- Joined
- Aug 18, 2004
- Messages
- 2,239
And that is the folly of many animal rights activists, comparing animal rights to human rights.
Thery're at it again! PLEASE READ
- Thread starter the toe cutter
- Start date
The slavery comparison is in responce to the "right" to own animals as they are considered "property". I was in no way implying everybody keeps them as mere objects as I myself genuinely care for the animals I keep. The point was to say "rights" are human made and change as the views of society change and are not set in stone as PBL seems to be implying.
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Messages
- 1,272
So your saying the mere act of keeping a pet harms the people around you, just by having that said pet?
Once you decide you dont agrea with what your neighbort has done with his on belongings and or his private property. What step do u take next? If you strongly diagrea with it. You try to OUT LAW IT! does not matter if there is no reall evidence suprting the band. If you create mass histeria then BAM! Its a done deal! People are sheeple?? so many times the one carrying the torch becomes then one chased y the torch. shoes on the other foot.
Dont worry there isnt much controll of dogs that kill people.
If you dont like the selling of this snake or spider or even smoking in that resturant. Dont go! The market will correct its self. giving that its still a free market.
Let me clarify i do not suport the pet band, but at some point we alowed some out of touch A$$hole step into or private life. Hate to say it someone invited them.
Depending on someone for something is not good! Give a man a fish. he eats for one day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a life time. I think that came frrom the bible. anyway nock nockOnce you decide you dont agrea with what your neighbort has done with his on belongings and or his private property. What step do u take next? If you strongly diagrea with it. You try to OUT LAW IT! does not matter if there is no reall evidence suprting the band. If you create mass histeria then BAM! Its a done deal! People are sheeple?? so many times the one carrying the torch becomes then one chased y the torch. shoes on the other foot.
Dont worry there isnt much controll of dogs that kill people.
If you dont like the selling of this snake or spider or even smoking in that resturant. Dont go! The market will correct its self. giving that its still a free market.
Let me clarify i do not suport the pet band, but at some point we alowed some out of touch A$$hole step into or private life. Hate to say it someone invited them.
This comes down to what you think the role of government is, i don't think the government has a role in protecting people from themselves necessarily but it definitely has a role in protecting people from other people. Second hand smoke is proven to be really bad for people, and if your an employee or a customer going to a business out of necessity and someone's smoking then your being forcibly exposed to something thats harmful. Let me ask you if your against the civil rights act that said that business's were banned from discriminating against race? This isnt the forum for debating political issues but it sounds to me like your espousing libertarian mumbo jumbo which has no bearing on reality and i had to correct that, market forces alone cannot prevent businesses from harming people.
If people were being killed left and right by their pet snakes, and their neighbors were being attacked, then i would be for banning large snakes. As an example i don't think people should keep chimpanzees as pets for a number of reasons but one of them is that adult male chimps have a tendancy to attack strangers, and bite off their faces, fingers, and genitals.
Last edited:
DUH! :? Where have you been??
Anybody who thinks that banning something will fix a problem is living in a fantasy world. Murder is already illegal, so banning tools that can be used to kill is pointless. The only people that follow safe-driving laws are the people who wish to drive safely. I wouldn't drive drunk even if it were legal because I don't want to harm myself or others. It IS illegal, but people STILL do it. Why? Because they don't care. The only people that follow the laws are the people predisposed to do such. For example, wearing your seatbelt... I'd wear it even if I didn't legally have to. People who want laws to tell them how to behave properly and/or safely are clearly too immature to handle the responsibility of driving a car, shooting a gun, owning a pet, etc. If you can't handle cooking without burning the house down, should we ban stoves? Laws (or lack thereof) ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. It's a people problem. End of story.
Name one incident where something bad happened (besides perhaps a tsunami), and I can prove it was human error that caused and/or contributed to that bad event. Even if you have a tire blowout and hurt someone, you must consider the fact that 1) the tire may have not been properly checked for air and/or wear, 2) a person made the tire, or at least the machine that made the tire, and 3) a person may have been driving under conditions for which the tire was not rated. So much human involvement, even with the selection of the material and tire-making process, hence a freak accident tire blowout is anything but a freak accident. Human error was a factor. Bottom line.
Start with the "5 whys." A child was killed by an exotic snake. Why? Because the snake was by the boy's sandbox. Why? Because the snake escaped. Why? Because the owner didn't latch the cage. Why? Because he forgot. Why? Because he was high. <<There you go. Human error. So because that stoned exotic snake owner screwed up, people shouldn't be allowed to have those snakes??
