11 minutes ago, kwilco said:

victim blaming - You are not really looking seriously at the situation.

There's no need to look at the situation, whatever you mean by that.

 

Yes, I'm blaming him for being stupid enough to get out of a vehicle into an area populated by wild animals.

All the fool had to do was stay in the vehicle. If I was to choose to jump into a river and I drowned - it would be my fault. (Not if I accidentally fell in of course)

 

You are implying that if a person does something stupid and becomes a victim, we should ignore their stupidity because it killed them. Why - stupid is as stupid does and has its consequences.

He chose to exit the vehicle and got attacked - his fault!  End of!!

On 9/10/2025 at 2:14 PM, Gottfrid said:

Maybe he didn´t give them dinner the day before.

They were clearly very hungry. I suspect that they were never given enough food.

1 hour ago, bdenner said:

How many times did you take your kids to a zoo - or didn't you? Either a scrooge or so well of you took em to South Africa and toured the wild.

Why would I take my kids to a Zoo? Is that an obligation as a parent in your world?

And yes, we have been to Africa 3 times. 3 with our older girl and one so far with the younger. If you think little bit, you don´t have to go so far down as South Africa. Our trip have been Kenya, Nigeria and Tanzania.

Don´t consider myself a scrooge, and neither does anyone in my family. That´s good enough for me. What you try to apply, does not even bother nor concern me. You are just a little drop in the ocean. But I really advise you to learn to swim before you post more rubbish.

For us, hell yeah, it will be more trips. 🙂 And yeah, I am well of. In difference to so many on this forum, I can afford to live in Thailand and go by the rules and regulations for my stay.

1 hour ago, bdenner said:

How many times did you take your kids to a zoo - or didn't you? Either a scrooge or so well of you took em to South Africa and toured the wild.

 

My family actually did both back in the last century – zoos and safaris – and we learnt from it. These days we think twice before engaging in any form of animal tourism, because we understand the issues better. Modern zoos now need to justify themselves on very different criteria than they used to. As for the ‘scrooge’ reference – I don’t really see the relevance

9 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

What disgusting with not keeping wild animals, or any animals, in Zoo´s or locked up for display?

Did the victim own the zoo?

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

 

My family actually did both back in the last century – zoos and safaris – and we learnt from it. These days we think twice before engaging in any form of animal tourism, because we understand the issues better. Modern zoos now need to justify themselves on very different criteria than they used to. As for the ‘scrooge’ reference – I don’t really see the relevance

Absolutely. I don't have kids, but when I was one, 60 odd years ago, I loved going to London and Chessington Zoos with my parents.

 

But as you say, our awareness of animal welfare  has improved, and for several decades now, I have avoided patronising most zoos. I say most, because the  research establishments that have "open" zoos attached to them are somewhat kinder to the animals, IMO.

Even with those, I give it serious thought before visiting and of course even they have to keep the fiercer animals in cages, which I really dislike and which puts me off visiting. I'm thinking now of Khau Keeow (sp) zoo in Chonburi where I have been.

 

Just to return to the actual subject of this thread, the man who got out of the vehicle ought to have known that he was entering (invading) the lions' domain and as such was endangering himself even if  the lions were not hungry. I'm no naturalist but even I know that so he, as an employee should have.

7 minutes ago, VBF said:

Absolutely. I don't have kids, but when I was one, 60 odd years ago, I loved going to London and Chessington Zoos with my parents.

 

But as you say, our awareness of animal welfare  has improved, and for several decades now, I have avoided patronising most zoos. I say most, because the  research establishments that have "open" zoos attached to them are somewhat kinder to the animals, IMO.

Even with those, I give it serious thought before visiting and of course even they have to keep the fiercer animals in cages, which I really dislike and which puts me off visiting. I'm thinking now of Khau Keeow (sp) zoo in Chonburi where I have been.

 

Just to return to the actual subject of this thread, the man who got out of the vehicle ought to have known that he was entering (invading) the lions' domain and as such was endangering himself even if  the lions were not hungry. I'm no naturalist but even I know that so he, as an employee should have.

