Appropriate punishment for the Crocodile Hunter?

[Guest]

Did you guys see the footage of Steve Irwin, the crocodile hunter, holding his 1 month-old baby in one hand while feeding a large crocodile with a chicken in the other? This almost makes Michael Jackson look half-sane. I have never seen such outrageous behavior for the sake of attention-getting. And what the hell was his wife thinking? How would the readers of this message center handle the situation if you were in a position of authority? Mandatory counseling sessions? Parenting classes? Fine? Jail time? Community service?

[Guest fukamarine]

>How would the readers of

>this message center handle the situation if you were in a

>position of authority? Mandatory counseling sessions?

>Parenting classes? Fine? Jail time? Community service?

 

The first thing that leaps to mind is to remove the child from his custody!

 

fukamarine

[Guest Love Bubble Butt]

And he has responded that "he was in complete control of the crocodile." Just how does he figure that? It was stupid of him to risk his son's safety/life for the sake of publicity.

[Flower]

>And he has responded that "he was in complete control of the

>crocodile." Just how does he figure that? It was stupid of

>him to risk his son's safety/life for the sake of publicity.

 

A GREAT philosopher--one of my favorite, said "Control is control until you lose it." :+

 

What he did is clearly child endangerment (in my opinion) and at the very least his wife or someone interested in the child's welfare and safety, or even the state, should get him counseling and lay a restraining order on him.

 

If the croc did get the baby, in California, it would be at least 2d degree murder and maybe first degree if the judge had balls enough to let it go to the jury that way.

[swallows22]

Ask these questions of his wife. Am sure she will understand you. After all, she is an American.

[Boston Guy]

I grew up in small-town America in the 1950s and 1960s. At six years of age, I was walking a mile to school -- often alone, at my own insistence. We rode bikes all over town, away from our parents for hours at a time. We parked our bikes at the ends of the runway at the local airport and sat in the grass watched large 4-engine prop planes fly over our heads and land.

 

Today, if children engaged in any one of many different behaviors that we took for granted, there would be hell to pay. Arrests might follow, child welfare would become involved, the children might be taken from the parents, and the community would be outraged.

 

But we grew up happy and safe and, for the life of me, I cannot recall even one incident where one of my friends was seriously hurt as we were growing up.

 

I have a very good friend who has two children. The oldest is 12 and the parents are just contemplating letting her ride her bike out of their sight. Up to this point, whenever she has ridden her bike, it's been up and down their street, with them keeping careful watch. And this is in a small town in New England with a good reputation as a safe place to live.

 

How in the world did we come from the Ozzie-and-Harriet world we grew up in, where kids were free to grow up, have fun, do things on their own -- and get into trouble -- to a world where we are so afraid of every risk that we smother children and try to raise them in a kind of protective bubble?

 

Regarding Steve Irwin, I probably wouldn't hold my child while feeding a crocodile. But I'm not a trained crocodile handler. He is.

 

It's easy for people who don't know anything at all about handling crocodiles to think this was an egregious example of child abuse. But I think these people are basing their judgment on their own fear of crocodiles and an imagined sense of what the crocodile might do that would truly place the child in danger. In other words, I would kindly suggest that most of us are quite simply incompetent to make an educated decision as to whether that child was in danger or not.

 

Further, I would suggest that while placing one's child in real danger could easily constitute a form of child abuse, placing one's child in a situation that others might perceive as dangerous but in reality is not does not constitute abuse. In other words, what should matter is whether or not the situation really is dangerous.

 

It's clear from watching the show that Steve and his wife are loving parents. This is not their first child and they have shared their love of animals and adventure with their daughter. Bravo for them! I suspect she'll grow up thankful for such an upbringing.

 

Steve's wife was nearby as he was feeding the crocodile. Her reaction? She was laughing, not cringing or leaping for the baby. Why? Probably because, as someone who is also quite used to working with crocodiles, she, too, knew that the child was safe.

 

Working with crocodiles is their business. They're world-acknowledged experts in this field. So, if Steve Irwin feels that he can safely hold his child and feed a crocodile, I guess I'd pretty much trust his judgment and that of his wife.

 

BG

[ValleyDwellerNorth]

Baby meat is so fatty. How dare he expose a healthly, in-shape croc to an unhealthy anomaly in his daily diet!

 

Seriously, all I can say is he and Mr. Jackson need some parenting classes.

 

Though movies, specifically American movies, have bastardized crocs (in the wild they tend to run away from humans UNTIL we start giving them food) what he did was so wrong. That baby had no say in the matter while the croc hunter chooses to be a pay-per-fool.

 

VDN

[guyinsf]

I'm sure that Roy thought he was in control of that tiger, too.

 

>And he has responded that "he was in complete control of the

>crocodile." Just how does he figure that? It was stupid of

>him to risk his son's safety/life for the sake of publicity.

[Bilbo]

I think that Boston Guy said what I was thining more eloquently than I would have managed it. So I won't repeat anything, but wanted to support his post.

[+ deej]

My understanding is his wife was there, watching.

[+ deej]

BG, that was a very eloquent post. I see your point, and have often had similar thoughts, but it compares apples to oranges.

 

You and I had similar upbringings. When I was 12, I thought nothing of hopping on the bike and riding to the other side of town with friends. I remember how scandalized my parents were when a bicycle lock became a necessity because bicycle theft, previously unkown, had become common. Different times, indeed.

 

These days, I get nervous when I see children riding bikes or skateboards unsupervised around my (quite safe) neighborhood. (Oddly enough, my bicycle has been parked outside my front door for 8 months without a lock. ;-))

 

This is different. The kid wasn't riding his bike unsupervised. He doesn't have the motor skills for that. He was in a pen with a wild animal.

 

The common theme in reports after Roy Horn's attack was that it was inevitable, made even more so by complacency. Trained animal handlers will tell you that an attack is not an "if" but a "when". In an eery interview taped prior to the baby incident, Corwin himself talks about how danger is always present and one must always be vigilant.

 

This wasn't a case of letting your kid grow up and have some independence. It was wreckless endangerment.

[Rick Munroe]

>How in the world did we come from the Ozzie-and-Harriet world

>we grew up in, where kids were free to grow up, have fun, do

>things on their own -- and get into trouble -- to a world

>where we are so afraid of every risk that we smother children

>and try to raise them in a kind of protective bubble?

 

That reminds me of one of my favorite lines from Finding Nemo, which I finally saw last night --->

 

Marlin: I promised him I'd never let anything happen to him.

 

Dory: That's a funny thing to promise. You can't 'never let anything happen to him,' because then nothing would ever happen to him.

[Guest msclonly]

Attention Please. Announcement coming...............

 

Please stand aside!

 

It is time for that angry TV lady, Gloria Allred, to make a forceful statement about legality and child rearing!

 

Where in the hell is she, when you are expecting her to pop up on the News Channel, again, and again!

 

 

 

 

}( }(

[sdg]

BG,

 

i love your perspective on things. just wished you could be more concised in your writings since my attention span is so short. anyhow, i think steve knows what he is doing and this is the life him and his wife have chosen. i am sure steve hopes this will also be the life his child chooses. so i am sure he is going on the basis of - why not throw him in the pool early and let him learn to swim. i think the world is way to quick to judge and react especially when provoked in that direction.

[Flower]

>Working with crocodiles is their business. They're

>world-acknowledged experts in this field. So, if Steve Irwin

>feels that he can safely hold his child and feed a crocodile,

>I guess I'd pretty much trust his judgment and that of his

>wife.

>

Certainly a point of view, but obviously you know nothing of Crocs nor have you experienced the life lesson of "shit happens when you least expect it."

 

Answer this question for all of us honestly--would you trust him holding YOUR child while feeding the croc?