I have a 4000 pound car that can go over 100 mph. I could be the deadliest thing on my street, except I DON'T WANT TO BE DEADLY, so I choose to maintain my car, check the tires frequently, drive a safe speed (compensate for weather if necessary), follow traffic signals, etc. That red octagon is just a suggestion. There is no superior being forcing my foot to the brake pedal. I don't want to get T-boned, hit another car, or hit a kid, therefore I choose to stop. If I don't stop, and I kill somebody... HUMAN ERROR. No law could prevent that. I have all kinds of potentially dangerous stuff. My chef's knife is made of German steel. I could cause some serious damage with it, but I prefer to chop produce with it. Is it starting to make sense now?
I have concluded that repetition is a highly effective (though not the only) way to learn. I have done a lot of math problems, and have proven many times to many people that I have a firm grasp of math. Maybe if I keep repeating that it's not a law problem, but a people problem, then maybe y'all will get it...
If somebody can prove to me that a lack of a law caused a problem, rather than a human, then I will most definitely admit that I am wrong.
Name one incident where something bad happened (besides perhaps a tsunami), and I can prove it was human error that caused and/or contributed to that bad event. Even if you have a tire blowout and hurt someone, you must consider the fact that 1) the tire may have not been properly checked for air and/or wear, 2) a person made the tire, or at least the machine that made the tire, and 3) a person may have been driving under conditions for which the tire was not rated. So much human involvement, even with the selection of the material and tire-making process, hence a freak accident tire blowout is anything but a freak accident. Human error was a factor. Bottom line.
Start with the "5 whys." A child was killed by an exotic snake. Why? Because the snake was by the boy's sandbox. Why? Because the snake escaped. Why? Because the owner didn't latch the cage. Why? Because he forgot. Why? Because he was high. <<There you go. Human error. So because that stoned exotic snake owner screwed up, people shouldn't be allowed to have those snakes??
I have a 4000 pound car that can go over 100 mph. I could be the deadliest thing on my street, except I DON'T WANT TO BE DEADLY, so I choose to maintain my car, check the tires frequently, drive a safe speed (compensate for weather if necessary), follow traffic signals, etc. That red octagon is just a suggestion. There is no superior being forcing my foot to the brake pedal. I don't want to get T-boned, hit another car, or hit a kid, therefore I choose to stop. If I don't stop, and I kill somebody... HUMAN ERROR. No law could prevent that. I have all kinds of potentially dangerous stuff. My chef's knife is made of German steel. I could cause some serious damage with it, but I prefer to chop produce with it. Is it starting to make sense now?
I have concluded that repetition is a highly effective (though not the only) way to learn. I have done a lot of math problems, and have proven many times to many people that I have a firm grasp of math. Maybe if I keep repeating that it's not a law problem, but a people problem, then maybe y'all will get it...
If somebody can prove to me that a lack of a law caused a problem, rather than a human, then I will most definitely admit that I am wrong.
Last edited:
Like i said before i agree humans are the problem not the animals nor laws, but a law can detur most people from breaking it if it has a severe enough punishment.
Sure people will do crimes regardless of being legal or not, but with a harsh enough punishment you can probably prevent 95% of those people from committing a crime. If littering was punishable by death im sure there would be very few that would still litter where if it was punishable by a 100$ fine or just community service, the amount of people littering would be much greater as even if they got caught its just a slap on the wrist.
Sure people will do crimes regardless of being legal or not, but with a harsh enough punishment you can probably prevent 95% of those people from committing a crime. If littering was punishable by death im sure there would be very few that would still litter where if it was punishable by a 100$ fine or just community service, the amount of people littering would be much greater as even if they got caught its just a slap on the wrist.
Before I get called an anarchist, let me clarify that I do agree that things like murder and rape should be illegal, and punishable, but simply making them illegal does not prevent them from happening. Just wanted to clarify that. Tackling those problems is a whole other can of worms.
Missed your post before I posted my last reply... So you are saying we have to threaten people with death to get laws to work properly? Murder is punishable by the death penalty in many states. Murder still occurs. Try again...
And do you have any proof of these statements:
Never mind, you said it yourself:
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2008
- Messages
- 614
Wow... I'm trying not to keep up with this thread, heh. I'm vegetarian, liberal, and all that fun stuff. However, when it comes to exotic pets, I've always been 100% against ALL bans on them. As someone who DID own an exotic that was banned for a while (DURING the ban, mind you), and lived in fear of having my pet confiscated from me and immediately euthanized like others DID have happen to them, I don't believe any animal should be banned as a pet. If the person does their research, has the money, the time, the resources, the space, the knowledge to keep an animal, then by all means keep it. That includes everything from hamster to tiger, in my opinion.