IMO, the lions didn't really want to eat him. If they had, he would have been ripped to bits in seconds.

 

They either simply wanted to play, or more likely toy with him, for an hour or two, until they got fed up. Like a kitty with a mouse.

4 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

IMO, the lions didn't really want to eat him. If they had, he would have been ripped to bits in seconds.

 

They either simply wanted to play, or more likely toy with him, for an hour or two, until they got fed up. Like a kitty with a mouse.

Possible.

I remember reading somewhere that human flesh is not very palatable to lions, but, of course, if they're very hungry, it will do.

Reminds me of a line in "Crocodile Dundee" when Mick is asked about his cooking  "Tastes like s**t  but you can live on it"

22 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Suicide?

 

He left his shoes in the vehicle. Taking off the shoes and leaving them  behind is associated with Asian suicide format.

1 hour ago, MalcolmB said:

Did the victim own the zoo?

No but he was stupid enough to work for one

On 9/10/2025 at 8:14 AM, Gottfrid said:

Maybe he didn´t give them dinner the day before.

This is not funny, both you Gottfrid and the posters putting on smileys emo's want to get a grip of yourselves.

 

5 hours ago, VBF said:

Absolutely. I don't have kids, but when I was one, 60 odd years ago, I loved going to London and Chessington Zoos with my parents.

 

But as you say, our awareness of animal welfare  has improved, and for several decades now, I have avoided patronising most zoos. I say most, because the  research establishments that have "open" zoos attached to them are somewhat kinder to the animals, IMO.

Even with those, I give it serious thought before visiting and of course even they have to keep the fiercer animals in cages, which I really dislike and which puts me off visiting. I'm thinking now of Khau Keeow (sp) zoo in Chonburi where I have been.

 

Just to return to the actual subject of this thread, the man who got out of the vehicle ought to have known that he was entering (invading) the lions' domain and as such was endangering himself even if  the lions were not hungry. I'm no naturalist but even I know that so he, as an employee should have.

 

As an employee, one wonders what was going on – it sounds as if he was poorly trained and familiarity bred contempt – also it is the sort of job you wouldn't expect someone to be doing on their own. THere are a lot of unanswered questions about mangement policies and practices

4 hours ago, NoshowJones said:

This is not funny, both you Gottfrid and the posters putting on smileys emo's want to get a grip of yourselves.

 

When did I say something funny? I tried to discuss a reason. You get a grip

On 9/10/2025 at 4:49 PM, Gottfrid said:

Yeah, I will have that when respect is shown to the animals, and people don´t take them away from their natural environment. it´s a reason why it´s called wild animals.

Know when to stop man, your sick 'jokes' are way out of place, would have joked the same had one of your

family would be in the same situation? I'm sure not.

7 minutes ago, ezzra said:

Know when to stop man, your sick 'jokes' are way out of place, would have joked the same had one of your

family would be in the same situation? I'm sure not.

Nah, but I don´t need to worry about that, because people in my family does not deed themselves to wild animals.

The only mysterious here, is how so many members here can be so active and engaged in this thread? It´s simply a man that broke the rules and paid the price for it.

2 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

Nah, but I don´t need to worry about that, because people in my family does not deed themselves to wild animals.

The only mysterious here, is how so many members here can be so active and engaged in this thread? It´s simply a man that broke the rules and paid the price for it.

So you took the chance to mock this poor man and his grieving family, right?

1 minute ago, ezzra said:

So you took the chance to mock this poor man and his grieving family, right?

How can you mock a dead man? Please give me your great wisdom.

When have I mocked his family? First, I posted a possibility that they might have missed a meal and were extra hungry. Sometimes not more needed to get an attack from pride and wild animals. After that, I have been stating my stance on that wild animals should not be out of their natural habitat and environment just for display for humans to look at and admire. It´s not their role on this planet. They are predators and can suddenly chose to eat what they see fit.

1 minute ago, Gottfrid said:

How can you mock a dead man? Please give me your great wisdom.

