# The dangers of keeping large snakes



## dragonblade71 (Jan 26, 2010)

I think this youtube video speaks for itself....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNqJGPT0d50&feature=related


----------



## GiantVinegaroon (Feb 6, 2010)

It is impossible for snakes today to eat humans.  Snakes swallow headfirst, and the shoulders would be very difficult for a snake to fit it's jaws around.

That said, it's still dangerous to keep large snakes because they can easily suffocate you


----------



## codykrr (Feb 6, 2010)

really?

because seems this snake sure did get that boy into his stomache.

View attachment 82531


----------



## codykrr (Feb 6, 2010)

here is that snake before they cut it open.

View attachment 82532


View attachment 82533


----------



## GiantVinegaroon (Feb 6, 2010)

codykrr said:


> really?
> 
> because seems this snake sure did get that boy into his stomache.
> 
> View attachment 82531


Seen that photo a gillion times.  confirmed photoshop


----------



## jayefbe (Feb 6, 2010)

The "danger" of keeping large pythons/boas is so ridiculously overblown, and this thread is doing absolutely nothing to fix it.  It's exactly the same as keeping tarantulas, just don't be an idiot and you will be FINE.


----------



## GiantVinegaroon (Feb 6, 2010)

jayefbe said:


> The "danger" of keeping large pythons/boas is so ridiculously overblown, and this thread is doing absolutely nothing to fix it.  *It's exactly the same as keeping tarantulas*, just don't be an idiot and you will be FINE.


Well I sure wish I could keep a Burmese python in a KK :}


----------



## pitbulllady (Feb 6, 2010)

codykrr said:


> really?
> 
> because seems this snake sure did get that boy into his stomache.
> 
> View attachment 82531


Codykrr, you DO know that this very popular photograph has already been debunked as an internet HOAX, do you not?  Every herpetologist with an ounce of knowledge of large snakes has come out and stated that this is a hoax, based on several factors, not the least of which the snake shown in the series of photos leading up to this one aren't EVEN THE SAME SPECIES, and aren't even found on the same continent!  Also, the angle of the snake's ribs in the photo indicate that for the human to have been in the snake's digestive tract, the snake would have had to swallow the man FEET FIRST, and THAT, dude, is an impossibility for sure!  Furthermore, anyone with an iota of Photoshop know-how will immediately recognize a PS job here, and a lousy, amateurish one at that.

Like jayfbe said, the dangers of keeping large constrictors is horribly overblown, just like the dangers of keeping arachnids.  In 30 years, there have only been 12 cases of large snakes killing humans in the US, and that includes two involving young children which are highly suspect, including the latest in Florida, from this past summer.  In both of these, the facts just don't add up to "snake", but to "parent" as the cause of death.  It's just so much easier for the public to believe in killer snakes than to believe a parent would off their kid or, in the case of the toddler in Florida, that a crack-head would murder his girl-friend-of-the-week's baby.  You actually have a greater chance of being eaten by a shark in a body of FRESH water in North America than of being killed by a constrictor snake.  Of course, the HSUS and its supporters, and those who are in favor of the two Federal bills to ban the import, sale, trade, transport and breeding of large constrictors plus Boas just LOVE photos like the one you fell for, since these seem to bolster their claims that we are all in grave danger from the invasion of giant killer snakes unless our Big Brother does something to save us all now.

pitbulllady


----------



## jayefbe (Feb 6, 2010)

ScottySalticid said:


> Well I sure wish I could keep a Burmese python in a KK :}


What I meant by my comment, was that the dangers are relatively similar.  Keeping a pokie, I consider, more dangerous than a Burm.


----------



## GiantVinegaroon (Feb 6, 2010)

jayefbe said:


> What I meant by my comment, was that the dangers are relatively similar.  Keeping a pokie, I consider, more dangerous than a Burm.


i know i just felt like messing with you.

heck i'd rather handle a burm or retic over a _Psalmopoeus_ anyday


----------



## jayefbe (Feb 6, 2010)

ScottySalticid said:


> i know i just felt like messing with you.
> 
> heck i'd rather handle a burm or retic over a _Psalmopoeus_ anyday


I know you were, just thought it did need a little clarifying.


