I'm a teacher and I would like to say that I know kids pretty well. I would be lying if I said that though. Children are unpredictable, intelligent creatures. Which brings me to the gorilla incident at the Cincinnatti Zoo. Where, if you are not aware, a child was able to get into the gorilla exhibit. The mom was taking a picture and she thought her son was right beside her. Often in my own classroom I turn around for a second and "little Johnny" has managed to puke or "little Sarah" has tied a string around her fingers. Kids are going to be kids no matter what. No matter if that mom had her best eye on him, the kid could have made it look like he accidentally fell in to the mom. However, this is besides my point. My point is that kids will do what they want with or without supervision. There has been so much commentary on the mother and how she is a terrible parent and should have her child taken away. Do people not think about that fact that she almost saw her child die right in front of her? Do they not realize that the mother could not control the actions of the gorilla or the kid? People control their own actions. As well as animals.
As for the gorilla, I think the Cincinnatti Zoo did the right thing. Had that child died, the scenario would be completely different and hearts all around would be mourning. Hearts are mourning now, but the zookeepers are mourning the most. When you visit the zoo, you don't form a personal relationship with a gorilla. The zookeepers are solely the ones who do. Those are the people who should be devastated. Imagine, if the kid died, how many more would be mourning. I'm not saying one life matters more, but I think the zoo was going for the most painless way out possible.
As for using tranquilizers: just judging from the video, even though the gorilla wasn't trying to harm the child, he did. I can't imagine the scrapes and cuts from being dragged across rocks and the choking from it being in the water. Hamarabe may have not been trying to hurt the child, but he was. One false move and that kid could have been dead. So why irritate the gorrilla anymore than he already was? If they would have used the tranquilizers, the gorilla would have had it. He already had the crowd and the kid irritating him; he didn't need anymore. The zoo gave him a quick painless death. The gorilla would have given the child a slow painful death, and was slowly doing that.
All in all, the decision made was the best possible decision and I don't think anyone is really to blame. Life happens; all we can do is learn from it! We can start by making better zoo enclosures! Which is exactly what the Cincinnati Zoo has said they are going to do.
