Making the rounds on the internet now: So this French family (with children, including a very young one) decides it would be just a swell idea to get OUT of the car in the middle of the cheetah enclosure in Dutch safari park Beekse Bergen. First time they do it, the cheetahs don't react. So they do it again, not realising the animals are now sneaking up on them. No-one got hurt, but a VERY close call: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eje1RJKKDdw

Bonus points to the idiots in the car behind them filming, who seem to have nothing better to do than yell 'WTF' and 'OMG' all the time, in stead of warning the family to get back in their car...

Since that family did already procreate they wouldn´t qualify for the Darwin Award though.....

tommy1808 wrote:

Since that family did already procreate they wouldn´t qualify for the Darwin Award though.....

Also... um... they failed to die.

That was more than a close call! How can people be so stupid? It truly amazes me.

Just as well the Cheetahs are well fed.

Truth be told, if it hadn't been for the child, the Cheetahs would probably not have bothered the slightest. It's pretty obvious what they went for.

But I hope these fools got kicked out of the park afterwards.

The cheetahs were lucky it was a French family.

An American family would have shot them

Freakysh wrote:

The cheetahs were lucky it was a French family.

An American family would have shot them

in that case they would have been lucky not to be Americans, as they would go to Jail for it. On multiple counts.

best regards
Thomas

VSMUT wrote:

Truth be told, if it hadn't been for the child, the Cheetahs would probably not have bothered the slightest. It's pretty obvious what they went for.

But I hope these fools got kicked out of the park afterwards.

They weren't. The park didn't know this had happened until the video was posted online.

tommy1808 wrote:

Freakysh wrote:

The cheetahs were lucky it was a French family.

An American family would have shot them

in that case they would have been lucky not to be Americans, as they would go to Jail for it. On multiple counts.

best regards
Thomas

Well aren't you just a bag of laughs.

It was tongue in cheek

Scorpio wrote:

Bonus points to the idiots in the car behind them filming, who seem to have nothing better to do than yell 'WTF' and 'OMG' all the time, in stead of warning the family to get back in their car...

The maker of the video said they were afraid to get out and feared that honking would just make the cheetahs more likely to go after the child. Moreover, the family was apparently warned by others but the family didn't care.

LJ wrote:

Scorpio wrote:

Bonus points to the idiots in the car behind them filming, who seem to have nothing better to do than yell 'WTF' and 'OMG' all the time, in stead of warning the family to get back in their car...

The maker of the video said they were afraid to get out and feared that honking would just make the cheetahs more likely to go after the child. Moreover, the family was apparently warned by others but the family didn't care.

And, you know, the awesome footage they would have gotten if the family had been rightfully killed.

Glad that a Harambe type situation didn't result with the cheetahs being shot due to the family's stupidity.

Seriously, how can one reach adulthood and be that stupid?

Hopefully the parents of the who's children were allowed to do this can be identified and face child endangerment charges. I am quite sure they were given warnings about not doing such stupid acts but ignored, thinking they can get away with it.

The sign says ‘do NOT feed the animals’.

Freakysh wrote:

The cheetahs were lucky it was a French family.

An American family would have shot them

Beekse Bergen did handle this well, they have made the right decision to react to this atrocious act.

https://speld.nl/2018/05/11/beekse-berg ... geschoten/

Dutchy wrote:

Freakysh wrote:

The cheetahs were lucky it was a French family.

An American family would have shot them

Beekse Bergen did handle this well, they have made the right decision to react to this atrocious act.

https://speld.nl/2018/05/11/beekse-berg ... geschoten/

Imagine if it had been a black family and they decided to ban all black people from the park.

Why is ok for them to ban all French?

CCGPV wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Freakysh wrote:

The cheetahs were lucky it was a French family.

An American family would have shot them

Beekse Bergen did handle this well, they have made the right decision to react to this atrocious act.

https://speld.nl/2018/05/11/beekse-berg ... geschoten/

Imagine if it had been a black family and they decided to ban all black people from the park.

Why is ok for them to ban all French?

They didn't decide to ban all French people, according to the article, they have decided to shoot all French visitors pre-emptief. Normally I am against the death penalty, but I can see the exception being made here, I fully back this decision of the management.

Shame on you, drawing conclusions without reading the article first, which you clearly didn't.

Dutchy wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Beekse Bergen did handle this well, they have made the right decision to react to this atrocious act.

https://speld.nl/2018/05/11/beekse-berg ... geschoten/

Imagine if it had been a black family and they decided to ban all black people from the park.

Why is ok for them to ban all French?

They didn't decide to ban all French people, according to the article, they have decided to shoot all French visitors pre-emptief. Normally I am against the death penalty, but I can see the exception being made here, I fully back this decision of the management.

Shame on you, drawing conclusions without reading the article first, which you clearly didn't.

I don't speak Dutch very well so I must have misread. The automatically translated article said they banned French visitors.

Seeing this is an English language forum with rules stating posts must be made in English I think you should translate the article so to avoid these mistakes in the future.

CCGPV wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

Imagine if it had been a black family and they decided to ban all black people from the park.

Why is ok for them to ban all French?

They didn't decide to ban all French people, according to the article, they have decided to shoot all French visitors pre-emptief. Normally I am against the death penalty, but I can see the exception being made here, I fully back this decision of the management.

Shame on you, drawing conclusions without reading the article first, which you clearly didn't.

I don't speak Dutch very well so I must have misread. The automatically translated article said they banned French visitors.

Seeing this is an English language forum with rules stating posts must be made in English I think you should translate the article so to avoid these mistakes in the future.

Oh boy. So did you read the article in Dutch or in the automatically translated version? But alight, I put it trough google translate just for you:

Beekse Bergen intervenes: all French visitors are shot off preventively
'We do not want to take a risk'

11 May 2018 by Jop Eikelboom and Jan van Tienen

The management of Beekse Bergen decided to intervene after seeing the leopards incident. The safari park has shot off all French visitors as a precaution. "It is indeed pathetic. But we can not take the risk that things really go wrong, "said a spokesperson for the safari park.

Seems like a fine translation to me, including the thing where it said - twice - all French visitors have been shot. And of course, it is a Union like site. You could have realized that yourself with half a brain cell working. Even with your crappy translation - by you or your automatic translation thingy I will leave that up for everyone to decide for themselves - you could have and should have realized it, especially since you asked the right question. So either you are to dumb to realize your mistake and took such an article for the truth or you are just trolling and making an ass of yourself by doing so. So what is it? I can see arguments on both sides

The article mentions all French visitors will be pre-emptively shot. It’s a joke by a website similar to “The Onion” or “Fox News”.

petertenthije wrote:

The article mentions all French visitors will be pre-emptively shot. It’s a joke by a website similar to “The Onion” or “Fox News”.

Oh well the irony is lost when 90% of the members of the forum don't understand the language used in the post.

Big fan of the Onion though.

Jebus Christus!!

As a father, I think that family should have their child taken away from them or have to endure some very thorough parental re-education. How fu*king stupid can people be, not only to put themselves in danger but a young child!!!

Redd wrote:

Jebus Christus!!

As a father, I think that family should have their child taken away from them or have to endure some very thorough parental re-education. How fu*king stupid can people be, not only to put themselves in danger but a young child!!!

Especially the young child, adults will not be attacked by these animals, too big for them, but a child is a perfect size. If it were lions then they probably would not have survived. That was the analyses of the zookeeper of these animals.

A cheetah, or in this case several cheetahs, could have easily dispatched the adults.
The question for me without need to comment on the moronic visitors, is where were the keepers and how the hell did the park not know about it until afterwards?
Here, such enclosures are required to be manned (especially when the public are in) and monitored at all times to prevent this sort of thing. A keeper would have been on scene and intervened within a couple of minutes of the first incident, the second wouldn't have happened as they'd have been escorted until they'd left the enclosure.