----------



## sharpfang (Feb 6, 2010)

*I'll Hold any Large Retic, Anaconda - Want Pics?*

But, HAMSTERS......................Forget IT!!!!

Those little bastards, man - No Way  Brave 5 year olds Out there - LOL

- J


----------



## codykrr (Feb 6, 2010)

i didnt know this was  hoax...when searching i found this and a few others.  never mentions in any of the dozen sites featuring this set of pics was a hoax.  so my appologies.


----------



## redrumpslump (Feb 6, 2010)

codykrr said:


> i didnt know this was  hoax...when searching i found this and a few others.  never mentions in any of the dozen sites featuring this set of pics was a hoax.  so my appologies.


Deffinetly can understand why you thought that at first. Haha so did i when you first posted the pic.


----------



## burmish101 (Feb 6, 2010)

Funny how people get freaked out by big snakes in captivity. There are way more deaths of children drowning, and countless dog attacks each year.


----------



## ZergFront (Feb 7, 2010)

sharpfang said:


> But, HAMSTERS......................Forget IT!!!!
> 
> Those little bastards, man - No Way  Brave 5 year olds Out there - LOL
> 
> - J


 I'm lucky I still have fingers.....evil little dwarf hamster..


----------



## Shell (Feb 7, 2010)

ZergFront said:


> I'm lucky I still have fingers.....evil little dwarf hamster..


My little panda hamster is evil too  and yet my family is terrified that I have Ball pythons around my kids!!

The hamster would bite them way before the snakes would :wall:


----------



## Draiman (Feb 7, 2010)

I think there has been at least one confirmed and documented report of a very large reticulated python killing and eating a 14-year-old boy in Indonesia....


----------



## ZoSoLp510 (Feb 7, 2010)

jayefbe said:


> The "danger" of keeping large pythons/boas is so ridiculously overblown, and this thread is doing absolutely nothing to fix it.  It's exactly the same as keeping tarantulas, just don't be an idiot and you will be FINE.


Well said! So long as you keep these animals in a responsible manner and with a proper amount of space and common sense you won't have a problem. Every animal has its natural wild instinct ... that cannot be changed no matter how "tame" a pet is. The problem comes when their keepers ignore signs of aggitation, hunger, or defensive behavior, which seems to be the root cause of the bad reps for both the animals and our hobbies. 

A little respect and common sense go a long way and can ultimately lead to an incredibly fulfilling experience in pet ownership ... I'll stand by that till the day I die.


----------



## stardustcivic (Feb 7, 2010)

Snakes gotta eat too =)



Draiman said:


> I think there has been at least one confirmed and documented report of a very large reticulated python killing and eating a 14-year-old boy in Indonesia....


----------



## JTC5150 (Feb 7, 2010)

My E.Murinus or my Tger Retic, I'm holding my Retic!


----------



## Shrike (Feb 7, 2010)

ScottySalticid said:


> It is impossible for snakes today to eat humans.  Snakes swallow headfirst, and the shoulders would be very difficult for a snake to fit it's jaws around.
> 
> That said, it's still dangerous to keep large snakes because they can easily suffocate you


Respectfully, I disagree.  The largest constrictors are quite capable of swallowing a child or small adult.  I'm not saying they're in the habit of doing this regularly, just capable of performing the feat:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ke-that-ate-10-year-old-Durban-boy-whole.html

I think this story is legitimate, but I could be wrong.


----------



## GiantVinegaroon (Feb 7, 2010)

mking said:


> Respectfully, I disagree.  The largest constrictors are quite capable of swallowing a child or small adult.  I'm not saying they're in the habit of doing this regularly, just capable of performing the feat:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ke-that-ate-10-year-old-Durban-boy-whole.html
> 
> I think this story is legitimate, but I could be wrong.


Yes it's been accepted that small people can possibly get eaten.

I find that article very hard to believe.  In all my years of keeping and studying reptiles. I have never heard of a snake actually trapping it's prey(from the account they made it sound like it got the boy trapped in the tree and then climbed up and ate him).  Also, a human moves much too quickly for a snake that size, and if this kid was trying to stay away from the python, why the heck would he just sit there as this snake slowly approached him?

