Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Timeout
What are we saying....people can only have dogs if they put them behind a 20 ft fence?!!

I think what people are saying is that those who own or care for dangerous animals should secure them safely so they cannot harm others.

This is not hard to understand. If your chain is not strong enough to hold your rottweiller, you are to blame. If the prison's walls are not high enough to contain an enraged prisoner, then the prison is to blame. If the zoo's tiger enclosure does not keep the tiger inside, then the zoo is to blame.

158 posted on 01/01/2008 9:54:19 AM PST by Mr. Brightside
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]


To: All
Just a tidbit from Tatiana's past....after her first maul job.

She was bred in captivity.

Even as a cub, she was noted for her "quick tempered" personality compared to her more mellow siblings"

159 posted on 01/01/2008 9:59:10 AM PST by Sacajaweau ("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Brightside

Exactly!


166 posted on 01/01/2008 10:10:38 AM PST by Sue Perkick (And I hope that what I’ve done here today doesn’t force you to have a negative opinion of me….)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Brightside
This is not hard to understand. If your chain is not strong enough to hold your rottweiller, you are to blame. If the prison's walls are not high enough to contain an enraged prisoner, then the prison is to blame. If the zoo's tiger enclosure does not keep the tiger inside, then the zoo is to blame.

Interesting point of view but what if an intruder breaks into my home and my Rottie seriously wounds or kills them; am I responsible for not doing enough to keep the intruder from breaking into my home in the first place?

If a prison takes all reasonable precautions and safeguards to contain a violent offender but said offender still finds some way of escaping anyway, then you are saying that it’s the prison’s fault alone and that the escapee is not responsible for his actions?

If I were a juror, given the facts known at this time, I would have to consider:

1) There was a shoe found in the moat “inside” the enclosure indicating that at least one of the three had gone past the visitor’s barrier and placed a leg inside the enclosure.

2) The surviving two were uncooperative with the police.

3) They were found to have had sling shots in their possession – not exactly standard gear for a nice leisurely trip to the zoo and demonstrates a premeditation on their part.

4) If the enclosure was so inadequate and the tiger, so extremely aggressive, then why wasn’t the tiger jumping out on a regular basis?

5) Did the zoo pass previous safety inspections? Where they compliant?

6) Did the zoo have signs and warnings posted saying not to taunt the animals or enter past a certain point and not to place body parts inside the enclosure?

7) Did the zoo’s ticket stub have a “limited liability statement” printed on it? A lot of public venues like theme parks and sports stadiums have them in order to protect themselves from lawsuits by people knowingly engaging in stupid and dangerous behaviors.

In civil law there is a legal precept called “contributory negligence”. It basically says that the party being sued is in some part negligent but that the complainant’s actions were so out of the norm and equally negligent, thus ending in a legal draw.

So far I’m leaning toward “contributory negligence”. The three “youts” were old enough to know better and most likely did not follow the posted rules and intentionally provoked a dangerous animal to attack them.

How much do any of you want to make a bet that one of the three guys was filming the event on a cell phone camera with hopes of being the next “Jackass” or YouTube video star.

If so, they got their wish, they got their 15 minutes of fame. And one of them died for it.
192 posted on 01/01/2008 11:35:06 AM PST by Caramelgal (Rely on the spirit and meaning of the teachings, not on the words or superficial interpretations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson