# Should Non-adults be allowed to own/care for OW species



## T_DORKUS (Dec 8, 2008)

This issue came up recently and I think it has been debated at length in another unrelated thread.  For members who wanted to say something but did not feel hijacking another thread is appropriate, this thread is for you.  I'm hoping the mods will move some of the comments from the other thread here so members can read what's been said already and continue the discussion.  This thread was not started to persuade those who have OW species already to give up theirs but a place for everyone to voice their opinions.

Choose the maybe option if you think they can if they have parental consent or if a certain age is ok but not legally an adult.


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

im 17 and that makes me a non adult does that mean i cant have an old world t?

i cant say who can and cant have an old world t
and i think it can be pretty bad for a little kid to get a face full of u-hairs from a new world too IMO


----------



## rustym3talh3ad (Dec 8, 2008)

ive been on this board for a couple months now and i see that clam here is only 17 and that blew my mind, hes got alot of knowledge under his belt already and i say let it be, i vote yes. becuz i know alot of "minors" that are WAY more intelligent than adults, and ive seen people who just have a natural knack for being good with animals. so its just like anything else, if u can handle it then cool if not, then i guess we'll be reading some pretty funny bite reports.


----------



## aluras (Dec 8, 2008)

clam1991 said:


> im 17 and that makes me a non adult does that mean i cant have an old world t?
> 
> i cant say who can and cant have an old world t
> and i think it can be pretty bad for a little kid to get a face full of u-hairs from a new world too IMO


yeah, I totally agree, Im 26 and still not an adult. I think it really depends on the person. If your capable then why the heck not? like clam said "only 17" and knows enough to handle OW/NW, when it really comes down to the basics of T keeping, there are only small differences,....,,,unless its a fetherleg.


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

rustym3talh3ad said:


> ive been on this board for a couple months now and i see that clam here is only 17 and that blew my mind, hes got alot of knowledge under his belt already and i say let it be, i vote yes. becuz i know alot of "minors" that are WAY more intelligent than adults, and ive seen people who just have a natural knack for being good with animals. so its just like anything else, if u can handle it then cool if not, then i guess we'll be reading some pretty funny bite reports.


oh metal head i blushed

and thanks for the compliment i have 2 macaws multiple dogs and ball pythons tarantulas cats and i work weekends and i watch my baby brother when my mom works
and i have to say the 20 or so obts i have a piece of cake compared to the sun conure i have that thinks my fingers are treats 

and i think that if a kid knows what hes doing there shouldnt be a problem

there are a lot of younger people on here that have multiple ts and take great care of them with no issue at all

and for the argument that kids can be harmed by venom because they are smaller than adults..hehe
im 17 and im 6' 4" and weigh well over 200 pounds (like 280?)


----------



## Venom (Dec 8, 2008)

Medically significant species should not be sold to underaged persons, who have, due to their age, a medical susceptibility toward many venoms; and who, due to their age, are not legally competent if an accident should occur. 

Because: minors are more vulnerable to an envenomation, and so will incur both greater harm to themselves, and greater legal damages to the hobby if bitten/ stung, than if they were adult.


Many OW species are NOT medically significant. Pterinochilus, Eucratoscelus, Hysterocrates, Citharischius, Ceratogyrus, for instance. Venomous spiders should be kept by those who are physically less at risk, and legally less of a time-bomb for our hobby.


----------



## rustym3talh3ad (Dec 8, 2008)

clam1991 said:


> and for the argument that kids can be harmed by venom because they are smaller than adults..hehe
> im 17 and im 6' 4" and weigh well over 200 pounds (like 280?)


DANG! haha, 6 years younger than me and twice my size, ive noticed they started growing them big since i was born, i got the "Normal" euro-trash mut gene im 5'10" and 215lbs. pretty standard size for a white boy of my age


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

Venom said:


> Medically significant species should not be sold to underaged persons, who have, due to their age, a medical susceptibility toward many venoms; and who, due to their age, are not legally competent if an accident should occur.
> 
> Because: minors are more vulnerable to an envenomation, and so will incur both greater harm to themselves, and greater legal damages to the hobby if bitten/ stung, than if they were adult.
> 
> ...


so i could get a worse bite reaction than say crpy?
since hes like 40 sumthin?

i doubt it

oh and metal headd i live next to not one but two power plants so hehe
may be the reason for my ginormascity (yes i made that up)


----------



## Travis K (Dec 8, 2008)

*Maybe*

That just depends on how their guardians feel about it.  Pretty easy to figure that one IMO.


----------



## Venom (Dec 8, 2008)

clam1991 said:


> so i could get a worse bite reaction than say crpy?
> since hes like 40 sumthin?
> 
> i doubt it



It's a case of two factors: physical and legal. In the vast MAJORITY of cases, minors are physically at risk. But in the ENTIRETY of cases, a minor is a legal risk. 

You would pose a legal risk, not so much a physical risk.


----------



## rustym3talh3ad (Dec 8, 2008)

risks? if a kid gets one, and gets tagged he should know from the get go what hes gotten himself into. and take for instance i drink alot more than what society deems appropriate, and smoke like a chimney so in theory I MYSELF at 23 could be at more health risk than say even a 14 year old due to my self inflicted weak immune system. i feel if a minor wants to get an old world so be it, so long as they know what they are getting into. and if a pet store doesnt have a waver on their arachnids and inverts then thats their fault and the only legal action would be taken on the store itself.

edit: also ive seen some pretty nasty cricket bites, so are we gonna go as far as saying minors cant keep crickets either?


----------



## reclusa (Dec 8, 2008)

It all depends on the individual. I know some people over the age of 30 that should not have anything venomous in their possession. On the other hand, many younger people show respect for the animals, and keep them correctly.

John


----------



## Venom (Dec 8, 2008)

rustym3talh3ad said:


> risks my ass, if a kid gets one, and gets tagged he should know from the get go what hes gotten himself into. and take for instance i drink alot more than what society deems appropriate, and smoke like a chimney so in theory I MYSELF at 23 could be at more health risk than say even a 14 year old due to my self inflicted weak immune system. i feel if a minor wants to get an old world so be it, so long as they know what they are getting into. and if a pet store doesnt have a waver on their arachnids and inverts then thats their fault and the only legal action would be taken on the store itself.


You are missing the point. Legal consequences could easily extend to the hobby in general, not just the vendor of an individual specimen. A bite/ sting to a minor could easily be much more serious than we typically see in our adult keepers, ergo, much scarier in the press. This could result in a campaign to ban our animals...FOR EVERYONE, not just kids. Hence I say, children / minors should not be allowed to purchase animals that put them at an elevated risk, both for their own sake, and for all other hobbyists sake. It is not an exaggeration to speculate that what put RobC ( and numerous others ) in an ER, could put a 13 yo in a coma. Do you want to see that on the nightly news? Do you want your local authorities, or state legislature to start writing bills about tarantula keeping? I certainly do NOT.


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

Venom said:


> It's a case of two factors: physical and legal. In the vast MAJORITY of cases, minors are physically at risk. But in the ENTIRETY of cases, a minor is a legal risk.
> 
> You would pose a legal risk, not so much a physical risk.


true

but how come some scorpions and true spiders are sold as hot or only 18 or older but all ts can be purchased by anyone:? 

and i understand that a little kid getting bit could pose a risk especially if they are a giant like me
but people who are ignorant about this sort of thing usually dont buy tarantulas

maybe dealers should have a disclaimer or something to let people know about ow species when people try to buy them:? 
and swift i know warns people of defensiveness and potency in the description


----------



## Rick McJimsey (Dec 8, 2008)

Absolutely yes.
Age != maturity.
Granted, sometimes it does, but there are several underage persons on this forum that keep OW species, and hot species (myself included), and sometimes they are much more responsible and mature with them than several adults. I have also noticed that the majority of incidents (bites, stings etc) have occurred in adults, not in younger persons. Limitations of what can/cannot be purchased by an individual should be regulated by the experiance level of the person, and if any past incidents have occurred.
Granted it would be alot more work for sellers, but it could possibley make the hobby much better for us, and for future generations.