I'm also pretty sure this story would be pretty big if it really did happen.  I've been a subscriber to Reptiles magazine since 2002...and I'm 99% positive that this story would have shown up in an issue if it was true.


----------



## pitbulllady (Feb 7, 2010)

ScottySalticid said:


> Yes it's been accepted that small people can possibly get eaten.
> 
> I find that article very hard to believe.  In all my years of keeping and studying reptiles. I have never heard of a snake actually trapping it's prey(from the account they made it sound like it got the boy trapped in the tree and then climbed up and ate him).  Also, a human moves much too quickly for a snake that size, and if this kid was trying to stay away from the python, why the heck would he just sit there as this snake slowly approached him?
> 
> I'm also pretty sure this story would be pretty big if it really did happen.  I've been a subscriber to Reptiles magazine since 2002...and I'm 99% positive that this story would have shown up in an issue if it was true.


Retics are ambush predators, and are the most arboreal of all the large constrictors, with the exception of the Bar-Neck Scrub(_Python amethystina_-yes, these have been re-classified as genus _Python_, and are actually closely related to the Retics).  They commonly hang from branches over game trails and grab animals that pass underneath, hauling them up to finish off.  It's unlikely that many potential prey animals have any clue that there is a very large snake dangling just feet above their heads.  It's like a croc or an alligator, the one that gets you is the one you never see coming.
Still, these cases in which a child is killed or even eaten by a large constrictor are extremely rare, even in the snakes' natural habitats.  When you take into consideration that the estimated numbers of captive snakes, including large constrictors and venomous snakes, in private hands in the US is roughly the same as that of horses kept in the US, yet on average, anywhere from 18-38 people will be killed by horses EACH YEAR in this country-a figure which does NOT include people being killed when falling off of horses, by the way-yet there is no outcry and demand to ban and kill every horse in the country, it doesn't make sense.  The fear far, far outweighs the actual risk when it comes to snakes.  Once again, it's a case of the AR movement exploiting the lack of knowledge of something to further their cause through the fear that ignorance inevitably breeds.  They know that they can be a lot more successful in implementing bans on certain animals if they can convince the public that these animals are too dangerous to keep, or it's too cruel to keep them, or that the people who DO keep them are the dregs of society.  

pitbulllady


----------



## Shrike (Feb 7, 2010)

Here is a slightly different account of the same story:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/11/24/1037697985131.html

It seems to me that the snake ambushed (as the pitbulllady pointed out, very typical of this species) the victim while he was picking fruit, while his friends sought refuge in the tree, and watched while he was constricted and then consumed.

Recognizing that this was an extremely unlikely and rare occurrence, I don't find the story that hard to believe.


----------



## pouchedrat (Feb 7, 2010)

you should see how many people are harmed or killed by CATTLE every year.  I don't see our farm industry suffering from that yet. 

But yeah, dogs, horses, cows, all do far more damage to humans than many other species that are being threatened by bans.   I'll stick to my weird exotic rodents, thank you.  I trust them more than I trust a dog or a horse any day of the week.


----------



## Exo (Feb 7, 2010)

pouchedrat said:


> you should see how many people are harmed or killed by CATTLE every year.  I don't see our farm industry suffering from that yet.


That's because cattle farming is one of the largest industries in America. People care alot more about their hamburger than they do about a bunch of "weirdos" who like to keep snakes.


----------



## GiantVinegaroon (Feb 7, 2010)

pitbulllady said:


> Retics are ambush predators, and are the most arboreal of all the large constrictors, with the exception of the Bar-Neck Scrub(_Python amethystina_-yes, these have been re-classified as genus _Python_, and are actually closely related to the Retics).  They commonly hang from branches over game trails and grab animals that pass underneath, hauling them up to finish off.  It's unlikely that many potential prey animals have any clue that there is a very large snake dangling just feet above their heads.  It's like a croc or an alligator, the one that gets you is the one you never see coming.
> Still, these cases in which a child is killed or even eaten by a large constrictor are extremely rare, even in the snakes' natural habitats.  When you take into consideration that the estimated numbers of captive snakes, including large constrictors and venomous snakes, in private hands in the US is roughly the same as that of horses kept in the US, yet on average, anywhere from 18-38 people will be killed by horses EACH YEAR in this country-a figure which does NOT include people being killed when falling off of horses, by the way-yet there is no outcry and demand to ban and kill every horse in the country, it doesn't make sense.  The fear far, far outweighs the actual risk when it comes to snakes.  Once again, it's a case of the AR movement exploiting the lack of knowledge of something to further their cause through the fear that ignorance inevitably breeds.  They know that they can be a lot more successful in implementing bans on certain animals if they can convince the public that these animals are too dangerous to keep, or it's too cruel to keep them, or that the people who DO keep them are the dregs of society.
> 
> pitbulllady


The python in the article is an African rock python, not a retic, just pointing that out.

I by no means agree with these ridiculous proposals for a nationwide python ban.  I think it's dangerous as far as letting your average joe go out and buy a baby on impulse.  But that's not why I posted in this thread initially.  I was just questioning the stories of giant snakes eating people.

btw I'm going to point out that horse statistic in my facebook.  alot of my friends are into horses, so their reactions will be interesting.


----------



## Shrike (Feb 7, 2010)

ScottySalticid said:


> The python in the article is an African rock python, not a retic, just pointing that out.


Duly noted.  However, an African rock python is also an ambush predator.


----------



## pitbulllady (Feb 7, 2010)

ScottySalticid said:


> The python in the article is an African rock python, not a retic, just pointing that out.
> 
> I by no means agree with these ridiculous proposals for a nationwide python ban.  I think it's dangerous as far as letting your average joe go out and buy a baby on impulse.  But that's not why I posted in this thread initially.  I was just questioning the stories of giant snakes eating people.
> 
> btw I'm going to point out that horse statistic in my facebook.  alot of my friends are into horses, so their reactions will be interesting.



If you are referring to the story in which the python in Durbin, South Africa supposedly came after the boy, grabbed him and went into the bushes/up a tree(depending on whose story got printed)while his brothers and sisters watched, this has already been proven a hoax, as well.  The father actually murdered the child himself and made up the snake story, with the aid of his other children, to cover for the crime.  Authorities found many holes in the accounts as told by the other children, especially when they were questioned one at a time, that were not consistent with a snake encounter.  It seemed that the dead child was born to a wife whom the man had fallen out of favor, and rather than waste his precious resources raising the kid, he decided to kill him.  The man has been arrested on murder charges after no evidence of a snake could be found and after the other children admitted to helping their father make up the story.  Like the incident in Florida this past summer, this is a case of an adult murdering an innocent child, and then pinning the death on an equally-innocent animal, one the real perps figured would be easy to blame due the hate so many people feel for those animals.  It is actually rather common, according to a co-worker of mine who is originally from South Africa, for men of certain villages to kill children born to unpopular wives and blame the death on either wild animals or witches.

pitbulllady


----------



## Shrike (Feb 7, 2010)

Like I said, I could be wrong.  I'd read the story around the time the alleged incident occurred  but didn't follow up on it.  Thanks for the info pitbulllady.  Do you have a source debunking the story?

Anyway, the original point still stands.  While _highly_ unlikely, large constrictors such as Retics, African rock pythons, and green anacondas are capable of swallowing a small human being.


----------



## AudreyElizabeth (Feb 8, 2010)

pitbulllady said:


> Like the incident in Florida this past summer, this is a case of an adult murdering an innocent child, and then pinning the death on an equally-innocent animal, one the real perps figured would be easy to blame due the hate so many people feel for those animals.
> 
> pitbulllady


This is true?? If so, I haven't heard it before. I must have my head under a rock or something.


----------



## Red Eyes (Feb 8, 2010)

AudreyElizabeth said:


> This is true?? If so, I haven't heard it before. I must have my head under a rock or something.


Here you go ...http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,542441,00.html?test=latestnews and here http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2009-08-25/news/python_1_burmese-python-sumter-county-darnell


----------



## Shrike (Feb 8, 2010)

Thanks for the links.

Where does it say that the parents killed the child?  It seems to me that the python killed the child, and now the parents are being criminally charged for their negligence.  Rightfully so, I should add.

Pitbulllady, as the original debunker of these stories, can you clarify?  Are there definitive sources stating that the snakes involved in the incidents in Florida and South Africa did not kill their respective victims?