I had an emin's pouched rat during the monkeypox fiasco. It's a species of african rat, smaller than the gambian rat, but also included in the ban. He was an amazing pet and I would have done anything for him. When the ban went into effect, those with pet prairie dogs and gambians had veterinarians recommend putting them down immediately, and even some people had animal control come in and confiscate their animals from their homes. That ban was lifted a few years back finally, but it has definitely left a dent in the exotic rodent hobby, and no one can even find pouched rats again (and don't get me started on Florida. If you knew how many of us have gone down there ourselves to look for them, have offered huge sums of money to individuals to catch them for us, NO one's seen them since they were FIRST reported as being there, and they were poisoned long ago). These rats have been used to sniff out tuberculosis, land mines, and are crazy intelligent. Mine used the toilet to go to the bathroom, walked on his hind legs, jumped through hoops, etc. in mere minutes of teaching him.
Now that the ban had been lifted (and my pouchie passed away), I keep three prairie dogs... I went with one of the other species that was banned during that ordeal, since pouchies are non-existant now in the USA.
The scary part about it is that the SOLE person who was responsible for the monkeypox ordeal? HE STILL IS IN Business!!! I feel that he should have been further punished, not allowed to sell exotics again. it's human error that caused it.
You should read the crazy instances of dog, horse, and cow related human deaths every year in the US. Are those animals going to be banned? Of course not. The exotics are a scapegoat IMO... and much of these laws are put forth by those who don't understand what the hell they're talking about, or just don't care to learn about them. When a place bans keeping something like a short tailed opossum of a fennec fox, I mean wtf. What can a 2 lb. hyperactive little fox do to you that a ferret or terrier dog can't? And I've NEVER heard of STO's harming a living soul... they're so calm, but because it's an opossum it's illegal in many places.
I'm also just rambling here. so ignore what I said for the most part. I still stand by that exotic bans are stupid. That I've seen MANY owners of exotic pets go well above and beyond what even zoos do to provide for their animals. i've also seen these same people have a pet confiscated for legal reasons and put down. For some of us, they're our lives, they mean the world to us. Pouched rats were my life, so yes i know what it was like to have a ban happen and have to live in secrecy with an illegal pet, even my veterinarian wouldn't let me bring him in anymore after he rubbed his nose on the cage bars one night while I was away. I brought him in to treat the nose rub, and she told me it could very well be "lesions" from monkeypox, so i was no longer allowed to bring him in, regardless of the fact he was 4th generation captive bred, had NOTHING to do with the gambians nor that exotic vendor, and I knew exactly where the nose rubbing came from and what it was. she gave me antibiotics and sent me on my way.... so my boy basically was no longer allowed at his regular veterinarian anymore....
Once again rambling about nothing. Sorry. This is what happens when you're 37 weeks pregnant and always sleep deprived, lol.
I had an emin's pouched rat during the monkeypox fiasco. It's a species of african rat, smaller than the gambian rat, but also included in the ban. He was an amazing pet and I would have done anything for him. When the ban went into effect, those with pet prairie dogs and gambians had veterinarians recommend putting them down immediately, and even some people had animal control come in and confiscate their animals from their homes. That ban was lifted a few years back finally, but it has definitely left a dent in the exotic rodent hobby, and no one can even find pouched rats again (and don't get me started on Florida. If you knew how many of us have gone down there ourselves to look for them, have offered huge sums of money to individuals to catch them for us, NO one's seen them since they were FIRST reported as being there, and they were poisoned long ago). These rats have been used to sniff out tuberculosis, land mines, and are crazy intelligent. Mine used the toilet to go to the bathroom, walked on his hind legs, jumped through hoops, etc. in mere minutes of teaching him.
Now that the ban had been lifted (and my pouchie passed away), I keep three prairie dogs... I went with one of the other species that was banned during that ordeal, since pouchies are non-existant now in the USA.
The scary part about it is that the SOLE person who was responsible for the monkeypox ordeal? HE STILL IS IN Business!!! I feel that he should have been further punished, not allowed to sell exotics again. it's human error that caused it.
You should read the crazy instances of dog, horse, and cow related human deaths every year in the US. Are those animals going to be banned? Of course not. The exotics are a scapegoat IMO... and much of these laws are put forth by those who don't understand what the hell they're talking about, or just don't care to learn about them. When a place bans keeping something like a short tailed opossum of a fennec fox, I mean wtf. What can a 2 lb. hyperactive little fox do to you that a ferret or terrier dog can't? And I've NEVER heard of STO's harming a living soul... they're so calm, but because it's an opossum it's illegal in many places.