Staff is expensive and they have been told many times to stay in the car in Dutch and English and given warnings in four different languages. You cannot monitor such a park every inch all the time. Morons will be morons, if you visit such a park, you should know how the behave, if not the consequences are yours as well. Same with visiting wild parks in Africa somewhere.

If we, as a society, eliminate every thread, nothing can happen anymore and everyone should stay home, although most injuries and death occur at home......

Redd wrote:

Jebus Christus!!

That's what I call a funny typo...

ChrisKen wrote:

A cheetah, or in this case several cheetahs, could have easily dispatched the adults.
The question for me without need to comment on the moronic visitors, is where were the keepers and how the hell did the park not know about it until afterwards?
Here, such enclosures are required to be manned (especially when the public are in) and monitored at all times to prevent this sort of thing. A keeper would have been on scene and intervened within a couple of minutes of the first incident, the second wouldn't have happened as they'd have been escorted until they'd left the enclosure.

Cheetahs aren't really dangerous to adult humans. A quick search led me only to 2 reported human deaths at the paws of them, one of which was a child. A lot of people have been mauled, but all in petting zoos (and again, children were involved in most). But ultimately, Cheetahs have a reputation for being almost tame towards adults, to the extent that zookeepers can enter the pen without any protection, and you see all those photos and videos from safari parks where they get onto/into cars.

Leopards are a different story though...

ChrisKen wrote:

Here, such enclosures are required to be manned (especially when the public are in) and monitored at all times to prevent this sort of thing. A keeper would have been on scene and intervened within a couple of minutes of the first incident, the second wouldn't have happened as they'd have been escorted until they'd left the enclosure.

Why would the park expend money to waste it on a few visitors that are reckless and stupid? If they had been attacked, they could not sue, but rather they would need to pay the for the animals they would likely have to put down after they had a bit out of a human.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Why would the park expend money to waste it on a few visitors that are reckless and stupid? If they had been attacked, they could not sue, but rather they would need to pay the for the animals they would likely have to put down after they had a bit out of a human.

Why? Because it's a basic requirement to obtain/renew the license to run such a park.
It's not just to cover the morons (there's more of them than you think), the patrols (usually the keepers) also cover breakdowns and a whole host of other problems. ie the safety of all, public, animals & staff. All sorts of scenarios must be planned for and regularly exercised.

It's truly appalling that above park didn't even know of the incident until after it'd been posted online, from both public safety standpoint and that of the safety & care of their animals.

ChrisKen wrote:

Why? Because it's a basic requirement to obtain/renew the license to run such a park.

Nanny state...

It's not just to cover the morons (there's more of them than you think), the patrols (usually the keepers) also cover breakdowns and a whole host of other problems. ie the safety of all, public, animals & staff. All sorts of scenarios must be planned for and regularly exercised.

people are perfectly safe when they stay in their cars, no need to have standby personal for that sort of stuff. Stay in your car, period.

It's truly appalling that above park didn't even know of the incident until after it'd been posted online, from both public safety standpoint and that of the safety & care of their animals.

It would be appealing if they would track each and every visitor every minute just because of some visitors being stupid.

Driving to the park is more dangerous than being in the park. Also have standby people every couple of hundred yards along highways?

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Nanny state...

Hardly a nanny state. A basic duty of care (for both human & animals) and easily implemented.

people are perfectly safe when they stay in their cars, no need to have standby personal for that sort of stuff. Stay in your car, period.

Great, you'll be happy enough to sit there in your breakdown all fat dumb and happy awaiting assistance that's not there.
Oh btw, Lions in such enclosures have a strange habit of biting car tyres, he keeper patrols are there for the animals too.

It would be appealing appalling if they would track each and every visitor every minute just because of some visitors being stupid.

They monitor the enclosure and everything in it.

Driving to the park is more dangerous than being in the park. Also have standby people every couple of hundred yards along highways?

Guess what, you obtained a license after learning how to safely drive along such roads. A safari park enclosure had different hazards, some are obvious, others aren't. It's an unfamiliar environment for most.