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

rustym3talh3ad said:


> risks my arse


speaking or risks your risking an infraction


----------



## rustym3talh3ad (Dec 8, 2008)

Venom said:


> You are missing the point. Legal consequences could easily extend to the hobby in general, not just the vendor of an individual specimen. A bite/ sting to a minor could easily be much more serious than we typically see in our adult keepers, ergo, much scarier in the press. This could result in a campaign to ban our animals...FOR EVERYONE, not just kids. Hence I say, children / minors should not be allowed to purchase animals that put them at an elevated risk, both for their own sake, and for all other hobbyists sake. It is not an exaggeration to speculate that what put RobC ( and numerous others ) in an ER, could put a 13 yo in a coma. Do you want to see that on the nightly news? Do you want your local authorities, or state legislature to start writing bills about tarantula keeping? I certainly do NOT.


agreed, but i feel that this is a overblown idea, where in any post forum or news paper archive have we seen anyone becoming comatose SERIOUSLY injured or killed by a T? the Malaysian Pede that is supposedly the one that can take a humans life has only been reported of claiming a VERY small childs life with no means of medical attention in a 3rd world country, so honestly its like saying "what IF a kid gets tagged by an OW and what IF he is hospitalized and what IF there are serious complications due to the bite and What IF the media gets ahold of it and what IF local or national authorities bring light to the fact that Tarantula Keeping is dangerous and should be banned." its way to far stretched to say that no minor should ever handle or care for an OW, when roaming thru the backyard exploring their curious new love for bugs could wind up with them loosing a limb.


----------



## calum (Dec 8, 2008)

I'm "a non-adult" and I keep scorpions, tarantulas, and other venomous critters. I would NEVER handle anything that could do alot of damage, and I take care of all my animals properly. I say yes, if you know all the care requirments and not to poke it in the face with your finger, you should be able to keep what you wish, as long as you excersize extreme care when maintaining anthing highly venomous.


----------



## rustym3talh3ad (Dec 8, 2008)

clam1991 said:


> speaking or risks your risking an infraction


yeah i just got one yesterday HAHAH better edit that.


----------



## Venom (Dec 8, 2008)

clam1991 said:


> true
> 
> but how come some scorpions and true spiders are sold as hot or only 18 or older but all ts can be purchased by anyone:?


Simply stated, scorpions kill, and tarantulas don't. Even level 3 scorpions have killed, whereas, --so far-- no tarantula has a reputable / authenticated death report. But yes, it is a double standard. It is only logical that, as you say, the 18+ requirement be extended to the med' sig' species of tarantula. 



> but people who are ignorant about this sort of thing usually dont buy tarantulas


That is a real windfall for us! The fact that the hobby mainly occurs online, reduces the opportunity for the average joe to purchase an exotic T. You have to LOOK for these animals to find them for sale, hence, no impulse purchases. Mostly, those who buy specialty T's do so after a fair bit of research, which keeps everyone safer.



> maybe dealers should have a disclaimer or something to let people know about ow species when people try to buy them:?
> and swift i know warns people of defensiveness and potency in the description


Yes, many keepers are doing this now. Todd at tarantulaspiders, Chris at krazy8sinvertebrates, Swift at swiftinverts....they are all including info on whether a species is significantly toxic, and doing something to prohibit minors from purchasing these. However, like you said, that practice should be extended to genera like Poecilotheria, Stromatopelma, Heteroscodra, Selenocosmia. Not many tarantulas are venomous enough for this to be necessary, but I feel it is a good idea for at least these few genera, that have very real and serious bite reports.





rustym3talh3ad said:


> agreed, but i feel that this is a overblown idea, where in any post forum or news paper archive have we seen anyone becoming comatose SERIOUSLY injured or killed by a T?


To which I respond by asking: how many minors have you read bite reports from? We basically only have bite / sting reports from adults. What would happen in a kid, is speculative, but I think a general conclusion can be drawn: it will be worse. And we know already it can be bad enough.




> the Malaysian Pede that is supposedly the one that can take a humans life has only been reported of claiming a VERY small childs life with no means of medical attention in a 3rd world country


The child died IN a hospital, ergo, she did have medical attention. Otherwise, there would BE no medical account of her death.



> so honestly its like saying "what IF a kid gets tagged by an OW


NO, only a specific few OW. 




> and what IF he is hospitalized and what IF there are serious complications due to the bite


Logic, please? If your kid were bitten by a venomous animal, would you wait it out, or take them in? I think most parents will automatically take the child to the hospital, in which case, they must inform the doctors of what has happened: child bitten by venomous spider--otherwise, improper treatment results. If the child is bitten and receives venom ( not a dry bite ), there WILL be symptoms. How bad is unknown, and depends on the amount of venom, and the child bitten. But, whatever does happen to the child, it will be correspondingly worse in the child than if the same amount of venom were given to an adult, and we know how bad it can be for adults.  




> and What IF the media gets ahold of it


How familiar are you with pediatrics? If a hospital suspects child abuse, or child endangerment, they are LEGALLY REQUIRED to call Child Services. So, scenario: Paren says "My child was bitten by a toxic tarantula." Can you see the next question? Doctor asks: "How did that happen?" Parent can either lie (how many believable scenarios can you think of, for exposing a child to an exotic, venomous tarantula in this country? ), or tell the truth "It was a pet." In that case, the doctor must either decide that a venomous tarantula is a normal pet for a child to keep, ( lol ) or that it is a bit weird that parents allow their child to keep venomous animals ( more likely ). Ergo, their legal obligation to report child endangerment kicks in. Do you see how this could work now? The media are LOOKING for this kind of story, all the time. Read your newspaper.




> and what IF local or national authorities bring light to the fact that Tarantula Keeping is dangerous and should be banned."


People read the newspaper. Politicians are always looking for a platform issue that will excite people to vote for them. Protecting the public from "crazies" like us, is not far fetched for a politician to try.



> its way to far stretched to say that no minor should ever handle or care for an OW


, 

Not all OW, just a few.


----------



## Travis K (Dec 8, 2008)

Venom said:


> You are missing the point. Legal consequences could easily extend to the hobby in general, not just the vendor of an individual specimen. A bite/ sting to a minor could easily be much more serious than we typically see in our adult keepers, ergo, much scarier in the press. This could result in a campaign to ban our animals...FOR EVERYONE, not just kids. Hence I say, children / minors should not be allowed to purchase animals that put them at an elevated risk, both for their own sake, and for all other hobbyists sake. It is not an exaggeration to speculate that what put RobC ( and numerous others ) in an ER, could put a 13 yo in a coma. Do you want to see that on the nightly news? Do you want your local authorities, or state legislature to start writing bills about tarantula keeping? I certainly do NOT.


Unfortunately Venom you do have a very good point.  And frankly it is just a matter of time before something happens, but it will likely be to a Hobbyist's kid or baby.  The guy in the scorp forum that was messing with the A. aust. with the bong in the background comes to mind.  I could see one like that having an infant or toddler and getting tagged the the press would love to jump on a story like that.  The only problem is it wouldn't likely stop with the "HOT" species.  I hate to think of what a bite from my 4" regalis or ornata could do to my 3 or 1 year old.

Really with all of the "Oh NO! my T escaped" threads it really is just a matter of time. before some ones small child has an encounter of the venomous kind.  Heck even I had 2 Haplos loose a the same time for about 24-32 hrs in a room off of my garage.  It is not a matter of if it will happen, it is a matter of when.


----------



## GailC (Dec 8, 2008)

I voted maybe, in most cases though, no. The "average" kid who goes to the pet store to buy the cool bad ass blue spider, shouldn't be allowed to buy it.
There is always the exception and someone who spends the time to research the species and truly knows what they are getting into then its probably OK.

It also depends alot on the parent/guardian, I would never let my daughter who is 17 and totally aware of the dangers of a OW T (or any T for that matter) have one. Nor would I let her have a large snake or lizard that is know to be a defencive/aggressive species.
It not because she is incapable, but as a parent, I couldn't allow her something that could harm her. Even if the "harm" is simply a T bite.
That being said, I won't sell any T to a minor unless I know the parent will be the responsible party in the animals care and even then its not likely.
I have a pretty strict belief about kids and pets though, as a general rule I don't think kids should have pets.


----------



## Alex080 (Dec 8, 2008)

i would say yes for some species such as obt's and easy ow species but no for pokies and S.calceatum and also it depends on the keeper and there experience


----------



## Travis K (Dec 8, 2008)

*I took these last night*

This is my 7 year old daughter.  We took these for a school project.  I posted them in the watering hole under Kids Pics, but thought it was fitting for this thread as well

Enjoy,













I'm so proud


----------



## Venom (Dec 8, 2008)

Cute kid ya have there! And I love the matching pair of smithis :drool:  Nothing wrong with a kid handling good ole' Brachys


----------



## Godzirra (Dec 8, 2008)

Like most people have stated, i think someone under the age of adulthood (which in most places is 18), should have permission acquired from a parent or guardian to care for .......imo, any pet. 