 

If you say no, then you've sorta shot down your own argument--if you say YES, then I doubt if anyone here will believe you:P

[Guest]

>Though movies, specifically American movies, have bastardized

>crocs (in the wild they tend to run away from humans UNTIL we

>start giving them food)

 

You may be thinking of the American crocodile, which is actually quite docile (even less dangerous than the more common alligator). The Australian crocodile, especially the saltwater crocodile, will seek out and attack humans (admittedly I don't know whether the croc was an Australian saltwater or fresh water croc, but either is more dangerous than the American croc). Since they are reptiles, crocs are even less predictable than mammalian predators such as tigers. A wrong move could have made him lose his child.

Your information probably comes from American sources. It is certainly true that alligators will rarely attack adult humans except by accident (they have been known to attack pets and children, though). And American crocodiles do their best to avoid humans all together!

[Boston Guy]

>Answer this question for all of us honestly--would you trust

>him holding YOUR child while feeding the croc?

>

>If you say no, then you've sorta shot down your own

>argument--if you say YES, then I doubt if anyone here will

>believe you:P

>

>

 

Actually, I don't know the answer to your question. Since I don't have children, it's a hypothetical that I can't honestly answer.

 

As I said above in my original post, I probably wouldn't hold my child as I fed a crocodile, because I would be fearful and way out of anything remotely resembling my experience. But, if I were there, would I let Steve hold my child? I honestly don't know -- if pressed for a yes or no, I'd probably say no because I'd probably err on the side of caution.

 

But that's a very different thing than saying that he cannot hold his own child in a situation that is within his area of professional expertise and that, in his professional judgment, is safe. I understand the shock value of the picture but I still defer to him both as a parent and as an world expert in the handling of large reptiles.

 

BG

[Guest Love Bubble Butt]

Hmmm. I'll be damned. This is actually the FIRST posting of BG for which I disagree. That's never happened before. Always a first I guess.

 

>In other words, I would kindly suggest that

>most of us are quite simply incompetent to make an educated

>decision as to whether that child was in danger or not.

 

You have got to be kidding. If you phrased your statement that we are not competent to "measure the amount of risk" the child was in, I would then agree with you. But any sane person with a minimal amount of common sense knows that there is danger while being in a pen with a crocodile. Why do you think he's the only one allowed in the pen? Why do his shows stress that this should not be tried by others? Yes, he's a trained handler and expert on crocs and knows how to minimize the risk for HIMSELF.

 

But his infant son is just that -- a helpless infant. Had he accidently dropped this child (that he was only holding with one arm while he was dangling the food in the other), then what? I've seen several of his pieces where these crocs start lunging at him, and he has to run or step back very quickly. What if he lost his footing (again while holding his infant son in one arm) and dropped the child? It's one thing for him to put his own life at risk for his career, but he put his son in unneeded risk of very serious harm (or death). And that's child endangerment.

 

 

>Working with crocodiles is their business. They're

>world-acknowledged experts in this field. So, if Steve Irwin

>feels that he can safely hold his child and feed a crocodile,

>I guess I'd pretty much trust his judgment and that of his

>wife.

 

BG, you have always been so logical. I just can't believe what you're saying. I, for one, am not willing to ASSUME that just because parents lover their children, that they will always use proper judgement and never do things that put them at risk.

 

Not too long ago, there was a report of a ten year old child sweeping the pavement right near a tiger's cage in their back yard. He got too close and the tiger grabbed him, pulled him under the fence, and killed him. I'm sure these parents thought their child was safe too because the tiger was locked in a cage.

 

Another couple had a boa constrictor that got out of its cage. The Mother came home to find the snake wrapped around their eight year old daughter ... she was dead. I'm sure they too thought their child was not in danger.

 

I just don't fucking understand why these people insist on having these wild animals in proximity WITH THEIR CHILDREN!! These are wild animals, not cute cuddly puppies. And sadly, their children paid the ultimate price for their parents' over-confidence (i.e., arrogance), ignorance and stupidity.