I look forward to your reaction when <insert preferred airline> withdraw all cabin crew from every flight, replace them with a few signs on the end of the air bridge and let passengers fend for themselves once the door has been closed. Sure, most will get through a routine flight well enough but they are there for a reason (guess what, they monitor the cabin), ditto park staff.

ChrisKen wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Nanny state...

Hardly a nanny state. A basic duty of care (for both human & animals) and easily implemented.

very nanny state, since it assumes informed adults do bs that requires them to act like (little) kids that have Nannies.

people are perfectly safe when they stay in their cars, no need to have standby personal for that sort of stuff. Stay in your car, period.

Great, you'll be happy enough to sit there in your breakdown all fat dumb and happy awaiting assistance that's not there.

As a quite frequent Safari park visitor i´d say: yes, i´ll wait. I also have a cellphone if things get complicated.

Oh btw, Lions in such enclosures have a strange habit of biting car tyres, he keeper patrols are there for the animals too.

Don´t know that park, but Safari parks are not enclosed spaces, that is why they are Safari Parks.

They monitor the enclosure and everything in it.

apparently they don´t.

Guess what, you obtained a license after learning how to safely drive along such roads. A safari park enclosure had different hazards, some are obvious, others aren't. It's an unfamiliar environment for most.

"Do not leave the car under any circumstances" should be easy enough to process for anyone with a drivers license, as that comes with the requirement to recognize, read, interpret and execute actions according to signs.

I look forward to your reaction when <insert preferred airline> withdraw all cabin crew from every flight, replace them with a few signs on the end of the air bridge and let passengers fend for themselves once the door has been closed. Sure, most will get through a routine flight well enough but they are there for a reason (guess what, they monitor the cabin), ditto park staff.

I have been on plenty of trains without any staff on board, i would not be any more concerned with aircraft if crew less was the normal mode of operation. There is no need for constant staff availability in Safari parks. Quick news search seems to indicate that airline accidents and incidents are far, far more common than Safari Park ones. Mostly ride related accidents come up.

Reality seems to indicate that constant park surveillance can not have a positive effect on safety and security, since the incident rate is already very low, and as long you let people self drive, there is no way for them to prevent someone from getting out of the car and be stupid.

best regards
Thomas

ChrisKen wrote:

Why? Because it's a basic requirement to obtain/renew the license to run such a park.
It's not just to cover the morons (there's more of them than you think), the patrols (usually the keepers) also cover breakdowns and a whole host of other problems. ie the safety of all, public, animals & staff. All sorts of scenarios must be planned for and regularly exercised.

It's truly appalling that above park didn't even know of the incident until after it'd been posted online, from both public safety standpoint and that of the safety & care of their animals.

You appear to be doing an awful lot of 'jumping to conclusions' here. Nobody said the park was unmanned. It's very much not, there are patrols all the time. But you can't reasonably monitor every inch of it allthe time. It's too big for that. And so, things like this can happen. If the people in the other cars don't inform the park, the park doesn't know.
People at this park are warned at least FOUR times to not get out of the car, and keep windows and doors closed:
-at the entrance of the park there are clear signs in different languages, and pictograms;
-every car gets a leaflet clearly explaining the rules;
-everyone gets verbally warned before they enter;
-there are signs again at the entrance of the cheetah enclosure.

ChrisKen wrote:

Why? Because it's a basic requirement to obtain/renew the license to run such a park.

Clearly, that is not the case in the Netherlands, otherwise there would have been supervision.

At the risk of starting another USA vs EU flamefest, in the USA companies presume their customers to be blithering idiots. That's why there are so many warning labels on everything, including completely useless labels (you know the ones: this bag of nuts may contain nuts). It is very easy to get sued, so companies have to cover themselves for any eventuality no matter how insanely stupid one would have to be to get into the situation. Thankfully this is not the case here.

petertenthije wrote:

It is very easy to get sued, so companies have to cover themselves for any eventuality no matter how insanely stupid one would have to be to get into the situation. Thankfully this is not the case here.

No penalty damages, no one can get rich sueing a company.

Scorpio wrote:

But you can't reasonably monitor every inch of it allthe time. It's too big for that.

Exactly, if you have to monitor everyone every second, you may very well discard the own car trip and only offer supervised safari busses, which probably also an option in the Dutch park.
The only time I used my own car was when my car was so old that I would not mind a few extra scratches.
Areas with animals that can endanger cars structurally, rhinos for example, have ready to react staff in cars with running engine in the very area. In case the animals decide to go on a rampage, but not where danger requires stupidity on the side of the guest.

Best regards
Thomas

CCGPV wrote:

Seeing this is an English language forum with rules stating posts must be made in English I think you should translate the article so to avoid these mistakes in the future.

ROFL! need a hanky?
"de Speld" is comparable to "The Onion" "news"site .

getting informed is all so easy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Speld

IMU the translated article still would have the frenchies shot, right !?

WIederling wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

Seeing this is an English language forum with rules stating posts must be made in English I think you should translate the article so to avoid these mistakes in the future.

ROFL! need a hanky?
"de Speld" is comparable to "The Onion" "news"site .

getting informed is all so easy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Speld

IMU the translated article still would have the frenchies shot, right !?

Forgive me for not knowing about an obscure Dutch language satire website. Seeing the reactions it got here makes me think nobody else does either.

The computer translated article didn't mention shooting anyone.

CCGPV wrote:

Forgive me for not knowing about an obscure Dutch language satire website. Seeing the reactions it got here makes me think nobody else does either.
The computer translated article didn't mention shooting anyone.

I didn't know that either. But it was obvious : "shooting french people to avoid a replay of the situation"
To verify my hunch there is helpful google. ( my guess would be that that "obscure dutch website" is about
as obscure for the Dutch as "The Onion" is "obscure" for the US cultural environment.)

That can only be satire. Or is your cultural environment prone to such things and it thus is an expectable solution?

The Headline:
"Beekse Bergen grijpt in: alle Franse bezoekers preventief afgeschoten"
translates to:
"Beekse Bergen intervenes: all French visitors are shot off preventively"

WIederling wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

Forgive me for not knowing about an obscure Dutch language satire website. Seeing the reactions it got here makes me think nobody else does either.
The computer translated article didn't mention shooting anyone.

I didn't know that either. But it was obvious : "shooting french people to avoid a replay of the situation"
To verify my hunch there is helpful google. ( my guess would be that that "obscure dutch website" is about
as obscure for the Dutch as "The Onion" is "obscure" for the US cultural environment.)

That can only be satire. Or is your cultural environment prone to such things and it thus is an expectable solution?

The Headline:
"Beekse Bergen grijpt in: alle Franse bezoekers preventief afgeschoten"
translates to:
"Beekse Bergen intervenes: all French visitors are shot off preventively"

I assumed the "shot off preventitevly" was a bad translation of "kicked out" or something similar in the Dutch language. There are some rediculous translated articles out there. Some are quite funny.

But we are dumb worthless Americans after all so wanton killing of children and innocent black people is what we do for fun. We as dumb wastes of life here in America have come to accept killings like this because we are sub-human religious ignorant worthless people.

CCGPV wrote:

I assumed the "shot off preventitevly" was a bad translation of "kicked out" or something similar in the Dutch language. There are some rediculous translated articles out there. Some are quite funny.

But we are dumb worthless Americans after all so wanton killing of children and innocent black people is what we do for fun. We as dumb wastes of life here in America have come to accept killings like this because we are sub-human religious ignorant worthless people.

Assuming something is the mother of all f*ck-ups.

Dutchy wrote:

So either you are to dumb to realize your mistake and took such an article for the truth or you are just trolling and making an ass of yourself by doing so. So what is it? I can see arguments on both sides

So thanks for answering the question though

A while ago a family did the same thing in a wildlife park in Beijing and resulted in one death. The family then sue the wildlife park for 2.5 Million Chinese Yuan damages, saying they shouldn't allow people driving into the area