I don't find it an issue when someone of "mature" age, can comprehend the responsibilities involved with owning exotic pets.


----------



## J.huff23 (Dec 8, 2008)

IMO, as long as the person in question is mature enough to care for the T, and knows the risks involved, then yes. But everybody has their own opinion, obviously.


----------



## pandinus (Dec 8, 2008)

clam1991 said:


> i have 2 macaws


Well now i know youre insane. i love macaws dont get me wrong, but plus sized parrots are kind of like nephews or nieces to me, its fun to play with them and have fun, but at the end of the day, i get to send them home to their parents lol. i lost part of a fingertip to a particularly neurotic blue-tip scarlet a few years ago. Owning a macaw is like owning a todler with a pair of bolt-cutters for 80 years.

In regard to the question, what do i think about these kind of regulations, i think people should stop trying to tell other people what to do and mind their own business. ive met several minors who were awesome keepers, and ive met some adults who shouldnt even have a pet rock. lots of people have a tendency to think that only their opinion works, and everyone should do things their way. i say that anyone regardless of age should be made aware of the risks involved with OW t's, but that if the person is a minor, the only person who has any right to tell them what they can or cant have is their parent/guardian.


John


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

waldo said:


> I voted maybe, in most cases though, no. The "average" kid who goes to the pet store to buy the cool bad ass blue spider, shouldn't be allowed to buy it.
> There is always the exception and someone who spends the time to research the species and truly knows what they are getting into then its probably OK.
> 
> It also depends alot on the parent/guardian, I would never let my daughter who is 17 and totally aware of the dangers of a OW T (or any T for that matter) have one. Nor would I let her have a large snake or lizard that is know to be a defencive/aggressive species.
> ...


so your saying since im only 17 i shouldnt be allowed to buy any pet on my own:? 

and venom i agree completely indian ornamental bites are serious 
evidence? robc ive seen him in vids hes not much smaller than me
and if it did that much to him just from a 4 incher
oww 

but an obt?

will hurt but i dont think it would be that bad just really sore
and s. cal i agree

some of them need to be regulated by us or the gov will step in to regulate

and im sure their not going to pinpoint just certain species either 

now i want a p. regalis to go along with my 20 or so obts


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

pandinus said:


> Well now i know youre insane. i love macaws dont get me wrong, but plus sized parrots are kind of like nephews or nieces to me, its fun to play with them and have fun, but at the end of the day, i get to send them home to their parents lol. i lost part of a fingertip to a particularly neurotic blue-tip scarlet a few years ago. Owning a macaw is like owning a todler with a pair of bolt-cutters for 80 years.
> 
> 
> John


im home watching my baby brother most of the time anyway
and the one i have is a rescue scarlet and hes a big ole cuddle buddy
and theother is a green wing and she hates me cuz i have glasses
i remember the first time i got her to step up
she ran up my arm grabbed of my glasses and tried to snap them in half 
so now i take them off before entering her room

and we cant just let anyone do what they want cuz it only takes one person to screw up to ruin the hobby for all of us


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 8, 2008)

I didn't read the whole thread but i read some of it. 
If ppl want to make non-adults forbidden to buy those Ts cauz of a "less strong" medical condition... therefore some law should be applied that EVERYONE had to do some medical exams to check if he was ok or not to get some of that venom.For example, someone who has somethin on his heart shouldnt have those Ts. 


just my 2 cents...


//Tiago


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

ReMoVeR said:


> I didn't read the whole thread but i read some of it.
> If ppl want to make non-adults forbidden to buy those Ts cauz of a "less strong" medical condition... therefore some law should be applied that EVERYONE had to do some medical exams to check if he was ok or not to get some of that venom.For example, someone who has somethin on his heart shouldnt have those Ts.
> 
> 
> ...


well its not really that that is the issue
its that if someone does die or get really sick then our hobby could come into jeopardy which means no more keeping ts for anyone
and the legality of people under 18 you know blame could get passed on and on


----------



## pandinus (Dec 8, 2008)

clam1991 said:


> im home watching my baby brother most of the time anyway
> and the one i have is a rescue scarlet and hes a big ole cuddle buddy
> and theother is a green wing and she hates me cuz i have glasses
> i remember the first time i got her to step up
> ...


it only takes one person to ruin everything whether its a minor or an expert. we should all be doing our part to make sure we dont screw up rather than trying to control everyone else.


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 8, 2008)

But if someone has any heart problems and got bit and dyied would be the same thing=bad for the hobby.

//Tiago


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

yes that is very true
but im sure someone with a condition like that would be especially careful with more potent ts than any regular person

or at least i would hope that would be the case

and i now it may not just be a minors mistake but minors are usually in a home with other people and possibly other younger siblings


----------



## syndicate (Dec 8, 2008)

My opinion is that I think dealers should only sell OW spiders to people 18 or over or with parents permission if under 18.
Venom you say that alot of the African species are not of medical significance?
I think I might have to disagree with you there as I've read some nasty bite reports from Hystocrates and Pterinochilus.
In no way am I trying to say people under 18 arent responsible enough to own these animals but I think some dealers are a little lax on selling these spiders to anyone.Also screening for age can be difficult when selling online but I would venture to say that quite a few dealers dont bother doing this at all!
-Chris


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 8, 2008)

syndicate said:


> My opinion is that I think dealers should only sell OW spiders to people 18 or over or with parents permission if under 18.
> Venom you say that alot of the African species are not of medical significance?
> I think I might have to disagree with you there as I've read some nasty bite reports from Hystocrates and Pterinochilus.
> In no way am I trying to say people under 18 arent responsible enough to own these animals but I think some dealers are a little lax on selling these spiders to anyone.Also screening for age can be difficult when selling online but I would venture to say that quite a few dealers dont bother doing this at all!
> -Chris


i agree somewhat but not all ow are of medical significance
hmm well they can be i guess
but i was thinking more along the lines of the ones that take adults out of work for a couple of days and extreme pain to be more of a concern
i personally havent been bitten by an obt yet
but i wouldnt think its bite would be as bad as say a s. cal


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 8, 2008)

some ppl can have those medical conditions and not know that. Professionals and amateurs are,by law, obliged to do medical exams every year and it happens once in a while that someone dies on the court playing.. So it wouldn't even surprise me that someone could die from smthin that he didnt even know. Another thing is that i'm 17 and trust me, i'm simply like 90% body grown. I'm small and thin,i'm never gonna change, i can eat whatever i want and i dont get fat,just like my father. I'm 5-5" -> 1.65meters and i weight 58 kg wich is.... 127lbs or smthin like that. Said that, i might grow some 2-5cm and get some more 5-10kg and i'll be really small in a few years. That said i couldnt have any Ts either then...

//Tiago


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 8, 2008)

i was talkin about pro and amateur sport ppl.

//Tiago


----------



## betuana (Dec 8, 2008)

I voted maybe because I think it depends on the 'non-adult' what you are talking about. As others have stated, there are plenty of adults out there that probably shouldn't even own the NW species, much less OW ones. But there are some 'non-adults' that know more about the proper care, safety, and everything else about tarantulas than many other people.

I'd say that if the parents are OK with it (since generally, minors are living with their parents, and the homeowner should at least approve animals kept in their home), and the minor is old enough to have a good understanding of the care and safety precautions needed, then there wouldn't really be a problem.

A _responsible, mature_ teenager, whose parents are OK with them having Ts and such, should be able to own OW species. A 6 year old, someone whose parents have said they can't have Ts, someone who can't even remember to feed their pet goldfish, etc. should not have OW species however. It has little to do with age and everything to do with maturity and responsibility IMO.

A dog can be 'dangerous' as a pet too, but are generally considered ok for kids to have. Pet herps can carry salmonella - pet rodents can bite, etc. All of them can put someone at risk for injury or illness, and its up to owners to understand the risks in keeping the animal.

I think the parental permission idea isn't a bad idea, though it would probably need some work to make implement it in a hood way. Not to say that people like Clam for instance can't have or take care of OW species, but having the parental thing as back up to help make sure a 10 year old isn't getting the T without having a clue is probably a good idea.


----------



## Aarantula (Dec 8, 2008)

reclusa said:


> It all depends on the individual. I know some people over the age of 30 that should not have anything venomous in their possession. On the other hand, many younger people show respect for the animals, and keep them correctly.