----------



## AudreyElizabeth (Feb 8, 2010)

mking said:


> Thanks for the links.
> 
> Where does it say that the parents killed the child?  It seems to me that the python killed the child, and now the parents are being criminally charged for their negligence.  Rightfully so, I should add.
> 
> Pitbulllady, as the original debunker of these stories, can you clarify?  Are there definitive sources stating that the snakes involved in the incidents in Florida and South Africa did not kill their respective victims?


I was thinking the same. I am still confused.


----------



## pitbulllady (Feb 8, 2010)

AudreyElizabeth said:


> I was thinking the same. I am still confused.


The owner of the python in Florida which is blamed for the death of the child is NOT the child's parent, or even related.  He is a crack dealer/user with multiple convictions and a rap sheet a mile long, who was just "shacking up" with the kid's mother, who was also a convicted dealer.  BOTH adults have been formerly charged with MURDER, not Manslaughter, which indicates that there was intent on the part of one or both adults to kill the child.  The child died from strangulation, according to the coroner's report.  Now, of course, someone who knows nothing about constricting snakes other than what the popular media spews out will assume that such snakes kill by strangulation, by "choking" their victims, but in fact, in my nearly half-century of keeping such snakes, I have NEVER seen one target the throat area.  If a large constrictor is in prey-killing mode, it targets the chest area, to prevent the lungs from expanding.  The child's hyoid bone was fractured, which is NOT consistent with a snake's attack, but IS commonly found in cases where the victim was choked to death by a human hand, and also when blunt-force trauma to the throat occurs.  If the police had no reason to assume that this was anything other than an accident, resulting from negligence, then the charge would have been a much-lesser one than murder.  It would have been very easy to make it seem as though the snake had done it, and most people would not have known any better because they would be ignorant as dirt when it comes to large snakes.

pitbulllady


----------



## Dyn (Feb 8, 2010)

I was looking up the statistics the other day and in the past 19 years there have been 8 deaths by large constrictors in the US.

It ended up being .44 people per year killed by pythons while looking up some other statistics to compare it to... your 10 times more likely (5 people a year compared to .44) to die from anthrax than from a large constrictor. No one from the general public has died from them either. It was either the owner or relative/worker that knew/accepted the risks or a child of said owner where it comes down to parental neglect.

I have 3 retics right now. None of which are large yet, one 10 foot, one 7 and one 6 foot. I also just had my son born and I dont think he will ever be in danger of these snakes because I keep their cages locked at all time and the room they are in is locked as well. It all comes down to common sense all my pythons/tarantulas are in a room locked off from anyone else.

I really hope these bans done come through anytime soon I'm really wanting to get some bar neck scrub pythons soon.


----------



## Shrike (Feb 9, 2010)

pitbulllady,

Let me preface this by saying I don't doubt your knowledge and experience.  I've read your posts and it's clear to me that you make many valuable contributions to the folks on this forum.  Nor do I doubt the fact that the child's mother and boyfriend from the Florida news story should be sent to prison for their part in what happened to that child.  I should also mention that I don't believe people should be banned from owning large constrictors.

That being said, where are you obtaining your information from?  The Florida and South Africa incidents are two well known cases in which the media reported that pythons caused the death of a child.  You have debunked both in this thread.  The information in the stories describes a scenario that, although exceedingly rare, seems plausible (a large constrictor killing a human being).  Did either the media or the authorities draw the same conclusion you have (asserting that the snakes did not cause any harm to the children)?  If so, do you have a source that is available to the rest of us?


----------



## jayefbe (Feb 9, 2010)

mking,

I'm not sure about pitbulllady, but I've read both of those stories before and have also had reached similar conclusions.

On the South African story:  Every year there are at least a couple snake "reportings" that are based on nothing but rumors or outright lies.  If you re-read that article, I found it surprising that it was published in the first place.  There is absolutely zero evidence backing up the story and the only accounts are from extremely questionable sources.  Furthermore, the idea of a large snake ambushing a child from a tree is absolutely preposterous.  African rocks are not arboreal.  They are extremely large and bulky like a Burmese python.  Even if it was a child, it would still be exceedingly difficult for a snake to swallow a human.  Human shoulders are just too wide to easily get around.  In fact, if I had read it cold, without any other information, I would assume it was either a hoax or intentional misconduct being blamed on a snake.   