 

When parents, for whatever reason, stop providing for the care and safety of their children, society has a definite obligation to intervene on behalf of these children.

[+ Axiom2001]

This thread would have been much more appropriately written/placed in "The Lounge" instead of here, but my response to it is: it's just another prime example of a damn foolish individual who deems himself a parent just by having fathered a child!

[Boston Guy]

>Hmmm. I'll be damned. This is actually the FIRST posting of

>BG for which I disagree. That's never happened before.

>Always a first I guess.

>

 

Then I thank you for all of your prior support!

 

 

>You have got to be kidding. If you phrased your statement

>that we are not competent to "measure the amount of risk" the

>child was in, I would then agree with you.

 

That's a fair comment. Your wording more accurately describes what I was trying to say.

 

>But his infant son is just that -- a helpless infant. Had he

>accidently dropped this child (that he was only holding with

>one arm while he was dangling the food in the other), then

>what? I've seen several of his pieces where these crocs start

>lunging at him, and he has to run or step back very quickly.

>What if he lost his footing (again while holding his infant

>son in one arm) and dropped the child? It's one thing for him

>to put his own life at risk for his career, but he put his son

>in unneeded risk of very serious harm (or death). And that's

>child endangerment.

>

>

>>Working with crocodiles is their business. They're

>>world-acknowledged experts in this field. So, if Steve

>Irwin feels that he can safely hold his child and feed a

>>crocodile, I guess I'd pretty much trust his judgment and that

>>of his wife.

>

>BG, you have always been so logical. I just can't believe

>what you're saying. I, for one, am not willing to ASSUME that

>just because parents lover their children, that they will

>always use proper judgement and never do things that put them

>at risk.

>

 

No, of course not. Nothing about being a parent automatically makes a person unable to make stupid mistakes and parents do exactly that all of the time. We all do. It's part of being human. I suspect that Steve Irwin believes that he made a stupid mistake with this episode. But, deep down, I'd bet he would say that it was a mistake because of the bad publicity, not because he felt his kid was at risk.

 

I truly don't know if the child was at risk. He and his wife, both extremely experienced with crocodiles, clearly didn't think so. Since I'm not an expert and they both are, I'm inclined to trust their judgment.

 

>When parents, for whatever reason, stop providing for the care

>and safety of their children, society has a definite

>obligation to intervene on behalf of these children.

>

 

And this is part of what I have been reacting to, I think. It's part and parcel of a wholesale change in our society, away from a pretty open and trusting society that existed here not very many years ago to a place where parents are truly frightened of allowing their children to ride bikes out of their sight, even around their own neighborhoods.

 

I guess I don't think that we can protect anyone, much less children, from every possible risk nor do I think we should try. All of us, including kids, learn and grow by being able to engage sometimes in somewhat risky behavior.

 

I know that's not the case here -- the child is way too young. But, from what I've seen, Steve and wife seem to be dedicated, loving parents who are truly trying to raise their children in a way that encourages them to be all they can be. And they have both said that, when you live around crocodiles, you absolutely have to know how to deal with them. So evidently he believed that what he was doing was safe and good his son.

 

Perhaps if I had children, I'd react differently. I hope not.

 

But I value your comments and your opinion. Thanks for replying.

 

BG

[Guest]

I agree with you... But you are in the lounge!;-)

[Guest msclonly]

This is just a lot of CROC!

 

ALert!

 

Gloria Allred has not shown up yet!}(

[Guest]

>>If the croc did get the baby, in California, it would be at

>least 2d degree murder and maybe first degree if the judge had

>balls enough to let it go to the jury that way.

 

I thought that the definition of murder in California involved malice and premeditation?

[+ deej]

RE: This is just a lot of CROC!

 

And I'm actually surprised.

 

She must've taken the holiday weekend off. :+

[sdg]

just curious as to how many of you that are responding to this thread are parents? and of those of you that are parents, how many of you have a passion for a sport or activity? and finally those of you that are parent with a passion. do you not want to pass this passion onto your children?