The zoo was forced to make a hard choice, that unfortunately it will continue to have to make as long as people are involved. If the child was killed by the gorilla, there would have been probably more of an outrage. It’s a lose lose situation for everyone involved: the zoo, the parents, the gorilla.

Be sure to read this comment as well: https://medium.com/@danna310/i-found-this-on-facebook-b48420669791#.t74jjxdzs

In an ideal world, if the public could have been quickly evacuate from the enclosure so as not to provoke the gorilla, perhaps there would have been a better chance at a different resolution.

Personally, we might be assigning too much right to have accidents and not hold responsibility. Even if an accident occurs, it doesn’t mean that responsibility is withheld. It just means that you may not be legally liable, but morally and ethically, there are still things that could have been addressed to make things not happen like they did.

Part of that will go to the parents ability to control their children. If you cant, then don’t visit. Accidents will happen, but be willing to take responsibility for it.

Zoos also need to balance the way people can appreciate these animals and to fulfill their duty to protect them. If the zoo is not their advocate, then no one else is. That is entirely unfair to the captive creatures. Just because humans are involved, humans may not always be the zoo’s priority even with the possibility of facing an outrage from the public.

So, yes, accidents happen, but that is not the same as absolution of responsibility.