Police: Tiger attack victim was drinking, admitted taunting

I need to rant about this. I don't know why but this article made me sooooo mad! Is it just me or is the fact that the victims of the San Francisco tiger attack taunted the tiger completely and totally irrelevant?!?!?!?!? Okay, so yes, I know that the boys were probably being obnoxious and they had alchohol and marijuana in their systems, but don't you think the zoo should take those things into account when building an enclosure for a deadly animal. I mean, were they sitting at a board meeting talking about how high to build the tiger wall and someone says "I know the wall should be 16 feet tall, but as long as no one taunts the tigers, 12 feet should do." I'm pretty sure that it's a given that at some point during the zoo's existence, they could have forseen obnoxious boys (yes, even adult boys) yelling things at the tigers. I don't care what they were doing, unless they crawled into the tiger enclosure themselves, which they did not. There is no justifiable reason that the tiger got out and to lay any of the blame on these boys (whether drunk and high or not) is absolutely ludicrous! It blows my mind that the zoo is really using this as an excuse for the clear negligence of their organization. Here's a quote from the zoo:

Sam Singer, a spokesman for the zoo, said he had not seen the documents but believed the victims did taunt the animal, even though they claim they hadn't.
"Those brothers painted a completely different picture to the public and the press," Singer said. "Now it's starting to come out that what they said is not true."

Yeah, last time I checked, being mauled to death by a tiger wasn't really a just punishment for smoking a joint and throwing back some vodka. I'm getting really worked up just writing this so I need to end. Thank you for listening!