bear. It was a thrilling moment. And one not likely to be repeated in today's climate of institutional fear over "deep-pocket" lawsuits.
Because the topic of my doctoral research and subsequent publications was public exhibitions of masculinity among young male humans, my antenna went up on Christmas when I heard about the tiger attack at the S.F. Zoo.
What caught my interest was the initial news report that the tiger attacked three young men who had been lingering by the tiger's cage after the zoo had closed - possibly ignoring other potential victims.
Another detail increased my professional interest. The two surviving victims, brothers age 23 and 19, were hostile and uncooperative with police. Think about it: If you were stalked and mauled by a rampaging tiger, why would you try to mislead and obstruct investigators?
A third revelation of note was that these brothers, Kulbir and Amritpal Dhaliwal, were awaiting trial for a recent display of alleged drunken aggression. In that Oct. 9 incident, police caught the brothers chasing two men; after their arrest they allegedly cursed police and kicked the police car's security partition. They are scheduled to appear in court in a couple of weeks on misdemeanor charges of public intoxication and resisting arrest.
Interestingly, it was the older of these belligerent brothers that Tatiana the tiger first attacked; the unfortunate Carlos Sousa Jr. was apparently killed when he intervened to save his friend.
While speculation persists about the victims' potential contribution to the attack, the media are focusing more on the height of the wall outside of the tiger grotto's moat. Is it built to the height of the recommended standards of the 21st century? Of course not. It is 67 years old. And in all those years, not one tiger has escaped. Indeed, experts say that around the world thousands of tigers are kept in enclosures of roughly the same height, and they don't escape.
As one wildlife expert commented, the ultimate explanation for Tatiana's attack is not the height of the wall, but the "stimulus" she was reacting to. "Tigers around the world are perfectly safe behind 10-foot or 12-foot walls," said Martine Colette, founder of a wildlife refuge in Southern California. "There had to have been a tremendous stimulus that made the tiger react the way she did."
If indeed the tiger was provoked, as some suspect, this would conform with a typical display of masculine aggression. These displays - which often take the form of sexual aggression or antigay harassment - serve the functions of proving masculinity, social bonding, and the celebration of male power. In these forms of participatory theater, the targets - whether they be women, gay men, or even, as in this case, a tiger - serve as interchangeable dramatic props. (See my article on this topic.)
While no avenue of investigation should be ignored, I hope the media and investigators will focus as much attention on the likely provocation as in Monday morning quarterbacking of the zoo's response. As a struggling public institution whose aim is to educate the public about wildlife conservation and endangered species, the S.F. Zoo can ill afford a deep-pocket verdict based on misplaced castigation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.