Posted on 01/16/2008 12:35:55 PM PST by repinwi
San Francisco police today began their review of the cell phones and car belonging to the survivors of a Christmas Day tiger attack at the San Francisco Zoo, officials said.
< snip >
A San Francisco Superior Court judge granted a search warrant allowing police to examine the cell phones and car on Tuesday.
For police and city officials to get the warrant, they needed to show probable cause of felony wrongdoing, a city official said.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
Why do you want to tell lies like that? The cops said there was no slingshots.
Uh, never take a cell phone to a tiger fight? Naw, that doesn't work for me..........
Um, never take a beer to a tiger fight? Nope, don't like that one either............
How about........never take a rock to a tiger fight? No, I like slingshot the best.
Yeah, never take a slingshot to a tiger fight.........
Two: Did they really have slingshots with them?
Doesn't matter
Three: If they had been drinking what was their blood alcohol level?
Doesn't matter
Four: Do you really think that someone deserves to be chewed and killed by a tiger for merely teasing it somewhat?
Doesn't matter. To determine who "deserves" any particular punishment requires a creature be cognizant of the concept of "right and wrong". Tigers are incapable of such cognizance. They react to stimuli and act instinctively. what are you going to say? "Bad tiger! No femur!"
Five: Where were the officials that are supposed to stop this type of teasing(if such really occurred)?
Apparently on Christmas break? I don't know. But I'm guessing the perps were on the lookout for just such "people" as they engaged in their activities. If not, then it was truly unfortunate timing for the perps.
Six: Why are you not calling the zoo officials assclowns for having a fence 4 feet lower than reccomended for containing tigers?
You have a point, there. Considering the number of "ass-cowboys" that SF has to placate, it probably had something to do with allocation of resources. Gotta keep those bath houses running without prejudice, ya know!
To answer your question about who evades Christmas to go get drunk at the zoo, I really don't know. What I do know is that evading Christmas and getting drunk at the zoo isn't a death penalty offense.
There were no lawyers present, I assume. An animal acted as it's nature dictates. Morons died. It's a case for the Darwin awards, not a legal challenge.
That's kinda like saying do you really think that someone deserves to be electrocuted merely because he was standing outside in the rain beating a power transformer box with a long metal pole.
Um, well, yeah.
:}
If we really wanted to be kind, we should discourage children from becoming trial lawyers. This might produce a world where the gentle Moron Slap early on would knock some sense into them before the Terminal Moron Slap kicks in.
“Nobody “deserves” to die for being a moron.”
Lets face it, all young men are “morons” to some degree. I know I was and am fortunate not be dead or in jail. They didn’t deserve to die, but sometimes, you underestimate the risk of what you are doing.
Cindy,
Yes I would help someone from being killed, but they the three fools let their (jaybird mouths(actions) overload their hummingbird butts.
I would have arrested the three for cruelty to an animal if I were there.
Stupid Is As Stupid Does, applies to the three (morons) in this case.
Respectfully,
NSNR
LOL......when all else fails, in the avenue of discussion here on FR, oftentimes said discussion degenerates into personal attacks..........
I'll let others decide on who is the "immature child"...........
:}
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.