Alligator killed 2-year-old boy in Disney World

Status
Not open for further replies.
A local woman from here was taken by a croc in a National Park up north towards teh end of last month.

They've got signs everywhaere entering the area, I doubt that there's a single grown up in Oz who hasn't heard of the problems, but went wading anyway.
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
A local woman from here was taken by a croc in a National Park up north towards the end of last month.

They've got signs everywhere entering the area, I doubt that there's a single grown up in Oz who hasn't heard of the problems, but went wading anyway.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/disney-faces-...nce.html?ref=gs

Same link:

Quote:
Stanford Law Professor Nora Freeman Engstrom said that Disney had a duty to protect visitors from danger and that wording and placement of the signs would be carefully looked at if the case went to trial.

The company could argue that the incident was not foreseeable and that the sign was adequate, she said. But she predicted the case would not go to trial.

"The bottom line is that they have a child whose body was snatched from the parents" as they watched, she said. "I don't think it is the kind of case where you want to be arguing the ... subtle details of law."
 
Well if that's the case, then the Heirarchy of Controls, as applied to everything else needs to be adopted...it's the only defensible position (not nuances).

Elimination - eliminate the risk (alligator or beachfront).
Substitution - a desert scene rather than a beach.
Engineering Controls - nets and screens that are alligator proof, manproof fences.
Administration - That's where signs fit in, and the "nuances" of the wording...in the heirarchy, they are pretty useless to a toddler.
Protective Equipment

If, as a manager, I don't select the highest then I need to justify why it was bypassed and a lower level selected.
 
I've been to Disney World 20+ times and have only seen one alligator while I was there. It was in a resort's lake (Coronado Springs) just swimming around.. He was pretty small though and their animal control got him.

I've walked many paths along water there even at night. The area where the child was taken, the path between MGM and the Beach/ Yacht club etc. No gators.

This is a rare occurrence for sure.

Florida water isnt to be messed with though. Snakes, large biting bugs, alligators etc. I like Indiana.

My dad did have an alligator TICK go after him in the pool once. They are filled with pistachio pudding.
laugh.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: bvance554
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
If Disney only had signs that simply said "No Swimming" they are going to get sued big time for negligence knowing the waters are infested with alligators. Wait and see how this all unfolds, you'll see Disney paying out some big settlement money.


So from now on a warning sign must list EVERY possible danger that is covered under the 'DO NOT XXX' or 'NO XXX.' I know how its going to play out, I don't need to watch anything. I just think it is completely ludicrous. If a seagull landed on your head and pecked your eyeballs out is that Disneys fault? Who would you sue? Seagulls weren't on the sign.


Originally Posted By: Shannow
Then your system is broken.

Nothing is more succinct than don't enter the water, whether it be for gators, or that's where the sewage ends up.

Throw in a hundred lines of fine print, and the guy who gets a brain eating amoeba was justified in swimming.


What I'm saying is having signs that just say "No Swimming" doesn't warn of any known dangers like alligators. Disney knowing and not warning their patrons of the possibility of dangerous alligators in the water will be viewed as negligence. Besides, the kid technically wasn't 'swimming', he was wading in 5~6 inches of water. There were no signs that said "Stay Out of the Water" or "No Wading" ... etc.

If Disney did have signs that clearly said something like "Warning, Do No Enter The Water - Dangerous Alligators", and then someone still went in the water and got hurt or killed, then Disney would most likely have covered themselves from a lawsuit. The onus would then be on the idiot ignoring the signs of danger in the waters.

Disney gave no warning whatsoever that there could be deadly animals in the water. Seeing a sign that says "No Swimming" makes one tend to think there is no danger at all, and that they just don't want you in the waters. Big difference.

Disney will probably be found to be negligent in this case. They will probably just settle out of court because they know they will lose and don't want the public publicity which will hurt future business.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

Disney gave no warning whatsoever that there could be deadly animals in the water. Seeing a sign that says "No Swimming" makes one tend to think there is no danger at all, and that they just don't want you in the waters. Big difference.

Disney will probably be found to be negligent in this case. They will probably just settle out of court because they know they will lose and don't want the public publicity which will hurt future business.


That pretty much sums it up. A mention of alligators would have been smart, something along these lines which you wrote: "Warning, Do No Enter The Water - Dangerous Alligators". They'd have to do it in several languages and maybe with some graphics to convey the point.

Disney is going to get hit in the pocketbook, and they should. No money in the world will ever make it right, or fix the [censored] that the parents will have to endure everyday for the rest of their lives.
 
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: fdcg27


They did have a very good track record.
Until some fool decided that the Florida gator was somehow a protected species.
As I posted above, hunt them until they are no more.
It's not as though any part of Florida can be regarded as a nature preserve.
Kill them all off and incidents like this one in this state which is both heavily populated and heavily visited won't happen.
I'd personally trade every gator for the son of one family.
50.gif

Pretty much everything you do entails more risk than being killed by a gator. Are you this hysterical about everything?

The UFO graphic may be cute, but it makes it difficult to take your post seriously.
The risks inherent in pretty much everything I do are easily managed.
Driving is a good example of an activity with much higher risk of fatal injury than an attack by an alligator.
Driving also offers one the opportunity to greatly reduce risks in ways that we're all aware of.
We cannot reduce the risk of an alligator seizing a small child in an area that most visitors would regard as safe without removing the alligators.
If there were an active alligator hunt in Florida, the creatures would then become very wary of humans and would likely avoid areas frequented by people.
Since you live in Florida, you should be well aware of the infestations of gators in developed areas.
We have similar populations of deer in developed suburban areas in this state. The difference is that we have an active deer hunt in Ohio to control the deer population and I've never known a deer to come running out of the woods to seize a small child.
We have deer in our backyard now and then and we have families of foxes. Neither are anything to fear and both will flee from any person although it is best to leave big bucks in peace during the rut.
 
Yet, on the other hand, we accept the kind of risk shown in my picture below everyday.

Shannow is very correct in that our system is broken (yet, he seems to be in denial about this in numerous threads).

Knee jerk reactions in the US are rampant depending on the circumstances:

- Rampant deer-car accidents accepted, shark or gator attack not.
- Daily friend/family member child abuse accepted, rare lone pedophile abduction/murder not
- No swimming sign not accepted, lame construction baracades yes.
stock-photo-construction-site-is-protected-by-several-signs-and-orange-fence-for-safety-271394987.jpg
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We have similar populations of deer in developed suburban areas in this state. The difference is that we have an active deer hunt in Ohio to control the deer population and I've never known a deer to come running out of the woods to seize a small child.
We have deer in our backyard now and then and we have families of foxes. Neither are anything to fear and both will flee from any person although it is best to leave big bucks in peace during the rut.


You seem to have a "bambi movie" type education about things.

"In Ohio, seven deaths and 844 injuries were caused by deer-vehicle collisions in 2013, Ohio Department of Public Safety records show. The department reported a total of 20,201 deer-vehicle crashes that year."
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2014/09/15/chances-of-hitting-a-deer-rising.html

Also, go research damage to agriculture, forestry, landscapes, as well as lyme disease, chronic wasting disease................. hundreds of million dollars per year in many states.

Why exterminate the alligators but not also the deer??? Because the stigma attached to alligators vs. the "bambi-like" perception of deer???

Statistics are fun. Want more:
Average Number of Deaths per Year in the U.S
Bee/Wasp 53
Dogs 31
Spider 6.5
Rattlesnake 5.5
Mountain lion 1
Shark 1
Alligator 0.3
Bear 0.5
Scorpion 0.5
Centipede 0.5
Elephant 0.25
Wolf 0.1
Horse 20
Bull 3

Ah, and then there is the lowly flies and mosquitoes!
 
Originally Posted By: Al
What'your point? The kid's only value is to the parents. Its worth zero dollars to society-it is valueless and doesn't perform any function at this point.


My point is - being that Time Warner is an evil company to begin with and one who gets all their money from ripping off their customers for cable TV - they should pay the parents $5 Billion - with a B.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: fdcg27


They did have a very good track record.
Until some fool decided that the Florida gator was somehow a protected species.
As I posted above, hunt them until they are no more.
It's not as though any part of Florida can be regarded as a nature preserve.
Kill them all off and incidents like this one in this state which is both heavily populated and heavily visited won't happen.
I'd personally trade every gator for the son of one family.
50.gif

Pretty much everything you do entails more risk than being killed by a gator. Are you this hysterical about everything?

The UFO graphic may be cute, but it makes it difficult to take your post seriously.
The risks inherent in pretty much everything I do are easily managed.
Driving is a good example of an activity with much higher risk of fatal injury than an attack by an alligator.
Driving also offers one the opportunity to greatly reduce risks in ways that we're all aware of.
We cannot reduce the risk of an alligator seizing a small child in an area that most visitors would regard as safe without removing the alligators.
If there were an active alligator hunt in Florida, the creatures would then become very wary of humans and would likely avoid areas frequented by people.
Since you live in Florida, you should be well aware of the infestations of gators in developed areas.
We have similar populations of deer in developed suburban areas in this state. The difference is that we have an active deer hunt in Ohio to control the deer population and I've never known a deer to come running out of the woods to seize a small child.
We have deer in our backyard now and then and we have families of foxes. Neither are anything to fear and both will flee from any person although it is best to leave big bucks in peace during the rut.
Deer kill an estimated 120-30 people a year. Funny you use them as an example. You yanks need to focus on yankee stuff and stop worrying about issues you have no knowledge of.

Quote:
The most dangerous mammal in North America is...Bambi. The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates that white-tailed deer kill around 130 Americans each year simply by causing car accidents. In 1994, these predator deer had a banner year, causing 211 human deaths in car wrecks.

There are about 1.5 million deer/vehicle collisions annually, resulting in 29,000 human injuries and more than $1 billion in insurance claims in addition to the death toll. Deer also carry the ticks that transmit Lyme disease to about 13,000 people each year. Economic damage to agriculture, timber, and landscaping by deer totals more than $1.2 billion a year.



http://reason.com/archives/2001/11/21/north-americas-most-dangerous
 
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We have similar populations of deer in developed suburban areas in this state. The difference is that we have an active deer hunt in Ohio to control the deer population and I've never known a deer to come running out of the woods to seize a small child.
We have deer in our backyard now and then and we have families of foxes. Neither are anything to fear and both will flee from any person although it is best to leave big bucks in peace during the rut.


You seem to have a "bambi movie" type education about things.

"In Ohio, seven deaths and 844 injuries were caused by deer-vehicle collisions in 2013, Ohio Department of Public Safety records show. The department reported a total of 20,201 deer-vehicle crashes that year."
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2014/09/15/chances-of-hitting-a-deer-rising.html

Why exterminate the alligators but not also the deer???

Also, go research damage to agriculture, forestry, landscapes, as well as lyme disease, chronic wasting disease................. hundreds of million per year in many states.
Beat me to it!
grin.gif

Alligator deaths in FL are .3/yr. You're more likely to die from everything.
 
Given rarity of event and massive amount of cash sitting at Disney why do some of you ladies have your panties in a knot about an extremely rare event that requires one payout. The payout is small compared to damage of reputation and (de)illusion.

Apparently the last time this happening was 1986 ( so Disney aware of risk) of a kid feeding ducks and alligator tried to grab and drag him in from edge of shore. Thankfully his siblings 12 and under beat the thing away. Disney is aware of danger but I guess felt the tiny risk outweighed the damage to illusion of happiness and glee of "Disney".
 
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Disney will pay good amount of money to the boy's parents, how much do you think it will be ? Between $1M and $5M ?


Little kids are only worth 5 million these days ? Meanwhile, a new fighter jet costs how much ?


My view may not be popular, but as here in Oz, after TORT reform I've formed a view consistent with how workers, injuries via medical negligence etc. are handled.

Under Tort reform, there is NO compensation for pain and suffering.

As such, a two year old kid is "worth" literally nothing in monetary terms. They aren't breadwinners with a family relying on the income, they aren't losing income...

In a post tort reform world, the company has an obligation to make them whole if that can be done (clearly not here), regardless of the cost, but in terms of compensation to the parents...should be nada.

It's a horrid event, with multiple parties sharing some of the guilt.


In economic terms, a two year old boy isn't an asset but is rather a liability. How much money would this family have to have spent to raise this young boy to self-sufficient maturity?
Certainly something approaching or even exceeding six figures, depending upon how much help the family could or would render the young man in pursuing higher education.
The effect of tort reform is to remove the economic incentive for all entities to reduce and remove potential hazards.
In this country, we've had little in the way of effective tort reform, so that an entity like Disney cannot escape liability for negligence, if negligence can be shown under law. This creates an incentive for all entities to reduce and remove hazards.
Civil law is often used to hold entities accountable for serious wrongdoing that cannot be pursued under criminal law.
This is the advantage of the often mocked and admittedly imperfect American system of tort law.
Many economic actors may not understand morality but they do understand money.
 