On the Florida story:  I know they did not charge the adults with deliberate murder, but there are a number of things that are inconsistent with a large python strangulation.  First, the child was covered in multiple lacerations.  I've never seen a snake deliberately seek out prey and then bite it multiple times.  It's just not their MO when it comes to dispatching prey.  Second, the child was strangled about the neck.  Generally, constriction by a large snake is done about the torso (like pitbulllady already said) and death is caused by cardiac arrest.  I'm not so bold as to say that the adults killed the child and then pinned it on the snake, but there is something fishy about the story.


----------



## sharpfang (Feb 9, 2010)

*My Eyes are Red, just thinkin' bout Story*

 Irresponsible Owners, should go to Jail!

Like the San Fran Pit Incident......I feel that a "permit" should be owned, in order to posses animals of Any type......That can pose "Unusual", unexpected Dangers to local residences. Not OUTLAWED, but, "PERMITTED".

My take on it.......everyone else is entitled to theirs.

I would OUTLAW  Hamsters though! - LOL - Jason


----------



## DrJ (Feb 9, 2010)

Hey now...let's not all get caught up in under-exaggerating the dangers of keeping large snakes.  For pretty much everything that exists in the reptile pet trade(including invertebrates), large boids are considered to be the most dangerous.  And, rightfully so.  Tarantulas and scorpions are no threat.  They can't kill you.  No healthy adult has ever been killed by one.  We discuss this all the time here.  We all know it to be fact.  However, strong healthy adults HAVE been killed by large snakes.  Is it the snake's fault?  Of course not!  Every single time, it is the fault of the owner/handler being stupid with their snake.  

But, let us look at this logically:  The most dangerous pets in the reptile trade are exotic venomous and large boids.  Even with the most venomous snakes in the world, the average human has at least 30 minutes to get to the hospital and get antivenin and steroids before the odds of survival start stacking up against him/her.  With a large boid, if you get it wrapped around your neck and it starts squeezing, you could be dead in under 1 minute.  And, there really isn't anything you can do about it on your own at that point.  

However, if you are smart and know what you are doing, they make fantastic pets that are very rewarding to keep.  But you have to keep in mind that there is a danger, and you have to respect it.  If you don't respect it, it'll bite you in the end.


----------



## jayefbe (Feb 9, 2010)

I'm not under-exaggerating the danger of large boids.  The fact is, as long as you have a modicum of common sense they are no danger at all.  Pokies have incredibly potent venom.  I'd hate to see what that would do to a child or what effect it would have if someone were bitten in the neck or chest.  People commonly keep incredibly venomous scorpions that can and most definitely have killed people.  

Yes, a retic or a burm can kill a person, but unlike a T or a scorpion or a venomous snake, it's not going to attempt to constrict every person that comes near it.  I know if I get too close to my Tityus scorp, it will sting me.  My large P. ornata tries to bite anything that gets close.  Unless I've been dumb enough to handle a prey item and then stick my hand in my Burm's cage, she is not going to jump out and try to strangle me.  

I've owned plenty of retics and burms.  The most dangerous animals I've owned, are most definitely my hotter scorps and my Pokies.  Large boids aren't inherently dangerous no more than a labrador is inherently dangerous.


----------



## Jmugleston (Feb 9, 2010)

DrJ said:
			
		

> ; Tarantulas and scorpions are no threat.  They can't kill you. No healthy adult has ever been killed by one.


Ummmm. You want to rethink that one?

If you want I can send you some .pdfs that cover human fatalities caused by scorpions. 

Exotic animals can be dangerous. Those of us that keep them know the risks. You probably realize your spider has venom. It can bite you. It probably won't be serious, but you should try to avoid it. A large python can bite you. If you're responsible, you can greatly reduce the risk. Not eliminate it completely, but reduce it greatly. Any exotic animal in the care of an irresponsible person is dangerous.....as is any large dog. The same animal in the care of a responsible person is much less a threat. The danger is there, but the possibility of injury is reduced.

