Steve Irwin taking baby in crocodile pit
Find a Conversation
Steve Irwin taking baby in crocodile pit
| Tue, 01-06-2004 - 8:26pm |
I think he used VERY poor judgment, to say the least. It upset me to see the video.
| Tue, 01-06-2004 - 8:26pm |
Pages
So now people are talking about danger in automobiles and household cleaners. How lame.
ITA! Well written post!
cl-Libraone
>"When you come to a message board you "risk" reading opinions and FACTS which don;t match your thinking. That's the way this message board thing works."<
Glad you understand that point! Would be boring if we all agreed.
BTW
the board.

cl-Libraone
he didn't do anything that hasn't been done before, and not just in australia with crocodiles.
yes, there's a certain amount of risk involved, but that's a given in ANY situation.
that he taped it and showed it on tv speaks of sensationalism, but this isn't 'fear factor' we're talking about here. he knew what he was doing and would have done the same without cameras around.
>>I would venture to suggest that if we were to train hidden cameras on every parent with a young child for 24 hours we would witness numerous instances of risky actions/behaviour within the home, the car, out in public places. Like he himself said, there's more danger (and statistics bare this out) in putting a child in a motor vehicle and driving on a public road.>>
Irwin is obviouly an outback kind of guy not to know that DRIVING is a necessary part of life. Parents must drive to take the kids to school, go to the doctor, etc. What Irwin did is subject his baby to UNNECESSARY RISK! There was NOTHING to gain by doing it except to satify his selfish need for attention. All he needed to do is trip and this baby would have become an appetiser for that speedy crock. "Expertise" has nothing to do with it.
<>
Again using your logic, why does the media even bother reporting our soldiers that are
killed in Iraq? Afterall, more people die in gang-bang violence in our cities so what the heck, these soldiers would probably die in a drive-by anyway.
>>Parents must drive to take the kids to school, go to the doctor, etc.!>>
That may be so, but there are plenty of instances of what you like to call UNNECESSARY RISK involved in doing so with many people. Failure to strap the child into a child restraint, failure to obey road rules, failure to be observant, failure to ensure the vehicle being used to transport the child meets all safety standards, failure to ensure the car's tyers are in good order, etc. - THAT is unnecessary risk!
<>
What Irwin did was take a CALCULATED risk in introducing his baby to the family's lifestyle. The biggest UNNECESSARY risk he took was to have TV cameras there.
>>There was NOTHING to gain by doing it except to satify his selfish need for attention.>>
Again, you are wrong! His need for attention had absolutely nothing to do with it. I don't think he lacks for attention - unfortunately. If this incident were nothing but an attention getting exercise then how do you explain the fact that he did exactly the same thing with his daughter when she was a baby (photos have been produced) - of course he was quite so famous then and there were no TV cameras around to record the event.
>>Again using your logic, why does the media even bother reporting our soldiers that are
killed in Iraq? Afterall, more people die in gang-bang violence in our cities so what the heck, these soldiers would probably die in a drive-by anyway.>>
Well, I don't know whose logic it is you're using to arrive at that conclusion but it most certainly isn't mine. That was some leap you made there (but then why doesn't that surprise me?). In your scenario above, people are being harmed and killed in both situations (Iraq & drive-by). What you fail to realise (or perhaps simply refuse to accept due to mental myopia) is that in the Irwin incident baby BOB WAS NOT HURT IN ANY WAY!!! Do you understand that????
Edited 1/9/2004 12:04:59 AM ET by cheshierfire
>>And Yasir Arafat won the Nobel "Peace" Prize, too (nt)<<
Yeah. Whoopee.
Hey, if they are nominating Steve Irwin as "Australian of the Year" - either before or especially after this incident, the pickings in that country must be mighty slim. LOL!
Getting back to this "risk" issue, I guess according to some it's okay to sit a toddler in the middle of the freeway or thrust them in any other dangerous situaiton- as long as s/he is not "hurt". What's next, putting kids in the sewer with rats?
By the way, I've read that drug dealers often use crocodiles and alligators to guard their stash. Guess some people just don't get it, or they want to argue just for the sake of arguing.
Pages