How many times have you been to the zoo? Any zoo. I have been to several zoos across this country, multiple times. I have never seen any animal become aggressive towards any human. Oh, I have heard stories of an animal attacking or becoming aggressive with a feeder or trainer, while in the enclosure with the animal, but not towards the general public.
This recent case involving the tiger that attacked and killed a teenager at the San Francisco zoo illustrates several behaviors that humans continue to engage in, that, in this case, resulted in the death of a young man, the death of a wild animal, wasted police manpower, wasted taxpayers money, allowing more lawyers to peddle their trade of lies and shifting blame, and nearly caused a zoo to lose accreditation.
All this, because three men felt they could not enjoy themselves on a visit to the zoo without getting ‘high’. They ignored warning signs by taunting wild animals, they shunned common sense by taunting wild animals, they broke the law by being drunk in public, they broke the law by possessing and using illegal drugs, they are helping to keep the illegal drug trade alive (one of our biggest roadblocks to making this society as strong and productive as it could be) and they paid a terrible price. But so did a bunch of other people.
The public can no longer enjoy the pleasure of seeing that tiger at the zoo because of the careless and stupid actions of these three young men.
On Christmas day, 2007, there were reports of a group of men taunting animals at the zoo. The public saw these actions and reported it to the authorities. Carlos Sousa Jr, 17, Paul Dhaliwal, 19, and Kulbir Dhaliwal 24, were witnessed yelling at the tiger, waving their arms aggressively and standing on the railing of the enclosure. This, obviously, must have been acceptable behavior from their alcohol induced point of view.
What this tiger saw was some humans exhibiting some unusual and extraordinary behavior directed towards it and the tiger reacted.
Once the animal climbed over the fence, an action he never had reason to attempt previously, he attacked the provokers. Just wild animal reactionary behavior.
The lawyers say, “if the wall was higher this would not have happened”. I say bullshit to that. If these guys had not acted like damned fools the tiger would not have acted like he did. If you are going to use hindsight for cause/effect then go the whole way. If we didn’t live in a society where we thought it acceptable to cage wild animals, this would not have happened. If we didn’t live in a society where lawyers are allowed to lie to keep criminals and wrong doers from being punished, these lawyers would not make stupid statements like this. Well, actually, this is a real stretch because they would still lie due to their twisted view of what justice is.
After these guy’s actions had been reported to zoo authorities, and after the tiger reacted to their taunting, their cries for help were ignored. Why? Because since these intoxicated men had exhibited such rowdy behavior no one believed their story of an escaped animal. This is just human nature. We figure they are drunk or mentally unstable, so how can we take them seriously about anything? We tend to ignore people who have shown themselves to be idiots. Plain and simple. How can anyone know when these guys calls for help is serious after displaying such idiotic behavior? There is no way to know unless witnesses verify their need for help. This is another good reason not to drink and behave like children I public.
After it was verified that their story was indeed true, calls went out to 911 and help did arrive.
Their lawyer is trying to put the blame back onto the zoo by saying if help had arrived sooner the boy would still be alive. In reality the blame lies with the men themselves due to their previous behavior. If they had not acted like fools then their story would have been taken seriously when it was first told. This action by their lawyer is just another underhanded trick they like to use called shifting the blame and placing doubt where it does not belong. So, yeah, we can all speculate. The bottom line is they alone are responsible for their actions. They alone chose to ignore common sense and tease a wild animal. It doesn’t matter that the animal was caged it is simply a stupid thing to so.
Paramedics arrived on the scene as quickly as they could after receiving the call and found a large puncture wound in the victims neck. It is doubtful he could have survived the attack if they had gotten there any sooner.
Police found the tiger sitting down not bothering anyone and when they approached it got up and moved away. Just as you would expect it to. At this point, they claim it started to attack another person, which I personally think is bull. They saw this as justification for killing the animal rather than try to get it back into the enclosure, a particularly daunting task I am sure.
How long has this tiger lived in this enclosure without being a threat to the public? As a result of these idiots actions, the zoo will have to spend more money to protect the animals and the public from fools such as these guys.
Toxicology results show Paul Dhaliwal’s blood alcohol content at 0.16, twice the legal limit. Why is it still acceptable to go out into public drunk? His brother, Kulbir, was within the legal limit, which showed some responsibility on his part since he drove them to the zoo. But still, he was drinking and driving.
Upon first being questioned they both lied about taunting the tiger or any other animal, even though many others had reported them doing exactly this. They have finally admitted to this only after they realized other people actually saw them do it and told authorities. They thought is was okay to lie to authorities. Another problem with this society, in general. They thought everyone would believe that they were innocently strolling past the tiger enclosure when it lunged at them. They actually believed that the thousands of people who have walked past this same enclosure without any indication of aggressiveness on the part of the tiger would believe their story.
Their lies brought about the possibility of a law suit against the zoo. Did they think there would not be an investigation? Why would they risk being found out that not only were they stupid enough to do what they did but would also be found to be liars and lawbreakers by being intoxicated in public?
I know, I know, they were trying to cover their own butts. But this is exactly my point. If they had told the truth to begin with, accepting their own responsibility, then the taxpayers would not have had to pay for the investigation and these lawyers would not have been given the chance to participate in their lies by trying to shift the blame from them to the zoo.
This lawyer could have kept his mouth shut and waited for the investigation to conclude to determine whether or not his client was lying. But no, he had to back up their story in the press. Is he stupid enough to believe their story of innocence or just jumping at the chance to get his name in the paper even if it is based on a lie? This is another problem with this society, lawyers who try cases in the media in an attempt to cover up these guys responsibility.
Where is the common sense and common decency that we are born with? Where is the intelligence that we humans know these are not actions to be taken against a wild animal and against the society that we live amongst?
Oh, and yes, there was marijuana involved. Can’t these guys get high enough with just one or the other? Marijuana is supposed to make you mellow not stupid like alcohol does. The waste of money spent on ingesting two different drugs that counteract each other just shows another level of stupidity and weakness.
When they told police they each had a couple of shots of vodka, everyone knows instinctively that ‘a couple of shots’ always translates to more than just ‘a couple of shots’. So they lied to police about this as well.
Lack of respect for authorities, and themselves, and personal weaknesses resulted in the death of their friend and the outing of themselves in public as liars. Was getting ‘high’ worth it?
No comments:
Post a Comment