I'm also just rambling here. so ignore what I said for the most part. I still stand by that exotic bans are stupid. That I've seen MANY owners of exotic pets go well above and beyond what even zoos do to provide for their animals. i've also seen these same people have a pet confiscated for legal reasons and put down. For some of us, they're our lives, they mean the world to us. Pouched rats were my life, so yes i know what it was like to have a ban happen and have to live in secrecy with an illegal pet, even my veterinarian wouldn't let me bring him in anymore after he rubbed his nose on the cage bars one night while I was away. I brought him in to treat the nose rub, and she told me it could very well be "lesions" from monkeypox, so i was no longer allowed to bring him in, regardless of the fact he was 4th generation captive bred, had NOTHING to do with the gambians nor that exotic vendor, and I knew exactly where the nose rubbing came from and what it was. she gave me antibiotics and sent me on my way.... so my boy basically was no longer allowed at his regular veterinarian anymore....
Once again rambling about nothing. Sorry. This is what happens when you're 37 weeks pregnant and always sleep deprived, lol.
When did i say threaten murder for all law? Murder was just a synonom for a move severe type of punishment that people wont want to receive as opposed to a slap on the wrist. Murder occurs because of the murderers who would do it regardless of any punishment. If there were no laws against murder are you saying there wouldnt be more murders? I think not. Laws dont nessisarily prevent something. All laws do is detur those unsure of their possible actions.
There will always be those who will commit crimes regardless of the punishment (ex those who just dont care), those who may commit a crime in the right situation and those totally against crimes. Laws are ment to stop those in the middle who may commit a crime given the right situation, not those who are dead set on commiting a crime regardless of what it costs them
LOL Its so hard for some people to not tell other people what to do???
Little boy went to the doctor. He says to the doctor. It hurts when i hit my hand with the hammer. WHat did the doc say............................
stop hitting your thumb with the hammer.
My point is u think you can have your cake and eat it too. TIl you see your pice of cake on the other guys plate. I really dont think there is any evidene ec showing that 2nd hand smoke killed anyone just anoyying. prove me wromng witha reall source.
anyway the point i was trying to make to the greater open minded side over there to the left is duh. YOu infringe on ones rights you can expect to have ur poor feel good propertry taking as well. OH YEAH BY YOUR ON FEEL GOOD LOOK ALIKES. lol
WIDDLE IS THE MAN!
Little boy went to the doctor. He says to the doctor. It hurts when i hit my hand with the hammer. WHat did the doc say............................
stop hitting your thumb with the hammer.
My point is u think you can have your cake and eat it too. TIl you see your pice of cake on the other guys plate. I really dont think there is any evidene ec showing that 2nd hand smoke killed anyone just anoyying. prove me wromng witha reall source.
anyway the point i was trying to make to the greater open minded side over there to the left is duh. YOu infringe on ones rights you can expect to have ur poor feel good propertry taking as well. OH YEAH BY YOUR ON FEEL GOOD LOOK ALIKES. lol
WIDDLE IS THE MAN!
Dessicaria
Arachnopeon
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2010
- Messages
- 44
PouchedRat, I am totally with you here! (Okay, I'm not a vegetarian, but otherwise I'm totally there with you. ) I love African rodents too, and I've only recently been able to find some of the species I had years ago. Some others, I despair of ever finding again. No one has zebra mice, dormice, or jerboas anymore. I never had a pouched rat, but I did see and admire them on several occasions, and they sound wonderful. It's a loss to the entire hobby that they're no longer available.
Positive, loving interaction between pet-keepers and pets is beneficial to all species involved. Well-cared-for animals benefit from the mental and emotional stimulus of interaction, there's no question. And they help their conspecifics still living in the wild, simply by interacting peacefully with humans. How will people care about saving animals in the wild, if they've had no personal experience with them? How will people dispell the myths and negative stereotypes that they may have learned - for instance about snakes, or wolves, or any number of species that are so misunderstood by so many humans? The best thing we can do to promote the conservation of a species, as well as to keep hands-off our rights as pet keepers, is to allow people to interact with a friendly representative. Then they realize, "Gee, this python isn't vicious at all, she's somebody's pet, somebody's family member." Maybe the next time they hear about a pet python, they'll have a positive response, rather than a knee-jerk negative.
We in the exotics community do have a responsibility to present our animals in a positive light and dispell the negative fairy tales. And of course, to vigorously oppose any species- or breed-bans, even if they're animals we ourselves don't keep. Because when they start banning some, it just keeps growing from there.
