Kraftster wrote:Here's the thing, though. People do stupid things. That's pretty much a given. Should attractions, which invite people (including stupid people) to frequent, pose a risk of death because someone does something foreseeable, even if it's stupid? I don't think so.
Can't stupid-proof the stupid. Stupid will outwit the stupid-proofing.
Its an issue of foreseeability for me. One should not be required to try to think of every way that a person should find to place themselves in harm's way by doing something stupid. However, very obvious stupidity should be protected against. As I mentioned, the tilting of the railing indicates to me that the zoo foresaw this on some level. Yet, despite that, they still left this area of the pavilion open, without a secondary protective measure (that net was not for people).
Its a chicken egg thing for me. If that opening doesn't exist (as is the case on all other (less high from the ground) sides of the gazebo apparently), even the possibility of this particular accident does not exist. To take a minor step to protect against this by tilting the railing, while still leaving the area open, is negligent. In fact, you are actually inviting
people to go to the open area. Who wants to look through a fence when you can go to the open area?
It took some level of negligence on the part of the mother to occur, so the zoo is not entirely at fault, but certainly should be held financially responsible on some level. What if a child climbed onto the railing and fell in? This is an unnecessarily dangerous attraction that created the opportunity for this tragic accident.