What do people think about: incidents of tigers injuring humans?
Thread Content
On the afternoon of July 23, several tourists drove into the Badaling Wildlife Park in Beijing. One female tourist got out of the car midway and was dragged away by a tiger behind her; the two people who were in the same car tried to chase after her and were also attacked by the tiger. The mother who rushed out of the car to save her daughter was attacked by a tiger and died; her daughter was injured. The injured person has now undergone surgery and is not in life-threatening condition. It is understood that the tourist in question signed a relevant liability agreement, which explicitly stipulates that when entering the park by car, one must lock all the doors and windows and is strictly prohibited from getting out of the vehicle. What are everyone’s thoughts on this accident that resulted in one death and one injury?
In my opinion, although the tourists have signed an agreement with the park, this does not entirely exempt the park from its responsibilities. Given the risks associated with tigers attacking people, the level of risk is quite high. The tourists are responsible for implementing the preventive measures, but it is the park that bears the main responsibility for ensuring those measures are actually carried out. In this incident, the tourists are at fault, but the park’s primary responsibilities cannot be waived. This also shows a lack of safety awareness among the tourists; however, if proper supervision was in place, such incidents might have been avoided.
There are many such acts that come at the cost of ignoring safety! Just as the factory’s environmental and safety department repeatedly trains the contractors and warns them about fines! Some people are simply reckless; when something goes wrong, no matter how well the management handles things, they still have to take responsibility. In such cases, access should be prohibited! Eliminate it at the source!
In my opinion, in such a high-risk environment, self-driving access should not be allowed; the scenic area should provide shuttle buses, which should be staffed by personnel. Although relevant responsibility agreements were signed, the park’s actions are intended to shirk its responsibilities; the park should bear the responsibility for failing to provide adequate safety measures...
Problems exist: 1. Management issues – the wildlife park is not properly managed; how can one go there for a self-driving tour?； 2. Lack of awareness regarding personal safety: How can one get out of the vehicle?
When visitors buy tickets to enter the zoo, they enter into a contractual relationship with the management. Given the dangers present in the zoo, it is the responsibility of the management to ensure the safety of those visitors. Despite the safety warnings, announcements, and patrols carried out by security vehicles – all of which are measures taken by the park to ensure visitors’ safety – injuries and deaths among visitors indicate that there are still gaps in safety management, and warnings alone cannot exempt anyone from responsibility. Relevant news reports indicate that tourists who travel by car must sign an \"Agreement on Liability for Vehicle Damage During Visits by Car\" before entering the park. This agreement states that \"the car owner shall bear corresponding responsibility for any vehicle damage or injuries resulting from violations of the above provisions.\" This is a unilateral declaration and constitutes an \"unfair clause\"; it does not exempt the park from its obligation to ensure the safety of visitors. Therefore, although the park management has taken some preventive safety measures that can reduce liability, it cannot completely exempt itself from responsibility.
The incident of a tiger attacking a person teaches us a lesson: when encountering a tiger, one must not turn and run away, otherwise they will be seen as prey by the tiger. One should face the tiger bravely, with eyes narrowed in anger, fists clenched, and shouting angrily, \"Damn you bastard! Am I going to be afraid of you?\" ! ! ! ”. This way, one can die with a bit more dignity.
Everyone wishes to die with dignity, but in the face of disasters, they often feel extremely insignificant,...
First, let’s check whether this project is legal: Has a safety assessment been conducted for this commercial activity in which tourists drive their own vehicles to visit the wildlife park? Has it been registered with the Work Safety Supervision Bureau? Projects related to public safety also require approval from the public security bureau; are all these procedures in place?
Every citizen should have the awareness to abide by rules and not cross the boundaries
This post was last edited by firemale on 2016-7-28 at 13:51. When faced with people who act recklessly, no system or measure works； I. If one says that self-driving tours are not allowed, then it can be avoided. This is clearly incorrect, because self-driving tours are common in zoos and protected areas around the world. If such tours required approval, then that approval would have been obtained, and it wouldn’t be a problem; in fact, there might not even be any such approval requirement at all. And it’s not self-driving tours that are dangerous, but getting out of the vehicle on one’s own. II. From the videos and reports, it can be seen that visitors were informed upon entering the park, and reminders were given throughout their time there. In the event of an incident, the park’s emergency vehicles were also nearby and could arrive quickly; I believe this constitutes all necessary protective measures. Self-driving tours are meant to allow one to observe wild animals up close. If someone thinks that sufficient safety measures have not been taken, they might as well suggest how they should be implemented.