) I love African rodents too, and I've only recently been able to find some of the species I had years ago. Some others, I despair of ever finding again. No one has zebra mice, dormice, or jerboas anymore. I never had a pouched rat, but I did see and admire them on several occasions, and they sound wonderful. It's a loss to the entire hobby that they're no longer available.Positive, loving interaction between pet-keepers and pets is beneficial to all species involved. Well-cared-for animals benefit from the mental and emotional stimulus of interaction, there's no question. And they help their conspecifics still living in the wild, simply by interacting peacefully with humans. How will people care about saving animals in the wild, if they've had no personal experience with them? How will people dispell the myths and negative stereotypes that they may have learned - for instance about snakes, or wolves, or any number of species that are so misunderstood by so many humans? The best thing we can do to promote the conservation of a species, as well as to keep hands-off our rights as pet keepers, is to allow people to interact with a friendly representative. Then they realize, "Gee, this python isn't vicious at all, she's somebody's pet, somebody's family member." Maybe the next time they hear about a pet python, they'll have a positive response, rather than a knee-jerk negative.
We in the exotics community do have a responsibility to present our animals in a positive light and dispell the negative fairy tales. And of course, to vigorously oppose any species- or breed-bans, even if they're animals we ourselves don't keep. Because when they start banning some, it just keeps growing from there.
I was once bitten by a STO and it slightly hurt because it got me on the tip of my finger.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2010
- Messages
- 424
WOW!? I am thoroughly enjoying the continuous chaos here! So many opinions and emotions. We should get everyone here together in a room with the HSUS and PETA, maybe on the Dr. Phil show and see what happens.
You quoted my post. I asked if that's what you were saying. ? = Question Mark.
I think you mean that people need to be held accountable for their actions. Is that what you're saying because if so, we've already agreed on that. In fact that was the basis of my human error argument. Accountability and responsibility; I think we both agree that people need to practice more of both. Remember this thread is not about murder, but the ban of certain snakes.
No, they don't prevent or deter anything. Rather, they create it. Laws create crime. Bear with this over-simplified example: You have two countries, Country A and Country B. Country A has 5 laws. Country B has 500 laws. Which one has more crime? Don't get hung up on what the "laws" are, just look at the numbers. B has 100 times the amount of laws that A does, and while that does not imply that B has 100 times the crime, it most certainly guarantees it will have more crime because more things are illegal. (Please ignore things like population, income, and all those other things that could contribute to crime, for that is not the point. In fact, assume the countries are exactly the same except for the amount of laws.) My point is that once you start making things illegal like having a snake, or having a gun, you have to have more government agencies to enforce those laws. By having more laws, the government creates a need for itself. It may already have a bureau that deals with exotic pets (I do not know), but I do know that it has a very big organization enforcing its unconstitutional firearms laws (which, do you agree that making certain guns illegal, or restricting where you can have gun does not prevent murder/gun violence? Schools are gun-free zones, so think about that before you answer).
That's an awful lot of speculation on your part. I was amused by your death penalty for littering joke, but what's not a joke is that you have a say in what the government says is or is not a crime. And again, this thread is about exotic snakes, which I feel should not be illegal because it will create a need for more government officials to enforce the law, AND the law WILL NOT stop the problems associated with these snakes. Obviously if there were none of those snakes in this country, then there would never be an exotic snake to escape from its cage, but do you really think that a law could rid this entire country of all the exotic snakes? But that brings me back to the fact that it should not be the business of the government to regulate that.
Furthermore, one must look at the ramifications of the law. It will open a black market. Say "Joe" illegally imports millions of dollars worth of illegal snakes to sell, illegally, to various people in this country. Joe is now a seasoned criminal, and like the illegal drug cartels, he has millions of dollars invested in his operation. Joe then hires big, scary henchmen to protect his operation, and pretty soon, he's got his own government lobby, just like the drug lords. But wait, that couldn't happen, those snakes are illegal!
What the government could do is allow the snakes to be sold in stores, and at least in my state, we pay almost 10% sales tax, so if I bought a $100 snake, ten bucks could go to my state, and y'all know CA could use an extra buck or two... You think Joe the illegal snake smuggler pays his fair share of taxes on his multi-million dollar operation? But no, instead the tax dollars that are already spread so thin will have to fund another organization that's trying to hunt down those cold-blooded criminals; the people that is, not the snakes.
All this snake talk kind of makes me want an exotic snake so I can have a pre-ban snake to go with my pre-ban rifle... Then I can really do this to my big brother. ;P