Slog - Comments on The Real Danger of Drugs and Alcohol: Tiger Maulings

Comment by FL

FL — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:04:50 -0800

Tigers are fucking awesome.

Comment by max solomon

max solomon — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:05:53 -0800

did they test for the presence of testosterone? that drug interacts with alcohol in ways that marijuana cannot counteract.

Comment by Mike of Renton

Mike of Renton — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:14:06 -0800

Did they really need an explanation after "teenager"? It's the second word in the paragraph and not much more is needed.

Comment by Thom

Thom — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:21:51 -0800

You should see how the two brother's have behaved since the mauling. It almost makes me want to let the tiger have another shot at them.

Comment by Porkchop Sandwiches!

Porkchop Sandwiches! — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:27:00 -0800

Can I get a "w0000t!!!1!" for Natural Selection!!??

Comment by cw

cw — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:36:42 -0800

The species (human that is) got stronger that day.

Comment by j

Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:40:35 -0800

thats why I dont goto the park with a swagger, tigers hate it and it returns them to their natural instinct of picking off stoned villagemen.

Comment by michael strangeways

michael strangeways — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:52:26 -0800

Mama's Family ROCKS with or without the ganja!!

And the commercials kick ass...they're all for denture cream, medical products and adult diapers.

Comment by Jessica

Jessica — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:00:07 -0800

Kitty!
And pot didn't make that kid piss off the tiger. Liquor and being a teenage boy did.

Comment by Mr Fuzzy

Mr Fuzzy — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:00:31 -0800

Did the teenager in any way, shape, or form help the tiger get out? If so, they do have a minor case...
Assuming not, though, HAHAHA, that's so ridiculous. Had me a laugh.

Comment by rb

rb — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:00:54 -0800

@1, That's a fact.

Comment by Patti

Patti — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:05:12 -0800

And in the MEANWHILE - they had to kill the tiger. Nuts.

Comment by NapoleonXIV

NapoleonXIV — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:05:17 -0800

We need a couple of those tigers to patrol Third and Bell at night.

Comment by Jerod

Jerod — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:21:41 -0800

There wasn't any snow on Christmas eve and I knew what I should do...

Comment by rob

rob — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:21:53 -0800

Anybody with an ounce of sensitivity who spends a little time in a zoo with your eyes and ears open will have your heart torn by the tauntings, spitting, jumping, whooping, etc. to try to get a rise out of the animals. "Hey! Monkey! MONKEY! HEY DUMBSHIT!" says the lardass in plaid shorts trying to capture a little face-on video to bore his neighbors with. He ought to turn the camera around.

Good zoo design protects the animals from the people as much (or more) than the people from the animals.

Comment by lostboy

lostboy — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:33:53 -0800

If I hadn�t known I was at risk of being mauled by a tiger, I might�ve spent another weekend in my living room getting high and watching Mama�s Family reruns on TV, completely unaware that a tiger might be lurking somewhere nearby, ready to pounce.

(emphasis mine.)

I'd be more sympathetic to Jonah's indignation if he could mock the CBS report without misrepresenting it. The implication is that being drunk and/or high might have contributed to the poor judgment behind taunting a tiger to the point that it escapes its enclosure just to kill your ass.

Whether we accept the connection or not, the setting is circumstantial. Proximity to tigers is not necessary for poor judgment to be fatal.

Comment by Dee in SF

Dee in SF — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:07:11 -0800

I mourn Tatiana every day. *tear*

Also, "Proximity to tigers is not necessary for poor judgement to be fatal" but it is necessary for ones death to be caused by a tiger mauling.

Comment by Chrissy

Chrissy — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:35:29 -0800

Tigers are great for all kinds of crimefighting! Here's the YouTube proof:

http://tinyurl.com/277tvz

The clip is 16:00 in.

Comment by Wolf

Wolf — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 18:39:00 -0800

Why did it take 6 months for an autopsy report?

Comment by What a fucking megan

What a fucking megan — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:04:05 -0800

Thinning of the human herd; too bad they try to pin it on pot but if it helps keep that douchebag's family from seeing a penny from the zoo then I say GOOD.

Comment by ellarosa

ellarosa — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 19:22:31 -0800

all this blaming of the victims is just distraction from the cold hard fact that TIGERS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO GET OUT OF THEIR ENCLOSURES. a recent audit at the zoo found that the bond money for zoo improvement that san francisco voters passed some years back largely went to tourist-trap features at the zoo, not habitat improvement. that habitat tatiana was in was ancient, and DID NOT MEET SAFETY STANDARDS. do you really want to blame the young douchebags, or do you want to look at the people with the money and power? which choice strikes you as more republican?

Comment by elenchos

elenchos — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 21:06:23 -0800

I'm pretty sure snap judgments are non-adaptive and everyone how makes snap judgments about teenagers or tigers or pot or zoos is going to be removed sooner or later from the gene pool and then they'll win a Darwin Award.

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:39:40 -0800

@21,

The San Francisco Zoo is not a private enterprise. It's hardly run by "the people with the money and power." I reserve the right to trash the douchebags who got their friend killed, themselves maimed, and a wild creature (that shouldn't have been subjected to those assholes' taunts in the first place) killed, while also reserving the right to fault the zoo for not updating its facilities.

Comment by ellarosa

ellarosa — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 08:27:58 -0800

i meant relatively speaking, keshmeshi, of course, relative to the victims. and they are charged with the public's welfare, the young douchebags were not. that's my point. i don't argue that what happened to the young douchebags was karmic, but that doesn't mean the zoo is not grievously at fault here, as i see it, and the majority of commenters here and in other related posts seem to miss that point.

Comment by ellarosa

ellarosa — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:13:09 -0800

i'm speaking relatively about money and power here, keshmeshi. the zoo board wielded alot more of that than the douchebags did. and was charged with public safety, which the douchebags were not. most commenters seem to ignore the zoo's grievous fault here, and focus on the douchebaggery of the victims. that's all i'm saying.

Comment by ellarosa

ellarosa — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:15:50 -0800

uhg! why does it DO that when i post?! it eats a post, then when i re-enter it, it puts up both. i hate that.

Comment by inkweary

inkweary — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 11:31:46 -0800

How tragic! Another life brought short by marijuana and teen drinking. When wil it end?