When have I mocked his family? First, I posted a possibility that they might have missed a meal and were extra hungry. Sometimes not more needed to get an attack from pride and wild animals. After that, I have been stating my stance on that wild animals should not be out of their natural habitat and environment just for display for humans to look at and admire. It´s not their role on this planet. They are predators and can suddenly chose to eat what they see fit.

Give it up already, you know you were wrong, just move on.

2 minutes ago, ezzra said:

Give it up already, you know you were wrong, just move on.

That´s what you always say, when you can deny the information in a post you reply to.

But, if you can, please tell me what was untrue.

On 9/10/2025 at 6:42 PM, save the frogs said:

being eaten alive by a pack of lions.

is there anything more scary than that? 

 

Probably being chased and eliminated by a Ukrainian drone in the field?

40 minutes ago, Gottfrid said:

That´s what you always say, when you can deny the information in a post you reply to.

But, if you can, please tell me what was untrue.

There are two words in the English language, apathy and empathy, you seem to be much more familiar with the former

rather than the latter. 

19 hours ago, kwilco said:

 

Tranqs can work in seconds, and most safari parks have trained marksmen on standby – that’s standard practice, not fantasy. You’re making a baseless judgement. In a big cat attack, normal protocol is a rapid-response ‘Code Red’, firearms team, radios, and deterrents like warning shots or vehicles to protect visitors. Even in the UK, some rangers are trained and authorised to use guns. Human safety always comes first

Are you for real?

This is Thailand, rapid response is a dream except in a bar fight

53 minutes ago, Grumpy one said:

Are you for real?

This is Thailand, rapid response is a dream except in a bar fight

Yep, and then it´s only rapid response from one part, and the other on the floor. 

1 hour ago, ezzra said:

There are two words in the English language, apathy and empathy, you seem to be much more familiar with the former

rather than the latter. 

Nah that´s wrong. It´s actually over 1 million words in the English language. Specially about 170 000 words currently in use, and approx. 47 000 obsolete words, according to the Oxford Dictionary. 😂

2 hours ago, ezzra said:

There are two words in the English language, apathy and empathy, you seem to be much more familiar with the former

rather than the latter. 

And you still walk away from saying what was untrue. More deflection. You are good at it. 

22 hours ago, cynic1 said:

Your a sick person. Innocent employers killed. They are not the owners. They wanted money to buy food etc and pay their bills. As that was the only job available. Anyway your weird!

 

Wrong.

 

If the worker had an ounce of empathy for captive animals he wouldn't work there in the first place.

 

You're right about the owners though.

 

Weird? Good. Thank you!

3 hours ago, Grumpy one said:

Are you for real?

This is Thailand, rapid response is a dream except in a bar fight

I'm talking about this specific incident and not making sweeping generalisations of how I see Thailand from a personal perspective, so, yes – I'm for real, and parks in Thailand have them. - All major safari parks and zoos in Thailand have teams and procedures to respond to emergencies, such as animal escapes or other incidents, which function similarly to rapid response teams. For example, Khao Kheow Open Zoo conducts drills to test its staff's response to animal escapes. The term "Rapid Response Team" isn't always used, but these institutions have protocols and trained staff to handle emergencies, ensuring animal welfare and public safety.  However, due to lack of enforcement or management incompetence, they may not have worked in this instance. In general, Thailand has a very poor health and safety record. As someone who spent years working in industry, I was frequently shocked by the lack of willingness to adopt or enforce standard safety measures.

1 hour ago, Woke to Sounds said:

 

Wrong.

 

If the worker had an ounce of empathy for captive animals he wouldn't work there in the first place.

 

You're right about the owners though.

 

Weird? Good. Thank you!

Not The owners as they only consider money. Your weird!

Yet another Thai angry pussy ! 

There are people in the car and no one jumped in the driver seat and tried to run the lines off. I guess everyone’s too busy with their cameras these days photographing things instead of jumping in and helping.  They beeped the horn and watched.