Skip to comments.
TIGER BROTHERS HAD SLINGSHOTS
New York Post ^
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]
An empty vodka bottle was also found in a car used by Amritpal Dhaliwal, 19, and his brother, Kulbir, 23, on the day of the mauling, which left 17-year-old Carlos Sousa Jr. dead, according to the source.
The discoveries could be an indication that the brothers may have taunted the 350-pound Siberian tiger before it leapt from its grotto.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Local News; Pets/Animals
KEYWORDS: amritpal; animalworshippers; banglist; darwinawardees; kulbir; libertarians; misanthropes; slingshots; tiger; zoo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 281-296 next last
To: MHT
"They are not cooperating with police because they know their actions that night will effect their ability to get a big settlement. "Also, I'm sure cruelty to animals is a felony in CA and drunkeness is not a valid excuse. They had been arrested in OCt for doing the same to people. I wonder if they were using their slingshots there too?
221
posted on
01/01/2008 12:57:43 PM PST
by
spunkets
("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
To: spunkets
If you were the director for the zoo, I can guarantee the boys would double their cash settlement.
Only a fool would claim that the tiger enclosure was adequate when it clearly was not.
If the zoo was convinced that the enclosure was adequate, they would not be adding reinforcements to bring it up to current standards.
Please provide the statements from all the experts who now claims that the wall was adequate.
To: spunkets
Did they ever confirm if the sneaker footprint near the wall was one of their shoes?
223
posted on
01/01/2008 1:03:42 PM PST
by
MHT
To: Sacajaweau
Is this real? When's the last time you ran into anyone with a slingshot? I haven't seen one since the 50's.I bought one back from New Hampshire as a souvenir for my 9-year old daughter. She loves it. We've had some fun with it, and look forward to having more in the springtime when the weather is more conducive.
224
posted on
01/01/2008 1:04:11 PM PST
by
Maceman
To: Maceman
Slingshots are still available in most any sporting goods store and many dollar stores.
Even in CA.
225
posted on
01/01/2008 1:07:47 PM PST
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: MHT
"Did they ever confirm if the sneaker footprint near the wall was one of their shoes? "I don't know. I think that tidbit came from Cheif Fong, so there must have been some shoe print on the top of the rail.
226
posted on
01/01/2008 1:11:39 PM PST
by
spunkets
("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
To: Caramelgal
THis cat has a history:
A quote from when this cat mauled a caretaker on Dec. 2, 2006: "EVEN AS A CUB, Tatiana was noted for her "quick tempered" personality compared to her more mellow siblings."
227
posted on
01/01/2008 1:12:46 PM PST
by
Sacajaweau
("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
To: Mr. Brightside
The zoo DID NOT take all reasonably precautions to contain the animal. The zoos walls were 4 feet below recommendations.
The zoo was warned in the 60's that a tiger was endanger of escaping so they filled the moat with water to make it harder for it to escape. When that tiger died. They drained the moat.
Ten years ago, a woman and her 3 year old son had a close call with a tiger nearly jumping out of this same enclosure. The zoo did nothing.
So since the 1960s no tiger actually ever escaped despite the presumption that the wall was 4 feet too low for over 40 years. One close call ten years ago and nearly does not constitute an attack or a history on the zoos part of reckless endangerment.
Police have recanted. All of the victims shoes were accounted for. There was NO shoe in the moat.
But the police are investigating a shoe print:
Shoe print may hold clue to zoo tiger escape
Does a "Do Not Lean On The Glass" sign substitute for safety glass at the alligator farm? "This glass is plenty strong as long as people don't tap on it."
Of course one would reasonably presume that the glass would not shatter if I merely tapped on it, but what is my responsibility as a patron of this establishment to follow the rules? If the sign says "Do Not Lean On The Glass" it means what it says. If I go to an alligator farm I do so with the understanding that these are very real and potentially dangerous animals and if I dont follow the instructions posted for my safety, then am I without culpability if I choose to ignore the rules?
Limited liability statements do not absolve negligence on the part of people entrusted to protect the public. If your family was on a plane that crashed after it ran out of gas, how much comfort would you take from their disclaimer, "There are risks in flying. All people assume full responsibility for their own safety."
If Im on an airplane and the plan crashes after running out of gas, I am in no way responsible for that sort of negligence as I had no part in or control of that situation. But if Im on a plane and I get up during the flight and attempt to open the emergency hatch who is to blame then?
If I go to an amusement park and ride the roller coaster and Im given clear instructions not to attempt to disable the restraints while the ride is in motion and to keep my arms and legs inside the ride but instead I ignore the rules and I jimmy the restraint open anyway and am injured: is it the parks fault or my own?
I am sure that installing a "Do Not Taunt The Tiger" signs was definitely cheaper than upgrading the enclosure to current safety recommendations. But you can see how effective it was.