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Given rarity of event and massive amount of cash sitting at Disney why do some of you ladies have your panties in a knot about an extremely rare event that requires one payout. The payout is small compared to damage of reputation and (de)illusion.

Apparently the last time this happening was 1986 ( so Disney aware of risk) of a kid feeding ducks and alligator tried to grab and drag him in from edge of shore. Thankfully his siblings 12 and under beat the thing away. Disney is aware of danger but I guess felt the tiny risk outweighed the damage to illusion of happiness and glee of "Disney".



It's like the Ford Pinto then, but everyone was ready to hang Ford by their, you know what, for putting $$$ on human life. Apparently Disney can do this, no problem.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We have similar populations of deer in developed suburban areas in this state. The difference is that we have an active deer hunt in Ohio to control the deer population and I've never known a deer to come running out of the woods to seize a small child.
We have deer in our backyard now and then and we have families of foxes. Neither are anything to fear and both will flee from any person although it is best to leave big bucks in peace during the rut.


You seem to have a "bambi movie" type education about things.

"In Ohio, seven deaths and 844 injuries were caused by deer-vehicle collisions in 2013, Ohio Department of Public Safety records show. The department reported a total of 20,201 deer-vehicle crashes that year."
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2014/09/15/chances-of-hitting-a-deer-rising.html

Why exterminate the alligators but not also the deer???

Also, go research damage to agriculture, forestry, landscapes, as well as lyme disease, chronic wasting disease................. hundreds of million per year in many states.
Beat me to it!
grin.gif

Alligator deaths in FL are .3/yr. You're more likely to die from everything.


Considering that I avoid at least a couple of deer vs car (mine) events every fall on the rural two lane I drive for most of my commute to work and considering that I also hunt them in season, I don't think that I have anything like a Bambi view of the animals.
Pay attention during the rut and avoid flying along lovely back roads and your chances of hitting a deer are pretty minimal.
They do manage to live in areas where you'd think that the habitat wouldn't support them.
Deer also provide considerable economic benefit from both the harvested meat as well as from the sales of hunting licenses, weapons, ammo and other gear.
Can't really say that for Florida gators.
A ride in an airboat through the River of Grass is pretty entertaining, though, and the alligators are interesting to see.
The "you Yanks" comment is also a little naïve in that Florida was built with money from north of the Mason-Dixon line as well as that of Cuban expats fleeing the Castro brothers.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
Disney will pay good amount of money to the boy's parents, how much do you think it will be ? Between $1M and $5M ?


Little kids are only worth 5 million these days ? Meanwhile, a new fighter jet costs how much ?


My view may not be popular, but as here in Oz, after TORT reform I've formed a view consistent with how workers, injuries via medical negligence etc. are handled.

Under Tort reform, there is NO compensation for pain and suffering.

As such, a two year old kid is "worth" literally nothing in monetary terms. They aren't breadwinners with a family relying on the income, they aren't losing income...

In a post tort reform world, the company has an obligation to make them whole if that can be done (clearly not here), regardless of the cost, but in terms of compensation to the parents...should be nada.

It's a horrid event, with multiple parties sharing some of the guilt.


In economic terms, a two year old boy isn't an asset but is rather a liability. How much money would this family have to have spent to raise this young boy to self-sufficient maturity?
Certainly something approaching or even exceeding six figures, depending upon how much help the family could or would render the young man in pursuing higher education.
The effect of tort reform is to remove the economic incentive for all entities to reduce and remove potential hazards.
In this country, we've had little in the way of effective tort reform, so that an entity like Disney cannot escape liability for negligence, if negligence can be shown under law. This creates an incentive for all entities to reduce and remove hazards.
Civil law is often used to hold entities accountable for serious wrongdoing that cannot be pursued under criminal law.
This is the advantage of the often mocked and admittedly imperfect American system of tort law.
Many economic actors may not understand morality but they do understand money.
A healthy, intelligent two years old can be found by a jury to have the potential for a long working career, worth a lot of money.
M. Mouse & Company don't want a protracted public trial, the publicity will drive tourists elsewhere, and the loss of earnings would be far more than the settlement.
 
Quote:
Deer also provide considerable economic benefit from both the harvested meat as well as from the sales of hunting licenses, weapons, ammo and other gear.
Can't really say that for Florida gators.
You do realize FL has gator hunting too? Had it for decades.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom