Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Steve Irwin feeds crocodile with baby
- Thread starter eyelikeart
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And I think with any *very* young child you shouldn't put them near anthing something that dangerous.
I know HE knows what he is doing... but when something goes wrong the croc knows you can take it... but it can take the baby.
Obviously, tragedy could easily have struck in a situation such as this, regardless of the guy's skill and experience (he was bitten himself in the past) - even if the likelihood wasn't huge.
And while anything could potentially be risky for a tiny, helpless infant, this far exceeds any "reasonable safety" in terms of calculated risk. As a mother of a small child, this scares and bothers me, as it shows complete disregard for one's own baby's well-being at a period when the baby is most vulnerable. It's not just about the baby's safety, which certainly was at risk. But it's about unnecessarily scaring your tiny baby to death! And yes, a tiny little one definitely "gets" enough to be scared of a huge, weird animal with open mouth, of loud noise, of his dad dangling him unsafely, uncomfortably, definitely the wrong way, paying no attention to the baby whatsoever. To me, it actually looks like the baby is crying in the pics, though it's hard to tell. I would be amazed if he wasn't crying in a situation like this.
In the US a child could be removed from the parents' house and placed into foster care for an incident like this. In any case, I think a significant fine would have been in order, to show the guy he can't do anything he likes for the sake of publicity.
This reminds me too much of children being put up as sideshow/freak show exhibits 100 years ago. I thought societly was beyond that stage.
And while anything could potentially be risky for a tiny, helpless infant, this far exceeds any "reasonable safety" in terms of calculated risk. As a mother of a small child, this scares and bothers me, as it shows complete disregard for one's own baby's well-being at a period when the baby is most vulnerable. It's not just about the baby's safety, which certainly was at risk. But it's about unnecessarily scaring your tiny baby to death! And yes, a tiny little one definitely "gets" enough to be scared of a huge, weird animal with open mouth, of loud noise, of his dad dangling him unsafely, uncomfortably, definitely the wrong way, paying no attention to the baby whatsoever. To me, it actually looks like the baby is crying in the pics, though it's hard to tell. I would be amazed if he wasn't crying in a situation like this.
In the US a child could be removed from the parents' house and placed into foster care for an incident like this. In any case, I think a significant fine would have been in order, to show the guy he can't do anything he likes for the sake of publicity.
This reminds me too much of children being put up as sideshow/freak show exhibits 100 years ago. I thought societly was beyond that stage.
And tragedy could easily strike every time you stick your* baby in the back seat of a car. Flying along a narrow strip of bitumen at 80 K's an hour, with tonnes of metal flying at you in the opposite direction just METRES to the side, driven by tired and stressed-out humans, separated by a pathetic pair of painted lines. And on the other side, hundreds of fixed targets ready to transform your car and its precious contents into a grossly distorted wreck should you make the slightest lapse. My god--how could anyone put a defenceless little baby, or any young kid, in that situation? Isn't the danger OBVIOUS?
Well, no, it isn't. Because you've been sticking yourself in that situation every day for years, and you've probably come out fine (though a lot of people haven't). Maybe you've had a little prang in the car park, and been rear-ended by some idiot at a set of lights, but you made it home.
Now look at it from Irwin's perspective. He's been dealing with dangerous animals, crocodiles in particular, every day since he was a boy. Maybe he's been bitten once or twice, but he's learned from the experience. His ability to read and react to the situation near the croc is every bit as good, if not better, than your ability to read and react to the situation on the road. From his point of view, the baby was in no more danger than if it were zooming along in the back of a car. The enclosure was his road, crocs the other cars, and he the experienced driver.