It is a similar argument that is used with guns, cars, etc. A large snake can kill and adult human. The cases are very rare considering the number kept in captivity. In all the cases, human stupidity is to blame. They are not bloodthirsty creatures looking for the next primate to munch on. As mentioned earlier, you should be much more worried about your neighbor's family dog than your neighbor's pet python. I know I've been chased and bitten by the a golden retriever when I was younger. I also remember the interruption to a family Easter dinner a few years back. We were sitting there when the LAPD opened fire on a stray rottie in the road behind the house. My sister has an old scar on her face from a neighbor's cocker spaniel that bit her when it was loose in our yard......

My point is that any animal poses a threat. The levels differ depending on the species. Some may be a mere inconvenience (no ER for a bite from a pet roach) while others may be more severe.....(see the chimp attack from early last year). Responsible pet ownership is the key. If you do your homework, provide an adequate home, and don't be an idiot, you will reduce your risks. Not erase them, but reduce them. By exercising caution and using proper protocols, you should not have to wonder if today is the day your burm will get you. I know my retics are large enough and strong enough to hurt me if I'm an idiot. I try to avoid acting as such when I am caring for them. I guess it is a matter of common sense.

I'm repeating myself. I'm done.


----------



## sharpfang (Feb 9, 2010)

*I know for a FACT, that there are Scorps which kill*

You don't usually see them at a Reptile show, but, They are certainly in the Hobby {supply-N-demand}.
I am actually giving some Hot scorps to Jayefbe as soon as, perhaps, Tomorrow........I have kids, and did Not know what I was receiving
{venom wise 5-of-5, still scorplings}.
There are scorpions in Mexico that have accounted for Deaths, and in Saudi Arabia - There is one I heard that kills in less than 4 hours!  and once,
a documented 1/2 hr. cardiac arrest...

However, You can also die from a falling Meteorite as well......... 
So.........yeah, a little common sense, can go along way 

My black labrador "Sophie", can lick you to death :} I still agree with Jay though. This Burmese Python mess really Belongs to Florida!
I would sign an agreement to "PERMIT" keeping Rocks, Pits and Cobras, etc.
Make Americans ACCOUNTABLE.

National Geo{channel} show on RIGHT NOW......"Python Wars" the battle in the Everglades. Worth watching.

- Jason


----------



## Shrike (Feb 10, 2010)

I agree with the permit concept.  I've been think the same thing for quite some time.  A permit system would wouldn't restrict the folks that really want a large boid, but would probably limit the folks that might buy a baby Burm on impulse and then end up dumping it outside.


----------



## DrJ (Feb 11, 2010)

Jmugleston said:


> Ummmm. You want to rethink that one?
> 
> If you want I can send you some .pdfs that cover human fatalities caused by scorpions.


I'm not trying to debate anyone, it's just a fact.  I have read through most of the reported human fatalities, and in most, you will either find the deceased to have a "medical" history, be of older age, or be of younger age.  The age range that we typically label to "adults" ranges from 13-18 (I generally say 13 is a good number) all the way up to 55-65 (you can go up to 65 for our purposes).  So, speaking of HEALTHY adults, you can look in the 13-65 years of age class and not find any deaths.  If you wish, you can look through your articles, or send them to me.  The only deaths I've seen in this age range also had accompanying ailments, such as diabetes, heart disease, etc.  You can't really expect someone with diabetes or heart disease to have the same results as someone who is perfectly healthy.


----------



## Jmugleston (Feb 11, 2010)

DrJ said:


> I'm not trying to debate anyone, it's just a fact.  I have read through most of the reported human fatalities, and in most, you will either find the deceased to have a "medical" history, be of older age, or be of younger age.  The age range that we typically label to "adults" ranges from 13-18 (I generally say 13 is a good number) all the way up to 55-65 (you can go up to 65 for our purposes).  So, speaking of HEALTHY adults, you can look in the 13-65 years of age class and not find any deaths.  If you wish, you can look through your articles, or send them to me.  The only deaths I've seen in this age range also had accompanying ailments, such as diabetes, heart disease, etc.  You can't really expect someone with diabetes or heart disease to have the same results as someone who is perfectly healthy.


PM your email address to me and I'll send you the papers.


----------