It hasnt yet been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Zoos enclosure did not meet safety recommendations. Besides, every zoo or aquarium Ive every visited has signs with instructions not to throw things into the enclosure, not to go past a certain point for your own safety and not to yell or purposely taunt the animals. Sign may be cheap but they are there for a purpose.
The two main culprits are the zoo and the accrediting organization. As far as I am concerned, they can share equally in 80 percent of the multimillion dollar figment.
So you are saying these guys, even if they failed to follow the rules and taunted the tiger into attacking them, possibly with sling shots, bear no responsibility at all for their actions and are entitled to a multi-million dollar settlement?
228
posted on
01/01/2008 1:13:56 PM PST
by
Caramelgal
(Rely on the spirit and meaning of the teachings, not on the words or superficial interpretations)
To: Mr. Brightside
"If you were the director for the zoo,"If I were the zoo's director, the pit would have been deeper. That project would have begun after my examination. That's because I know cats, not because I care that anyone mistreating the cats would get chewed up.
"Only a fool would claim that the tiger enclosure was adequate"
The pit was adequate.
229
posted on
01/01/2008 1:16:44 PM PST
by
spunkets
("Freedom is about authority", Rudy Giuliani, gun grabber)
To: Caramelgal
The zoo is responsible for keeping animals, even and especially enraged animals, away from the public.
The zoo failed miserably. If the tiger got out after an earthquake or a tsunami, that would be forgivable.
But they fail to protect their patrons from enraged animals? That could be, and may be, considered criminal negligence.
The zoo was arrongant enough to try and handle the situation themselves, keeping armed police oficers outside the zoo for six minutes before they were allowed to come in and ultimately rescue one of the brothers.
The wall was too low. They had many reports over 40 years of tigers jumping the moat. They delayed the police rescue of a victim.
The zoo will pay big and some of the officials may even have charges filed against them.
To: spunkets
"Only a fool would claim that the tiger enclosure was adequate" spunkets: The pit was adequate. I guess you have made my point.
To: Mr. Brightside
I think in the end, we’re going to be surprised at how the cat got loose....and the boys had nothing to do with it.
232
posted on
01/01/2008 1:36:18 PM PST
by
Sacajaweau
("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
To: barryg
Sounds like the police showed up 5 minutes too soon. What a shame.
To: Mr. Brightside
The zoo will pay big and some of the officials may even have charges filed against them.
Perhaps you are right but then shouldn't the two survivors, if it is proven that they shot the tiger with sling shots and didnt follow the rules also have charges filed against them?
234
posted on
01/01/2008 1:45:20 PM PST
by
Caramelgal
(Rely on the spirit and meaning of the teachings, not on the words or superficial interpretations)
To: All
Just some thoughts:
Had the boys been drinking, they would have already been charged with "Public drunkedness".
Dangling a leg?? The wounds are all head wounds and upper torso...More like a pounce than a "pull down".
Wonder how much Tatiana the breeder was insured for? Betcha a million dollars!!
The insurance company would not pay for the first mauling by this cat last December.
235
posted on
01/01/2008 1:46:51 PM PST
by
Sacajaweau
("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
To: Mr. Brightside
I agree that multiple liabilities exist.
I wonder if the slingshots were a type liberal 'throw-down' weapons. ;^)
236
posted on
01/01/2008 1:48:09 PM PST
by
Cvengr
(Every believer is a grenade. Arrogance is the grenade pin. Pull the pin and fragment your life.)
To: muawiyah
You’re all wet on this one.
237
posted on
01/01/2008 1:52:20 PM PST
by
Palladin
(Cackle..cackle..cackle. Hillary laid another egg.)
To: Sacajaweau
“Boys”?????
You’re calling a 17 year old, a 19 year old, and a 23 year old “boys”????
You must be one of those Hillarycare advocates, who think that “children’s healtcare” extends from 0-25 years of age.
238
posted on
01/01/2008 2:09:30 PM PST
by
Spktyr
(Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
To: All
Here’s what amazes me: people on this site are usually extremely skeptical of the MSM, as well they should be. But here we have people accepting as gospel a report from ONE newspaper, credited to “a source” (not even “a police source” or “a zoo source”-just “a source”), just because it supports what they already want to believe. Like the NY Post has sources in the SFPD or at the zoo that the local SF papers don’t have. C’mon people—what happened to your critical thinking abilities?
To: barryg; digger48
This sad case just keeps getting interestinger and interestinger.
Thanks for your insight, digger48. I also got very suspicious when I heard that the brothers had told each other not to say anything to the police. If and when I was able, if it had happened to me, I’d be telling them everything they wanted to know, but then I would not have taunted the tiger, as these boys probably did.
240
posted on
01/01/2008 2:51:47 PM PST
by
Theresawithanh
(This is my tagline. FRED!!!!!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 281-296 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson