Escaped tiger shot after killing zoo visitor! [Archive]

Aramek

12-26-2007, 03:36 AM

SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- An escaped tiger attacked and killed a zoo patron Tuesday afternoon in a cafe at the San Francisco Zoo, a spokeswoman for the San Francisco Fire Department told CNN.

The tiger was shot and killed after attacking two other visitors, Mindy Talmadge said. Both of the victims were transported to San Francisco General Hospital with life-threatening injuries, she said.

A spokeswoman at the hospital would not give out any information about the victims.

"Apparently, right around closing time -- there was a pen with four tigers in it -- one of the tigers got out," Talmadge said. "The tiger went into a cafe at the zoo and attacked a patron. That person ended up dying at the scene."

Police arrived on the scene as the tiger attacked two other patrons, Talmadge said.

"They shot the tiger, and the tiger is deceased," she said.
Talmadge said the 125-acre zoo was locked down after the incident and all the facility's other animals were accounted for, including three other tigers that had been in the same enclosure with the escaped tiger.

Initially, officials feared some or all of the other tigers may have escaped, but later determined they had not, Talmadge said.
The 78-year-old zoo closed at 5 p.m. PT, and authorities received word of the escaped tiger at about 5:15 p.m. Police, fire and zoo officials remain on the scene investigating, Talmadge said.

A year ago, one of the zoo's Siberian tigers attacked a keeper during a public feeding. The keeper survived and recovered from her injuries.

California's Division of Occupation Safety and Health later determined that the zoo was at fault in the incident because of hazardous conditions in the Lion House, which houses the zoo's large cats, and lack of specialized safety training for employees. The zoo made OSH-ordered changes. The Lion House was closed for more than six months after that incident.

The zoo has Siberian tigers and rarer and smaller Sumatran tigers. It was not clear which subspecies of tiger was involved in the incident.

My only regret is that all that delicious, delicious Tiger is just going to go to waste.

At least let me have the pelt! I've always wanted a real Tigerskin rug.

ig.

12-26-2007, 03:56 AM

This story merits an intellectually charged debate.

Oh wait no it doesnt hurrrr

Mochan

12-26-2007, 04:01 AM

I love it when a story has no substance and they just have to keep repeating the same couple of lines switched up a bit with different words through out the entire piece.

Aramek

12-26-2007, 05:20 AM

I love it when a story has no substance and they just have to keep repeating the same couple of lines switched up a bit with different words through out the entire piece.
That's the CNN writing staff!

Course...I must admit it is hard to write news stories. I do not envy their jorbs.

Yugure

12-26-2007, 05:52 AM

I'm not mad that they shot the tiger- it was to save the other 2 people.

What I am mad about is the idiot that somehow left the tiger gate open. The only way for only ONE of the said tigers to escape from the same pen would be if someone puposefully let it out OR got out at the same time as the person who entered the area last. If there wasn't an alarm sent out or proper security- well, that Zoo needs to go down. Like- now.

Mochan

12-26-2007, 04:29 PM

If there wasn't an alarm sent out or proper security- well, that Zoo needs to go down. Like- now.

You must realize that this happened within minutes, there's really no way they could have made any 'proper alarm or security'. Once they realized something was happening, they took care of it.

Nuko

12-26-2007, 04:32 PM

My only regret is that all that delicious, delicious Tiger is just going to go to waste.

At least let me have the pelt! I've always wanted a real Tigerskin rug.

There are so many things wrong with what you said.

I dont think they should have shot it, thats really cruel, it's just instinct, really D: I mean I feel sorry for the families that have to live with the deaths but.. they are no better by killing the poor thing.

Chris Nagy

12-26-2007, 04:59 PM

Law of the concrete jungle. Why is killing okay when it is "just instinct" for a tiger, but not okay when it is "just instinct" for the people trying to prevent more deaths? If the tiger were a person who shot someone and threatened to shoot more people, he would have been shot dead as well. I don't understand where this double-standard on killing is coming from.

Nuko

12-26-2007, 05:04 PM

Well , I dont think the tiger knows that the humans are helpful, It's not in the right habitat that it might be used to, see in the jungle, they know no better im guessing, they see an opportunity for food or danger approaching they ..well, Attack.

Yugure

12-27-2007, 04:46 AM

Soulcrux42

12-27-2007, 10:27 AM

two words
"Bear Tranquilizers"
But then again, why would they want that when they could have some good old fun at legal killings of things youre not used to killing
Yay?

Mochan

12-27-2007, 04:00 PM

two words
"Bear Tranquilizers"

I and several other people would agree with you...except for the families. They would demand that that tiger be put down if it wasn't already. And of course, the Zoo would have to do it. So one way or another, that tiger wasn't going to survive.

Soulcrux42

12-27-2007, 04:03 PM

Dam families...
always whingin about their hurt ones
of course it makes sense to kill the thing, add more unnecessary bloodshed!
The f*cker who left the gate open
he might deserve to die
more than the tiger itself...
poor thing =(

fukkatsu

12-27-2007, 04:12 PM

First of all... there is no need to curse *points to above*. Second of all do we know for sure if someone left a gate open? It seems like the more obvious reason but do we know for sure before we start calling random zoo people malicious curse words?

Being an animal lover and activist I understand that it was a grave loss but in an emergency situation you can't wait for tranquilizers to kick in because if you have never used them then you don't know that they take at least 15-20 minutes to bring the animal down. Most animals go into rage even when they are first shot as well and can be equally as dangerous as they were the moment before...

Unfortunately, in this case, shooting it probably was the best solution for everyone involved.

[EDIT]I want to add that you can't use bear tranquilizers on a tiger, thus them being BEAR tranquilizers and not ones specifically made for a tiger's body mass. That would most likely kill it which would have just led to the same result.

Soulcrux42

12-27-2007, 04:33 PM

meh
better death than getting shot up to high hell
and cussing at people who cause the deaths of animals is FUN

Cheshire

12-27-2007, 05:07 PM

meh
better death than getting shot up to high hell
and cussing at people who cause the deaths of animals is FUNLike fukkatsu said, in an emergency situation like that, you can't take the time to wait around an be cautious. If they'd taken the time to shoot the tiger with tranquilizers and then waited for them to kick in, who knows how many more people could have been hurt or killed by the now doubly-enraged tiger. The people at the zoo took what seemed like the best course of action to protect any more people from being injured.

Dam families...
always whingin about their hurt ones
And if someone in your family was randomly and needlessly killed, I think you'd be "whining", too.

Soulcrux42

12-27-2007, 06:53 PM

I wouldnt want to take revenge on the poor animal though...
Its not Its fault
And I know feel unsafe at zoos seeing as security personnel seem to have firearms.
"According to the San Francisco Chronicle, police found a shoe and blood in an area between the gate and the edge of the animal's 25- to 30-foot-wide moat, raising the possibility that one of the victims dangled a leg or other body part over the edge of the moat.

Police could not confirm the Chronicle's report to The Associated Press on Thursday.".
They think It was taunted

Chris Nagy

12-28-2007, 12:01 AM

two words
"Bear Tranquilizers"
But then again, why would they want that when they could have some good old fun at legal killings of things youre not used to killing
Yay?

Dam families...
always whingin about their hurt ones
of course it makes sense to kill the thing, add more unnecessary bloodshed!
The f*cker who left the gate open
he might deserve to die
more than the tiger itself...
poor thing =(

meh
better death than getting shot up to high hell
and cussing at people who cause the deaths of animals is FUN
I'm breaking my "Try not to reply seriously to anyone born in the 90s" rule, but what alternate reality are you experiencing? You are a prime example of the type of person who gives animal rights activists a bad reputation. I know you are speaking emotionally and not rationally, but there is a limit to how stupid an opinion can be before people are no longer bound to be overly polite about it.

First, it was "Bear Tranquilizers. Why needlessly kill it?" Then, when informed that bear tranquilizers would probably kill the tiger, it was "a better death than getting shot up to high hell." So much for the needless killing angle. Nevermind the part about tranquilizers still taking a good amount of time to kick in, or the part about the tiger having killed upwards of three people (hard to tell if someone is going to live with "life threatening injuries" at the scene.)

You know what, I don't even want to finish this reply. I will simply end it on this note:

And I know feel unsafe at zoos seeing as security personnel seem to have firearms.
Yeah, because you're the one in danger from security. :facefault
"Today, three people were shot and killed by zoo security for disregarding a 'Do Not Feed the Animals' sign."

Soulcrux42

12-28-2007, 02:20 AM

So...
much...
Aggression
Yes!
After all these years of targettig idiots whos posts have gone overboard, ive experienced it...
And come out of It same as I always did
You must of course take into consideration my only half serious statements, and covering my mistakes to not seem stupid
Oh well
Just Imagine If one of themsnaps, they have access to high power able-to-kill-tigers weapons

This has gone too far!
*Puff of smoke*
I will leave with one final statement
"These are the internets, take nothing seriously"

Chris Nagy

12-28-2007, 04:08 AM

Too many people hide behind "don't take the internet seriously" as a way to validate their opinions, by attempting to lower the bar to the point that anything is acceptable. Hitting enter after each sentence and using selective punctuation is not a style, proper writing form and halfway-decent grammar is always in vogue. On a related note, stream-of-consciousness posting (in other words, lines that seem at home in an ADHD-addled preteen's journal) will, in fact, make you seem like an ADHD-addled preteen.

Just a few friendly tips to help make your next excursion into posting a less embarrassing, facepalm-less experience for everyone involved.

Soulcrux42

12-28-2007, 04:34 AM

I write like that cuz thats just the way i like to write on forums and on my Lj
Not cuz its sylish
Its just what I do
It demonstrates pauses alot better
Oh well...

ig.

12-28-2007, 04:37 AM

I write like that cuz thats just the way i like to write on forums and on my Lj
Not cuz its sylish
Its just what I do
It demonstrates pauses alot better
Oh well...

You come off as a giant mental pause.

Yugure

12-28-2007, 05:43 AM

You come off as a giant mental pause. ...end personal attacks now. However- if that was meant in sarcasm I understand.

Too many people hide behind "don't take the internet seriously" as a way to validate their opinions, by attempting to lower the bar to the point that anything is acceptable. Hitting enter after each sentence and using selective punctuation is not a style, proper writing form and halfway-decent grammar is always in vogue. On a related note, stream-of-consciousness posting (in other words, lines that seem at home in an ADHD-addled preteen's journal) will, in fact, make you seem like an ADHD-addled preteen.

Just a few friendly tips to help make your next excursion into posting a less embarrassing, facepalm-less experience for everyone involved. END PERSONAL ATTACKS NOW. this is not the place to argue internet stupidity. If you wanna do that, make a new thread. You're off-topic.

So knock it off. Besides- many people can't take reading huge blocks of text on computer screens. For me, it's because I have poor eyesight and it's frustrating when the pixels blend together. Also, I'm not gonna bother writing formally due to the fact I gain nothing from it.

Again- off topic and attacking. Stop it.

ig.

12-28-2007, 07:28 AM

Also, I'm not gonna bother writing formally due to the fact I gain nothing from it.

Hey Chris, do you smell flapjacks? Oh no, wait - that's civilization crumbling around us.

Vincent_the_Paladdin

12-28-2007, 08:32 AM

Why doesn't wild and crazy s#^! like this happen when I go to the zoo? But seriously, I feel bad for the unlucky person who got attacked and I feel bad for the tiger who had like only some time of freedom before being shot.

fukkatsu

12-28-2007, 02:04 PM

Chris Nagy

12-28-2007, 05:48 PM

...end personal attacks now. However- if that was meant in sarcasm I understand.

END PERSONAL ATTACKS NOW. this is not the place to argue internet stupidity. If you wanna do that, make a new thread. You're off-topic.

So knock it off. Besides- many people can't take reading huge blocks of text on computer screens. For me, it's because I have poor eyesight and it's frustrating when the pixels blend together. Also, I'm not gonna bother writing formally due to the fact I gain nothing from it.

Again- off topic and attacking. Stop it.

Hold a moment, lemme check where we are again. Oh, hey, it's To Be or Not To Be, that place where the kidskin gloves come off. Now then, if you are done trying member-moderate (a.k.a. trying to enforce some sort of policy where you have no jurisdiction), let me point out a few things to you:

1: I have spent a lot of time with ADHD children, and I have read the things they've written. So, from a technical standpoint, what you consider a personal attack is, in fact, an observation.

2: Writing isn't an either/or option. It isn't either "Press Enter After Every Sentence" or "Never Touch Enter At All." People use things call paragraphs, it spaces a text out without making it look like crappy poetry. If your eyesight doesn't support paragraphs, then you must live in a personal hell.

3: No, I'm not off-topic. Off-topic would require posting about something totally unrelated to the topic. I replied to an opinion, the reply to my reply was an attempted justification, I replied to that justification. If you consider that off-topic enough to start a new thread, I can't imagine how you actually stand reading a forum. Oh, wait, I just checked out the abortion thread. Turns out you are being a hypocrite.

Now then, if you are done being off-topic (when was this an etiquette thread?) people can go back to discussing the slaying of man-killing tigers.

Hey Chris, do you smell flapjacks? Oh no, wait - that's civilization crumbling around us.
Haha, that made my day. My pre-apocalyptic day.

Soulcrux42

12-28-2007, 09:55 PM

Hold a moment, lemme check where we are again. Oh, hey, it's To Be or Not To Be, that place where the kidskin gloves come off. Now then, if you are done trying member-moderate (a.k.a. trying to enforce some sort of policy where you have no jurisdiction), let me point out a few things to you:

1: I have spent a lot of time with ADHD children, and I have read the things they've written. So, from a technical standpoint, what you consider a personal attack is, in fact, an observation.

2: Writing isn't an either/or option. It isn't either "Press Enter After Every Sentence" or "Never Touch Enter At All." People use things call paragraphs, it spaces a text out without making it look like crappy poetry. If your eyesight doesn't support paragraphs, then you must live in a personal hell.

3: No, I'm not off-topic. Off-topic would require posting about something totally unrelated to the topic. I replied to an opinion, the reply to my reply was an attempted justification, I replied to that justification. If you consider that off-topic enough to start a new thread, I can't imagine how you actually stand reading a forum. Oh, wait, I just checked out the abortion thread. Turns out you are being a hypocrite.

Now then, if you are done being off-topic (when was this an etiquette thread?) people can go back to discussing the slaying of man-killing tigers.

Haha, that made my day. My pre-apocalyptic day.

Yes, people use things called paragraphs. Paragraphs are the correct way of writing things, arent they? But I dont recall "Please write in paragraphs" being part of the forum rules. I
F
S
o
m
e
o
n
e

w
a
n
t
s

t
o

w
r
i
t
e

l
i
k
e

t
h
i
s
,
then it would annoy us all to hell, but theres nothing explicitly prohibitting people from doing so.

And just because theres no mods here doesnt mean you can personal attack

ig.

12-28-2007, 10:10 PM

There's also nothing explicity prohibiting people from swan diving off of an overpass into rush hour traffic, which is all sorts of unfortunate. Tigers or not.

There may not be mods around to enable a defense you are so incapable of forming, but we can acquiese by volunteering to stop this idiotic off-topic tangent by requesting a

t
h
r
e
a
d

l
o
c
k
!

Soulcrux42

12-28-2007, 10:48 PM

yes
i

a
g
r
e
e
threadlockwouldbegoodohmygoshmygfdumpedmetoday
waits
for
lock

Chris Nagy

12-29-2007, 03:46 PM

And just because theres no mods here doesnt mean you can personal attack

Based on your definition of "personal attack," I beg to differ. (http://voiceactingalliance.com/board/showpost.php?p=88028&postcount=40)

Yugure

12-29-2007, 09:27 PM

Based on your definition of "personal attack," I beg to differ. (http://voiceactingalliance.com/board/showpost.php?p=88028&postcount=40)

I don't give a crap about what tamtu said in that forum. Calling anyone names or making-fun of them for how they type is a personal attack. Which is NOT the point of a debate.

In debates it is the point to talk about the matter at and, which would be the tiger getting shot, and discuss if it was the right reason or what instead should have been done.

This thread is not about you ragging on other people's internet literacy. So yes, you were offtopic.

Soulcrux42

12-29-2007, 09:34 PM

I don't give a crap about what tamtu said in that forum. Calling anyone names or making-fun of them for how they type is a personal attack. Which is NOT the point of a debate.

In debates it is the point to talk about the matter at and, which would be the tiger getting shot, and discuss if it was the right reason or what instead should have been done.

This thread is not about you ragging on other people's internet literacy. So yes, you were offtopic.

Pwn'd oh wait, no attacking um yes I quite agree wtih Yugure, its quite an agreeable opinion which i agree to

Chris Nagy

12-29-2007, 10:02 PM

That's enough, children.

Bye, you obviously bitchy, sad excuse for a person!! Sayonara! Don't bother replying. :grin: Because I can't see your stupidity anymore.
Look familiar, Yugure? I love the smell of hypocrisy. Kindly grow up, and maybe think before you post.

And Soulcrux42, it's nice to see that you are giving paragraphs a try in the abortion thread. A for effort.

Now, since it seems only a matter of time before this after-school special of a thread gets locked, I have some advice for the both of you. Educate yourself by reading past threads, and grow some thicker skin.

Aramek

12-30-2007, 12:57 AM

I wonder what Tiger tastes like.

Probably lousy.

Predators tend to taste bad.

*sigh*

I guess I'll never know.

Yugure

12-30-2007, 01:52 AM

That's enough, children.

Look familiar, Yugure? I love the smell of hypocrisy. Kindly grow up, and maybe think before you post.

Now, since it seems only a matter of time before this after-school special of a thread gets locked, I have some advice for the both of you. Educate yourself by reading past threads, and grow some thicker skin.
My post was an annoyed responce to someone doing the same thing as you are now, but to the point where their foul language drove me nuts. AGAIN- knock it off with the insults. Maybe you should stop ignoring the point by bringing up past things that I have said or done?

What I said in a different thread has nothing to do with what I'm saying here.

Kevin Gillis

12-30-2007, 02:54 AM

How can you see those as insults? O.o

Chris Nagy

12-30-2007, 09:06 AM

Maybe you should stop ignoring the point by bringing up past things that I have said or done?

What I said in a different thread has nothing to do with what I'm saying here.
What was the point exactly? That you have no idea of what constitutes an insult? Outright, unapologetic hypocrisy (for example, insulting someone on another thread and then coming here to try and lecture me on threadiquette) is most often a sign of immaturity, so my telling you to grow up is hardly insulting. Telling you to think before you post is essentially the same thing; I'm telling you to try and not be so blatantly two-faced, especially if you are trying to call me out on something.

But apparently, that is all insults to you. I wonder how you've been able to cope with school and your fellow children if your skin is so thin as take what I've said to be insulting. I suppose you could be a coddled homeschooler, but I don't want to start supposing things about your life. I will say this, though: if you want me to insult you (and I mean real insults, personal insults), I can. But only if you ask really nicely.