As for dangling the baby under his arm, well, I don't know. People do cart their babies around the house like that. Maybe he could've slipped in that damp enclosure. Gotta be careful--the most benign everyday situations like walking on a rain-soaked pavement can lead to a serious accident. Simple absent-mindedness is just as dangerous. A few weeks ago here in Australia, a pram with baby inside rolled off a railway platform and onto the tracks just moments before a train roared into the station, because the father forgot to engage the pram's brake (thankfully, the baby was uninjured). Given the full range of possibilities, maybe the croc should have been the least of our worries
In the end, I'm not condoning what he did. I reckon he was letting his inclination to show off impair his judgement of the appropriateness of what he was doing. But I consider the public reaction to be just a little bit hysterical and hypocritical, with the tabloid media here blowing it out of all proportion in their usual self-serving way.
* Please note that I use the word "your" generally--I don't know whether you drive and cart your young kid along with you on a regular basis, but judging by the number of infant capsules and toddler seats I see in the back of those fat 4WDs (aka SUVs) that threaten to mow me down every day, there are many parents who do.
Well, no, it isn't. Because you've been sticking yourself in that situation every day for years, and you've probably come out fine (though a lot of people haven't). Maybe you've had a little prang in the car park, and been rear-ended by some idiot at a set of lights, but you made it home.
Now look at it from Irwin's perspective. He's been dealing with dangerous animals, crocodiles in particular, every day since he was a boy. Maybe he's been bitten once or twice, but he's learned from the experience. His ability to read and react to the situation near the croc is every bit as good, if not better, than your ability to read and react to the situation on the road. From his point of view, the baby was in no more danger than if it were zooming along in the back of a car. The enclosure was his road, crocs the other cars, and he the experienced driver.
As for dangling the baby under his arm, well, I don't know. People do cart their babies around the house like that. Maybe he could've slipped in that damp enclosure. Gotta be careful--the most benign everyday situations like walking on a rain-soaked pavement can lead to a serious accident. Simple absent-mindedness is just as dangerous. A few weeks ago here in Australia, a pram with baby inside rolled off a railway platform and onto the tracks just moments before a train roared into the station, because the father forgot to engage the pram's brake (thankfully, the baby was uninjured). Given the full range of possibilities, maybe the croc should have been the least of our worries
In the end, I'm not condoning what he did. I reckon he was letting his inclination to show off impair his judgement of the appropriateness of what he was doing. But I consider the public reaction to be just a little bit hysterical and hypocritical, with the tabloid media here blowing it out of all proportion in their usual self-serving way.
* Please note that I use the word "your" generally--I don't know whether you drive and cart your young kid along with you on a regular basis, but judging by the number of infant capsules and toddler seats I see in the back of those fat 4WDs (aka SUVs) that threaten to mow me down every day, there are many parents who do.
Comon guys jeez, lay off the guy. I was reading his comments in the paper this morning. It was control hysteria, he was in complete control. I'm sure if there was a risk he saw as threatning he wouldn't have done it. he did it with his 5 year old daughter and nobody said a damn thing
Just remember, HE'S the croc expert, not us. He's the one who knows how much danger (if any) the baby was in.
I have seen parents do a lot worse before. Like parents leaving matches out, their child found them and burns half the house down, no one was hurt though (got out in time).
Thats right, the croc will only close its mouth if it feels something touch the inside of the mouth.
i've been flip-flopping on this all week... i understand that he knows the crocs, but jeeez... while i trust him, and dont doubt that the baby was pretty safe cause i'm sure those darn animals are overfed and fat and slow in the zoo, its still a little silly. i lost some respect for the man.
I have to agree that Steve's the pro. His life is based around wild animals and doing things that would make most of us shudder just thinking about. He has every right to include his family in his business if he wishes to, no matter what their age. I saw clips of the video, it was entertaining (also within Steve's business). Even if there wasn't a large paying crowd, I'd bet that Steve'd have his son around crocs anyway.
To compare him to Michael Jackson is ludicrous: MJ isn't in the business of dangling things off hotel balconies...
I'm sure many have seen this.
To compare him to Michael Jackson is ludicrous: MJ isn't in the business of dangling things off hotel balconies...
I'm sure many have seen this.