Agree 100%

:clap:


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 8, 2008)

betuana said it all. I agree 200%

//Tiago


----------



## Arachnobrian (Dec 8, 2008)

Up here in Canada, pet stores are limited to five species they can sell. (G. rosea, A. seemani, A. avic, A. versicolour, and B. smithi), and this is a good idea as most pet store clerks are provided with little information except a price to sell it for. 

So a pokie can't be sold as a Rose hair, even if a labeling error happened none of the above could be considered "hot". 

Anything else can be puchased from several reputable T dealers across the country. I'm not sure if it's a liability issue, but most will have some kind of age restriction for medically significant species.

Sure I think, if a minor has the ability to care for pokie's and wants one, a parent or guardian should be present for the purchase. This would put the responsibility on the parents for knowing what thier kid bought, not the T dealer when things go wrong.


----------



## cagey (Dec 8, 2008)

I did quote on the tangential thread and did feel guilty for contributing.  However, I felt strongly about it because we got our first T when our children were quite small.  

On this poll, I voted "no" because I took the line at face value "Should non-adults be allowed to own/care for OW species" which I took to mean that a parent/guardian is not involved.    Will I ever rule out that my son or daughter may want an OW someday?  Nope.  We bought our sweet, laid-back a. avic when my son was 2.5 and my daughter 10 months.  It is very possible they may want an OW down the line.  Should that happen, it would be MY responsibility as the adult.  Any T we own is considered MINE.

Another perspective? Would it be okay for a 13 year old to own a pitbull and not have the parents involved whatsoever?  I think not (and don't tell me how sweet pitbulls can be - I know it because we had some when I was a kid.  But it was still a risk and when my younger sister was a baby, the pitbull did not react well and my dad had to give him away.)

*Seriously, I think she is sneaking hits of weed in her cage - she is SO laid-back for an A. Avic.  The Cheech of pink-toes?


----------



## somethingbig (Dec 8, 2008)

i voted no, but i wanted to vote maybe because the question is worded very ambiguously. i would specify what is meant by "non-adults" for one thing. i would also have specified whether you meant all OW species, or only the more potent ones? i think there should be specific species that require an age limit, whereas others should not.

owning and caring are different as well. if a parent owns the T, and the kid occasionally throws in a cricket, they are caring for it, but that's not really a problem because the parent is responsible for it. if the kid owns it, i have issues.

the problem with the maturity logic is: who is the judge of maturity? i agree that there are mature kids and immature adults, but legally, how do we define maturity? is there some sort of test? maturity is subjective, but age is not. age may not be the most efficient, but it is legally the best thing we have to help protect us.

there is also the very real issue of body size. someone 13 years old is more likely than not going to be smaller than someone 18. not always, but often. there are exceptions, but rules must be made for the majority, not the exceptions. clam you're a big ol' boy, but how big were you when you were 13? chances are, you were smaller, and go to any jr high and see how small those kids are. the effects of highly venomous Ts on these smaller framed bodies is too largely unknown to allow kids to own many of these Ts.


----------



## HcUnderoath (Dec 8, 2008)

im tired of laws banning this and that... if your 10 and want an OW species go for it.. if some1 really thinks you should have to be an adult, then lets just not let any1 under 18 ride or drive in a car, you can actually die from a wreck


----------



## barabootom (Dec 8, 2008)

I started importing large centipedes and tarantulas when I was 12.  My parents ignored me and let me do as I pleased.  I kept a lot of different things and was never bit.  I would leave it to the discretion of the parents. If the parents say yes, then in my opinion it's ok.  Now, if in the future something terrible happens or long term effects are proven from a bite, then I might change my mind, but I thoroughly enjoyed keeping everything I kept and I wouldn't want to take that away from some other kid.


----------



## somethingbig (Dec 8, 2008)

Ottawaherp said:


> Sure I think, if a minor has the ability to care for pokie's and wants one, a parent or guardian should be present for the purchase. This would put the responsibility on the parents for knowing what thier kid bought, not the T dealer when things go wrong.


i actually agree that if the parent wants to buy it for the kid then it would have to be acceptable. in the us, you have to be 21 to buy, drink, or possess alcohol. however, if the minor is drinking with the parent, it is legally acceptable. if the parents wanna get their kid a hotter T, then i regretfully say go ahead. BUT the parents must be held to the fullest responsibility if something goes wrong.


----------



## Arachnobrian (Dec 8, 2008)

At least this way the parents are fully aware of the puchase thier kid makes.

A T dealer should also have the imformation available to inform customers accurately about certain species.

So little Timmy can't come home with a pokie, and tell the folks it just a harmless rose hair.


----------



## Kenton Burris (Dec 8, 2008)

I don't post much on here simply because I am more of an absorbing sort of learner, I learn more by listening and reading than asking questions. However,  due to the topic of this thread I decided that this is the best thread to ask for some advice.

I am a 17 years old with a small collection of about eight T's, two of which are female P.regalis, the others are all fairly calm New worlder's, and my parents are aware that Pokies are among the more venomous spiders, and although they are obviously concerned that I may get bitten,they consider me a responsible young man who Is able to be dicerning and make good decisions this is why they let me keep them. Now I consider myself a responsible keeper, all of my cages are very secure and I_ never _ handle any of my spiders, I am extremely careful when moving any of my spiders, and try to do it as little as possible. I have transferred both pokies at least once with out any problems.  And I am fully aware of the medical significance of this beautiful species.  My philosophy on keeping tarantulas, Old Worlds in particular, is that they are interesting,amazing and beautiful creatures that should be respected and admired at a distance. I have had my collection for about two years however, I have been a "spider-nut" ever since I was old enough to comprehend the word "animal" and I have learned a great deal from keeping Ts and I consider them to be irreplaceable treasures that should be respected.

However, regardless of all these things. I have been considering lately if it is wise to keep Poecilotheria due to my age, regardless of how many cleaver techniques I may devise for moving my Ts, there is always the variable when dealing with tarantulas and thus there is always the chance of getting biten. I read as many bite reports and papers on tarantula bites and T venom that I can get my hands on because I think this increases my caution when dealing with any of my spiders. 

As much as I love my P.regalis I am considering selling them just because I think that it may be wiser to keep this species when I live under my own roof. But I am still unsure, if you guys have any suggestions or advice I am open.

Since I do not want to have a double standard, nor do I want to recommend that _every_ minor should be allowed to own OW Ts, I put "Maybe" as my vote. I think that yes, it is possible for minors to own OW T however, it really depends on the individual, like I consider myself old enough and responsible enough to keep OW species, namely the more venomous forms like Poecilotheria. HOWEVER, before purchasing and even after purchasing, and this goes for non-minors as well, the keeper should be very aware of the effects from the bites of these species and be very conscientious when dealing with them.

Yeah, so that is my two cents.

Cheers.


----------



## Thompson08 (Dec 8, 2008)

Well really I think non adults only should own OW species if the parents know. My parents know every single venomous t I have


----------



## keegan150 (Dec 8, 2008)

Well, i think it depends alot on the person. I'm 16 and i had an P. regalis and a OBT when i was 15. i would consider myself responsible and a "good" kid. i wanted tarantulas because i love  arachnids of any kind, any kind of arthropod for that matter. im very careful with my babies lol. i have a E. murinus now and just recently i held her, what an experience lol. running all over me and my friend lol. but i made sure that if she bolted she wouldnt get anywhere or get lost and what not; and she didnt. so i really think it depends on the person.


----------



## Arachnobrian (Dec 8, 2008)

I'm 42 and live on my own, I constanly question whether I should have pokies myself. As a smoker, I'm sure my immune system may not be as strong as a 17 year olds, so I could be at risk as well from a bite.


I do have a emergency plan though, my parents live across town but are very aware of my pets. Should something serious happen to me, they know exactly who to call for assistance in caring for my small collection


----------



## Kenton Burris (Dec 8, 2008)

I guess some things don't change with age or 'maturity' then right?  Maybe questioning weather you should own them or not is a sign that you _"can"_ keep them? Perhaps it tells you that you are aware of the 'dangers' and are responsible should anything happen.

Another thing that I think should be pointed out, is the clear distinction of a 13 year old to a 18 year old. There is massive amounts of changes that happen within those 'teen' years not only physically but mentally as well.


----------



## Talkenlate04 (Dec 8, 2008)

I sell a lot, and I am never going to do an age check or restrict someone from buying from me. Now someday could that come back to bite me in the butt. Maybe...... but I don't think it is my place as a seller to establish if someone is mature enough or experienced enough to have something or not. That is the job of the parent.


----------



## ZooRex (Dec 8, 2008)

If they wanted to and had an idea of what they were getting into, I would see no problem with a 13year old keeping an OW sp. I've had mine since I was sixteen, love them and can't wait to get more.


----------



## upwith inverts! (Dec 8, 2008)

What if sellers did a sort of test before selling you a tarantula? If you get a certain percent right, they will sell the T. Plus, if you have to do research, you would learn a thing or two about the spider


----------



## Remigius (Dec 8, 2008)

Hi!

 I voted yes, but I do think some conditions are necessary. First of all - parents should be informed on the spider their child is going to get. Some younger people forget that it's not only them risking their health. It should be up to a parent to decide, if they have environment safe enough to keep agressive and venomous spiders (how often do You hear the "cat stories"?). 
 2nd important thing about informing parents is that the view on being out of work for a week, because a mature female poecilotheria bit me, changes with age. When I was 16 I enjoyed every sick-pass  I'm not saying a 16 years old do not have imagination. I just think they might not realize all the consequences bites have.  

 I think that the perfect situation would be to introduce a kind of permission program, which would be based on consultations with local vets. I've been thinking about it since a plan of delegalisation of poecilotheria appeared in Poland. 
 That would be an easy way of ensuring an under-age person would be prepared for a spider, he/she could be underestimating. Let's say you've set a path from basic species to OBT. Anyone underage would need to go thru it before he/she would be permitted to buy a more aggressive spider. 
 I know it's much too idealistic to be put to life, and the legislation doesn't work this way, but I still think there could be sth. into it 

PS - great photo, Travis K, I think I'll make it my new desktop.


----------



## Struckanerve (Dec 8, 2008)

i dont think it should go by age. age is just a made up number.


----------



## Windchaser (Dec 8, 2008)

pandinus said:


> Well now i know youre insane. i love macaws dont get me wrong, but plus sized parrots are kind of like nephews or nieces to me, its fun to play with them and have fun, but at the end of the day, i get to send them home to their parents lol. i lost part of a fingertip to a particularly neurotic blue-tip scarlet a few years ago. Owning a macaw is like owning a todler with a pair of bolt-cutters for 80 years.
> 
> In regard to the question, what do i think about these kind of regulations, i think people should stop trying to tell other people what to do and mind their own business. ive met several minors who were awesome keepers, and ive met some adults who shouldnt even have a pet rock. lots of people have a tendency to think that only their opinion works, and everyone should do things their way. i say that anyone regardless of age should be made aware of the risks involved with OW t's, but that if the person is a minor, the only person who has any right to tell them what they can or cant have is their parent/guardian.
> 
> ...


I think John summed up my opinion very well.


----------



## Arachnobrian (Dec 8, 2008)

I think T dealers can easily figure out whether someone is capable of caring for certain "hot" species, with some simple questions.


----------



## ThomasH (Dec 8, 2008)

Venom said:


> Medically significant species should not be sold to underaged persons, who have, due to their age, a medical susceptibility toward many venoms; and who, due to their age, are not legally competent if an accident should occur.
> 
> Because: minors are more vulnerable to an envenomation, and so will incur both greater harm to themselves, and greater legal damages to the hobby if bitten/ stung, than if they were adult.
> 
> ...


A. Medical significance is an opinion. B. Being 18 doesn't magically keep you from a larger reaction. C. All spiders are venomous. D. Check P. regalis bite reports. The latest bite was to a middle aged man who called 911! That is a ticking time bomb! 911 is a public service hot line that happens to be accessible by the media. It could have been aired and ruined our hobby. I have yet to hear of a child owner who called 911.
Education definitely comes before age. I am a 14 year old male. I keep widows, scorps, T's, [Including Haplopelma's, calceatum's and P. murinus.] copperheads and other venomous exotics. I know what to do in case of incident and nothing has happened to me. I can guarantee I would fair better in bite than most adults. I am healthy, large and strong. 
On the other hand I have been bitten by hamsters, a commonly sold children's pet over thirty time.
Really, look at the regalis bite report at the bottom and tell me that he is a better candidate for more potent tarantulas than myself.


----------



## ThomasH (Dec 8, 2008)

Travis K said:


> Really with all of the "Oh NO! my T escaped" threads it really is just a matter of time. before some ones small child has an encounter of the venomous kind.  Heck even I had 2 Haplos loose a the same time for about 24-32 hrs in a room off of my garage.  It is not a matter of if it will happen, it is a matter of when.


The one thing all thos threads had in common is that the escapee didn't leave that room. I have yet to hear of an unattended baby in a T room. Most unattended babies are confined in a strooler or a crib. It is far fetched that out of all places a T would end up there. It would have to be arboreal and a super rare fluke. A scorp or pede wouldn't have a chance at climbing to the child. It takes an unbelievable fluke and a stupid/abusive/neglectful parent for anything close to that senerio. The pede bitten girl lived in natural range.
TBH


----------



## equuskat (Dec 8, 2008)

I sold a pair of Poecilotheria to a friend's son.  The kid is 13.  

Am I worried?  Absolutely not.  He was raised in a house full of animals, and he is well aware that he has to treat the animals with respect.  His maturity might be close to his age in many situations, but when it comes to animal care, he is wise beyond his years.  He grasped the concept of sexing molts and ventral sexing before his parents did.  His parents provide excellent supervision, and granted permission for him to buy the pair from me.  

It VERY MUCH depends on the person. If I don't think that someone will be a good keeper, I won't sell to him. If I feel that I person is educated on the species (or at least informed and willing to learn), prepared, and significantly experienced, I see no problem.


----------



## Travis K (Dec 8, 2008)

People especially you younger folks that seem to be offended by this thread to some extent!

If a young child was to die or get hospitalized it would be sensational and become media-viral very quickly, much more so that an adult.  We already have issues in many areas where Tarantulas are not allowed under city ordinances and thing like that.  It will only get worse.  The speed at which it gets worse is the unknown.  That is the reality.  

when local or state govs push ballots that discriminate against our hobby the voters will pass it just like smoking bans.  As the phrase goes, "every one knows what's best for you".  Gettem while you can.  Some cities in Canada prohibit you from owning ts and I am pretty sure there are a few communities in the US as well if I remember right.  We don't need any bad press so lets all take care of what we have.


----------



## Arachnobrian (Dec 8, 2008)

I don't think which age, size or health of human is best to handle a pokie bite, or care for one is the main concern here. 

Who is responsible when something goes terribly wrong? (many other possibilities), and how do we keep this growing hobby we all enjoy from a quick political halt by selling "hots" to anyone with enough cash.


----------



## somethingbig (Dec 8, 2008)

my proposition is that dealers take some responsibility and limit who can purchase specific 'hotter' species by age. this would help to eliminate some of the potential negative backlash in the event of a freak accident. this would put the blame solely on the age-legal purchaser, and not have a terrible effect on either the dealer or the hobby. the fact that the dealer has some sort of personal restrictions and disclaimer, would help keep the politicians at bay. 

and many keep saying age is arbitrary. maturity is what is most important. let me quote a previous post of mine with only a slight semantic adjustment: 



> the problem with the maturity logic is: who is the judge of maturity? i agree that there are mature kids and immature adults, but legally, how do we define maturity? is there some sort of test? maturity is subjective, but age is not. age may not be the most sufficient manner, but it is legally the most efficient thing we have to help protect us.


----------



## somethingbig (Dec 8, 2008)

Ottawaherp said:


> I don't think which age, size or health of human is best to handle a pokie bite, or care for one is the main concern here.
> 
> Who is responsible when something goes terribly wrong? (many other possibilities), and how do we keep this growing hobby we all enjoy from a quick political halt by selling "hots" to anyone with enough cash.


you worded my thoughts precisely!!


----------



## AudreyElizabeth (Dec 8, 2008)

Reading through this thread I have been wondering if I would let my child have a potentially dangerous species of tarantula (when she gets older). 
 This is a completely personal issue here in the U.S. (for now anyway) and it is up to the parents. But, it shouldn't be able to be done without parental knowledge. Maybe it should be conducted like seeing an R-rated or PG thirteen movie, with parental permission or advisory. BUT, who is going to 'rate' different tarantula species? If the government should step in they would probably do a blanket policy and say, you can't buy ANY tarantula without a valid photo I.D. And if it was serious enough they would make the transfer of a tarantula to a minor a crime just like alcohol or tobacco. Another option would be to make the sale of a tarantula illegal except to persons who have applied for and been granted a special permit. 
 I don't know.... I do know that my uncle, while I was growing up, kept lions, pythons, tarantulas, and probably lots of other stuff I don't remember, and had several children in the household. Irresponsible? Maybe, maybe not. No one was ever mauled by a lion, but he would have certainly been held responsible for such an occurance. 
 Before such laws come into effect I think that sellers, (pet stores and individuals,) must make and abide by certain rules before they are forced to by the government. This would serve to better protect the hobby, although it cannot be inforced. Code of ethics?


----------



## cagey (Dec 8, 2008)

Travis K had some valid points.  We DO need to be concerned about the sensationalism that could arise if a minor were to get bitten by a particularly venomous T.  I was a little surprised at the outcry of my friends and blog readers when we first got our T earlier this year - folks thought I had lost mind or was simply a fool for my toddler son who is obsessed with spiders.  I did not think it was such a big deal to get an arachnid and that reaction took me aback.  But truly, many folks are simply TERRIFIED of common house spiders and garden spiders - Ts are akin to godzilla to them.  As a newly minted invertebrate enthusiast myself, I am still shocked when I find myself coaxing spiders out my sink and saving spiders from my shower. I don't even trot them outside, I just make sure they don't drown or get washed down the drain.  Even a year ago, I would been squashing those suckers!

While I have y'all....I would like to give a hat tip to everyone commenting on all of this.  One of the reasons why I love this forum is that folks are fairly mature about DISCUSSING topics rather than getting mean or nasty about potentitally contentious topics such as this.  A personal thanks to everyone for keeping their coo (in general)l and just sharing.


----------



## Rick McJimsey (Dec 8, 2008)

To the persons whom said no, did you have any ow species when you were under 18?


----------



## cagey (Dec 8, 2008)

Oops - meant to just highlight the fact that we here forget that most folks are TERRIFIED of a spider with less than an inch or so leg span.  Ts are truly gruesome to them and those folks see no reason to NOT ban them.

Let's not GIVE them a reason, shall we?


----------



## DreadLobster (Dec 9, 2008)

I voted yes... but after reading through most of these posts... I'd have to change my answer to maybe.

I think people under 18 should DEFINITELY be allowed to own them.

However, a person who is under 18, legally speaking, is not in charge of themselves. This is why with guns and cigarettes and fireworks and various other "potentially harmful" things, there are laws restricting the age of who can purchase them. 

I do realize how ridiculous our legal system has become, and how likely even one horrible mishap (however unlikely) could outlaw our hobby. 

So, given that factor, I do think that minors should be able to own them, but to purchase them, no. Parental consent does wonders to limit lawsuits and liability towards the seller, and overall would probably help to conserve our freedom greatly. Sorry for anyone under 18, but honestly, would you waiting a few years, only owning NW species (a great way to gain experience by the way), really set you back that much? I fail to see how that is really harmful for the hobby, whereas someone getting sent to the emergency room, and their parents suing a seller, most likely one of the very reputable and responsible members of this site, could be really ugly. Just my two cents.


----------



## loxoscelesfear (Dec 9, 2008)

NO NO NO , the correct answer to this thread is "Who gives a crap?"  Kids w/ Ts isn't as frightening as kids w/ guns.


----------



## Zoltan (Dec 9, 2008)

Hello all,

First of all, sorry if I seem I'm trying to hijack the thread, I'm just curious.



Venom said:


> Many OW species are NOT medically significant. Pterinochilus, Eucratoscelus, Hysterocrates, Citharischius, Ceratogyrus, for instance. Venomous spiders should be kept by those who are physically less at risk, and legally less of a time-bomb for our hobby.


Do you have any references?

There was an article published in Toxicon a few years back, about tarantula venom-- one of the figures: _"the time to death (min) after ICV injection with 0.1 µL of crude venom in mice"_. Of the tested African species, _Citharischius crawshayi_ and _Hysterocrates_ sp. "hercules" 'finished' in the top three, meaning the lowest times (along with the infamous _Stromatopelma calceatum_).



Escoubas, P. & Rash, L. 2004. *Tarantulas: eight-legged pharmacists and combinatorial chemists* _Toxicon Volume 43, Issue 5, pp. 555-574_

Ps.: Tiago, in other words, they measured the time it took the mice to die from the tarantulas' venom. Thus logically, the shorter amount of time it takes for a mouse to die --> stronger is the venom. Strong venom = mouse dies fast; less strong venom = mouse dies slower.


----------



## Travis K (Dec 9, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> The one thing all thos threads had in common is that the escapee didn't leave that room. I have yet to hear of an unattended baby in a T room. Most unattended babies are confined in a strooler or a crib. It is far fetched that out of all places a T would end up there. It would have to be arboreal and a super rare fluke. A scorp or pede wouldn't have a chance at climbing to the child. It takes an unbelievable fluke and a stupid/abusive/neglectful parent for anything close to that senerio. The pede bitten girl lived in natural range.
> TBH


who says the T has to come to the baby.  Most likely it would be the baby coming to the T.


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 9, 2008)

Eraisuithon said:


> Hello all,
> 
> First of all, sorry if I seem I'm trying to hijack the thread, I'm just curious.
> 
> ...


Can u plz tell  that in other words ? x) 

Tkz in advance,

//Tiago


----------



## Remigius (Dec 9, 2008)

Eraisuithon said:


> Escoubas, P. & Rash, L. 2004. *Tarantulas: eight-legged pharmacists and combinatorial chemists* _Toxicon Volume 43, Issue 5, pp. 555-574_
> 
> Ps.: Tiago, in other words, they measured the time it took the mice to die from the tarantulas' venom. Thus logically, the shorter amount of time it takes for a mouse to die --> stronger is the venom. Strong venom = mouse dies fast; less strong venom = mouse dies slower.


isn't it the same test that g. rosea had some best scores in? I think I remember someone mentioning it was one of the shortest death-times.


----------



## upwith inverts! (Dec 9, 2008)

ReMoVeR said:


> Can u plz tell  that in other words ? x)
> 
> Tkz in advance,
> 
> //Tiago


It basically means that some people did a test in mice where they put a certain amount of T venom in the mouse, and saw how long it took the mouse to die. If a mouse injected with venom from a OBT died faster than a mouse injected with H. gigas venom, the OBT venom is more potent


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 9, 2008)

Yeah but how toxic was it? like a scale for example from 1-10 ?

//Tiago


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 9, 2008)

no they just compare the times to each other
the fast the death the ore potent it is
the slower the least potent

so then you could put them in order form most potent to least


----------



## upwith inverts! (Dec 9, 2008)

There is no 1-10 scale for it, so the only real way to measure it is in how much time it took for the mouse to die.

Clam typed faster


----------



## ReMoVeR (Dec 9, 2008)

upwith inverts! said:


> There is no scale for it, so the only real way to measure it is in how much time it took for the mouse to die.


Oh, now i get it 

Btw who was the last one of that study?


//Tiago


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 9, 2008)

upwith inverts! said:


> There is no 1-10 scale for it, so the only real way to measure it is in how much time it took for the mouse to die.
> 
> Clam typed faster


too slow old man :razz:


----------



## nexen (Dec 9, 2008)

I used to live in Toronto. A couple of children were bit by Pit Bulls a few months apart and this caused the local politicians to enact a sweeping ban on the breed. They literally started euthanizing pit bull puppies born after a certain grandfathering-in date. Many people who owned pit bulls had to give up their pets. The definition of "pit bull" was also very broad in the legislation leading to a lot of hybrids and near breeds being caught up in the ban.

Do not underestimate what a little bad press will do. Pit Bulls are dogs - man's best friend. Tarantulas are "scary bugs" to the vast majority of people. They do not and will never understand the difference between species. To them a pokie and a G.Rosea are literally the same creature. 

In my opinion this hobby is probably only one child in the hospital + slow news day away from a similar situation.


----------



## upwith inverts! (Dec 9, 2008)

ungh, gyah!
I speak the language of the whales
who thinks they can out random me?!


----------



## nexen (Dec 9, 2008)

Talkenlate04 said:


> I sell a lot, and I am never going to do an age check or restrict someone from buying from me. Now someday could that come back to bite me in the butt. Maybe...... but I don't think it is my place as a seller to establish if someone is mature enough or experienced enough to have something or not. That is the job of the parent.


I agree wholeheartedly but unfortunately I think you'd find that a court of law will almost always rule otherwise. As a "for example" someone quite close to me is currently suing a restaurant. A bartender at one of the franchises owned by the restaurant served alcohol to someone who ended up causing a fatal car accident. The lawyers involved are not arguing about whether or not the owners of the restaurant chain are liable for the damages - only how much money they are liable for. Even the lowest amounts that have been tabled thus far are considerable.

You're an expert on the spiders. If you sold a hot species to a minor without the permission of their parents and they ended up getting hurt...well thats going to be some tough times ahead for you, I'm afraid


----------



## nexen (Dec 9, 2008)

Just to be clear on my position here: 
I do not believe that minors should own dangerous Ts. I agree that it is true that it is unfair to slap an age requirement down since age does not equal maturity. Unfortunately we do not have an accepted "maturity test" and age strongly correlates to maturity so it is the best we are capable of doing.

My nightmare scenario is this: 

1) A minor buys a hot T, his/her parents none the wiser.

2) This T ends up escaping and bites someone who is immune compromised, in poor health, or extremely young (what would a pokie bite do to an infant?).

3) The news catches hold of it.

It wouldn't take much public outcry to get hot species banned from imports or breeding. The spillover could be pretty dramatic as well as neither the public nor the politicians are likely to do much research into what is and is not a dangerous species.


----------



## ThomasH (Dec 9, 2008)

nexen said:


> .............hot T..........


Like I said, hot and medically significant are mere opinions but I find it extremely far fetched for anyone to so much as have an opinion that some T's are hot.
TBH


----------



## ThomasH (Dec 9, 2008)

Travis K said:


> who says the T has to come to the baby.  Most likely it would be the baby coming to the T.


Like I said, in that scenario it would take a stupid/abusive/neglectful parent.
TBH


----------



## gvfarns (Dec 9, 2008)

Crap.  I voted no but I meant yes.  D'oh!


----------



## gecko_keeper/KBfauna (Dec 9, 2008)

I let my son own pretty much what he wants. He's been dealing with exotics most of his life in one way or another. He is totally into the 60 or so T's that we currently have. He helps but more importantly, he listens. I guess it helps to have support within your own home to educate, guide and help.

GK


----------



## Travis K (Dec 9, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Like I said, in that scenario it would take a stupid/abusive/neglectful parent.
> TBH


Are you a parent?


----------



## Kris-wIth-a-K (Dec 9, 2008)

You can if you want but if you want to be an idiot about it and get bitten then well, that is your problem.  It only takes one time, except if your Nature Boy.  I think the venom got to his head a little bit.  lol..  ;P


----------



## Tarantula_man94 (Dec 9, 2008)

rustym3talh3ad said:


> ive been on this board for a couple months now and i see that clam here is only 17 and that blew my mind, hes got alot of knowledge under his belt already and i say let it be, i vote yes. becuz i know alot of "minors" that are WAY more intelligent than adults, and ive seen people who just have a natural knack for being good with animals. so its just like anything else, if u can handle it then cool if not, then i guess we'll be reading some pretty funny bite reports.


totally agree im 14 and have 2 Ts, and 1 scorp. (and many vertebrates). If minors that have as much knowledge as i do, they should do fine. I am proud to say that all my arachnids are healthy.


----------



## Brian S (Dec 9, 2008)

Hell, when I was 8 years old I had 8-10 black widows. They pack alot more punch than any tarantula does which just goes to show age means nothing. Sure some kids have no right to keep a hamster however some kids have a good head on their shoulders and are quite capable of keeping an OW tarantula


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 9, 2008)

For those who answered yes or maybe.  Would your answer be different if the non-adult was a 10 year old child?


----------



## sean-820 (Dec 9, 2008)

I think mature people should be able to keep ow t's. There are still plenty of adults that are retarded that i could see trying  to hand feed them when they are drunk. If a kid is mature and knowlegable enough i say go for it. One thing though is that their parents should know their level of venom, and agression before the kid can get one. As long as its given a suitable enviroment and the kid or its parents will pay for upkeep i think it is fine. Generally, i wouldnt say anybody under 14, but if a kids father or someone kept t's or something and hes been around them and has plenty of experience i dont think it would be wrong for him to keep an ow species provided his parents know exactly what he is keeping and its level of danger.

I don't think any kid should keep one, since they would most likly not be mature enough, however if a kid is mature enough and has at least abit of invert experience i dont think it would be wrong for them to keep one (or more).


----------



## clam1991 (Dec 9, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> For those who answered yes or maybe.  Would your answer be different if the non-adult was a 10 year old child?


well it depends when i was 10 i loved bugs and collected the regularly
i would say yes if that was the case especially since any questions that he has he can answer with the internet
and at ten im not sure if hed be able to get an old world if his parents didnt support it
because hed have to have help with ordering on the web and you cant buy an animal from a pet shop unless your 18
and in the case of ordering on the web it some dealers have descriptions that say to watch out for their bite
and if a parent orders it without asking about it then its shame on them 

i know when i first ordered swift asked me a couple questions and he helped me get exactly what i was looking for


----------



## Thompson08 (Dec 9, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> For those who answered yes or maybe.  Would your answer be different if the non-adult was a 10 year old child?


I most likley would have said maybe on this one. Depends on the 10 yr old, if he loves animals and is dedicated and even tells his or her parents about the venomous animals he/she might get then yes I think he/she should be able to have OW sp.


----------



## Brian S (Dec 9, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> For those who answered yes or maybe.  Would your answer be different if the non-adult was a 10 year old child?


Nope! Like I said I kept Widows when I was younger than that


----------



## Tasey (Dec 9, 2008)

Hmm.. I haven't read the whole thread, but I get the gist... and I think that, while a few species should be restricted to 18 year olds, not all OW species should be included in that "hot list".
Don't get me wrong, I'm a minor too. I consider myself responsible and dedicated. I work, go to school, serve on a township committee, and keep all my critters very well, but that isn't the issue. I still don't think minors should keep Ts with medically significant venom, regardless of a sense of responsibility or experience. Simply because of the legal risk and potential consequences (media coverage, government involvement, etc) the hobby can't afford it. Am I able to handle an H. mac or a P. ornata? Sure. But I choose not to, because I simply don't want to pose that risk. 

Something just occurred to me. I've heard many pet stores are restricted in what they can sell, but I guess that's beside the point. Suppose dealers come up with species-specific quizzes for the more dangerous Ts and used that as a basis for selling the species. If a customer wishing to buy a P. ornata only wants it because it is "pretty", and has no idea of the potential risks, should either be educated or denied the T. I dunno, I guess it would be a lot of work for everyone. But something like that may weed out potential problems.

Cheers


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 9, 2008)

Brian S said:


> Nope! Like I said I kept Widows when I was younger than that


Widows and OW T's- not quite the same is it?  
Black widows are common in California.  I'd pitch my tent a few feet away from a nesting site and won't even worry about them leaving their nest to bug me at nite.  I don't think I would be able to sleep properly if I knew there was a pokie running around loose in my room.


----------



## Brian S (Dec 9, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> Widows and OW T's- not quite the same is it?
> Black widows are common in California.  I'd pitch my tent a few feet away from a nesting site and won't even worry about them leaving their nest to bug me at nite.  I don't think I would be able to sleep properly if I knew there was a pokie running around loose in my room.


Not the same at all! Widows pack a much meaner punch than any tarantula. No known tarantula has venom that is considered to be medically significant by toxicologists. Hell, they dont even list any spp under the LD50 chart that I am aware of. Sure some bites are painful and perhaps have some effects but its not like its gonna kill you or nothing


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 9, 2008)

Brian S said:


> Not the same at all! Widows pack a much meaner punch than any tarantula. No known tarantula has venom that is considered to be medically significant by toxicologists. Hell, they dont even list any spp under the LD50 chart that I am aware of. Sure some bites are painful and perhaps have some effects but its not like its gonna kill you or nothing


True.  But I would rather blindly wave my fat juicy fingers an inch away from a Black widow than do that to a pokie.  Black widows aren't known to randomly bite people.


----------



## cmart822331 (Dec 10, 2008)

i dont know much about T's but ive read a lot of whats been posted on this thread. i see good point on both sides or the fence here. i understand the fear of some kid getting killed and the keeping of T's being banned. BUt whats the difference if the kid bought the T or the kid was a 24 year old uncle joey's house and got into his T's enclosure? the end result would be exactly the same. young life tragically lost, keeping of T's banned! besides the fact that it wouldnt matter if minors couldnt purchase them for themselves. minors manage to get hold of tobacco, alcohol, drugs.... im sure they would find a way to get their hands on a T if they wanted it. i believe it is the dealer's responsibility to make sure anyone buying a dangerous species, regardless of age, knows what it is theyre buying and how to care for it! Period!


----------



## hasani1408 (Dec 10, 2008)

I don't see a problem with minor owning or caring for OW. Being a mother of 3 boys ages 9,11,13 my kids have respect for all animals and if a parent knows the risks involved I am all for it. The youth need to be involved for the sake of the hobby they are the future T keepers.


----------



## Aries (Dec 10, 2008)

I said "maybe" I think it's a person by person thing. Age doesn't mean anything, I know people in their 50's that are literally brain dead to the reactions of their actions and dull to their surroundings.

I started caring for OW first, I don't like hairs.


----------



## Warren Bautista (Dec 10, 2008)

Why not? I own an OBT and H. Lividum and I'm only 12.:?


----------



## Brian S (Dec 10, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> True.  But I would rather blindly wave my fat juicy fingers an inch away from a Black widow than do that to a pokie.  Black widows aren't known to randomly bite people.


Tarantulas arent known to randomly bite people either lol. The ones that do bite get bit when doing stupid things like messing with them.


----------



## somethingbig (Dec 10, 2008)

Brian S said:


> Tarantulas arent known to randomly bite people either lol. The ones that do bite get bit when doing stupid things like messing with them.


or catching escapees...


----------



## hinterwelle (Dec 10, 2008)

*Let whomever keep whatever.*

I was collecting black widows in 5th grade and I'm sure many others have been "lifers" as well.  Age means absolutely nothing to me.  The only rule I think we need would be that no one can tell others what they can or can't do on their own time at their own home.  If a parent objects, then so be it.  Other than that I think our society has way too many rules for the "protection of others".  History says that humans used to weed the dumb ones out. Natural selection you know. Survival of the fittest, that is, both mentally and physically. If someone wants to try and jump 100 ft off of a cliff and land on a wally world trampoline, so be it.:wall:   Therefore, I vote firstly for the "who are you to tell me what I can't do? Tell me how me doing whatever it is that i want to do can harm you?" reason. But if that's not enough, then by all means, let them do as they please and we'll at least do the gene pool a favor.  Can't people see that we're throwing off the balance of nature here by protecting everyone from experimentation?  But we'll see how it goes, nature always has its way.   Now a speed limit on the road makes sense.  I encounter hundreds of cars in one week that I have to trust to pass by me safely and soberly.  I am never forced though, to go over to Little Johnny's house and stick my hand in his cobalts tank. Furthermore, If i happened to be over there screwing his mom while his dad was at work and the little piss of a kid put it in bed with us... then I would be thankful that it was just a tarantula and not a .45 that he was cursing me to hell with. :evil:  So I guess the moral of this story is, Let Me Be, Set Yourself Free! 

:? hmm, but yeah, non-adults should be allowed to own OW t's.


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 10, 2008)

Brian S said:


> Tarantulas arent known to randomly bite people either lol. The ones that do bite get bit when doing stupid things like messing with them.


I beg to differ.  When a T is walking calmly on someone's hand then decides to sink its fangs into someone's knuckles when it was not threatened in any way, I call that randomly biting people.  That case was in the bite reports.

First, I'm not for telling people what they can or cannot do.  It does not matter to me if a parent wants to let his/her kid keep an OW T.  It is ultimately their responsibility and I don't think I or anyone should tell them how to care for their kids.  I agree there are too many rules in society today so much so that I may be breaking a few of them without even realizing it and the last thing I want is more regulation.  But if we as keepers do not discipline ourselves and behave responsibly, others will see it as their duty to regulate us.  Simple as that.


Let's weigh the pros and cons of this issue:

Pro
Kid gets bragging rights to his friends that he has a potentially dangerous animal

Cons
Kid gets bitten- rushed to hospital
Parents faced with child endangerment charges- claims ignorance(but it doesn't release them from responsibility), parents then throw breeder under the bus to save themselves.
Sleazy lawyer arrives and convinces parents that breeder is liable and tries to sue the breeder on the parents behalf.
Breeder loses suit, goes bankrupt.
Other breeders start buying liability insurance- transfer cost to consumers, prices for every T goes up
Politicians get involved and pass stupid regulations- most breeders go out of business.  Years later, the only T's allowed for sale are rosies, pinktoes and smithis.


----------



## Arachtis (Dec 10, 2008)

I would say that the individual's level of maturity and responsibility matters more than their age, I have seen many many adults who shouldn't care for a T of any kind.


----------



## Rick McJimsey (Dec 10, 2008)

T dorkus, what people say in bite reports isnt always accurate or true.
When something like that occurs, people are apt to exaggerate what happened.
Also, you're missing a few pros:
-Learning about new tarantulas and their habits
-Having a healthy hobby 
-Learning about geography (even though you probably won't notice it)


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 10, 2008)

Rick McJimsey said:


> T dorkus, what people say in bite reports isnt always accurate or true.
> When something like that occurs, people are apt to exaggerate what happened.
> Also, you're missing a few pros:
> -Learning about new tarantulas and their habits
> ...


Can't those things be accomplished with NW T's?


----------



## Travis K (Dec 10, 2008)

hinterwelle said:


> The only rule I think we need would be that no one can tell others what they can or can't do on their own time at their own home.


In a perfect world that is true, with out taking the statement to the point of commiting crimes against others.

BUT!!!

We live in America where in the year 2008 every one knows whats best for you.


----------



## Tuwin (Dec 10, 2008)

Yes. Why is it up to us or the government to protect people from poor decisions. I think we need to give the power back to people to make decisions for them selfs in stead of letting other people makes laws for them.

should children be allowed to own an Old World speices? yes! should they own one? that's a different question but if they want one they should be able to have one


----------



## ThomasH (Dec 10, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> I beg to differ.  When a T is walking calmly on someone's hand then decides to sink its fangs into someone's knuckles when it was not threatened in any way, I call that randomly biting people.  That case was in the bite reports.
> 
> First, I'm not for telling people what they can or cannot do.  It does not matter to me if a parent wants to let his/her kid keep an OW T.  It is ultimately their responsibility and I don't think I or anyone should tell them how to care for their kids.  I agree there are too many rules in society today so much so that I may be breaking a few of them without even realizing it and the last thing I want is more regulation.  But if we as keepers do not discipline ourselves and behave responsibly, others will see it as their duty to regulate us.  Simple as that.
> 
> ...


Oh my goodness. I don't think I have the time and enough sanity to argue with you................................:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:     

Have you actually owned an OW? Any T? A quick look at your profile shows quite a lengthy collection. It is just too often that adults flatter themselves, thinking they are a million times better at everything than children. YOU AREN'T. Sure blame me for being a mainstream society teen. Whatever. Some and not all adults use that excuse much too often.

TBH


----------



## ThomasH (Dec 10, 2008)

Travis K said:


> Are you a parent?


Mr. Travis, you are a smart and experienced adult and I respect you. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree this time.
TBH


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 10, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Oh my goodness. I don't think I have the time and enough sanity to argue with you................................:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
> 
> Have you actually owned an OW? Any T? A quick look at your profile shows quite a lengthy collection. It is just too often that adults flatter themselves, thinking they are a million times better at everything than children. YOU AREN'T. Sure blame me for being a mainstream society teen. Whatever. Some and not all adults use that excuse much too often.
> 
> TBH


Show me in my post where I said I was better than you?  Show me in my post where I blamed YOU for anything?   
Did I say children weren't capable of taking care of an OW T?


----------



## ThomasH (Dec 10, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> Show me in my post where I said I was better than you?  Show me in my post where I blamed YOU for anything?
> Did I say children weren't capable of taking care of an OW T?


You are pretty much distorting OW's to an evil, monstorous level. They don't bite you just because and they aren't after you. You opinion isn't smart and no matter who tells you better you still think you're right.
TBH


----------



## Talkenlate04 (Dec 10, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> You are pretty much distorting OW's to an evil, monstorous level. They don't bite you just because and they aren't after you. You opinion isn't smart and no matter who tells you better you still think you're right.
> TBH


Spending all this effort trying to discrediting someone’s opinion is a giant waste of time. No matter how much you might disagree with it, it's still his opinion. He obviously does not see things the same way you do, so get over it. Move on.


----------



## v4climber (Dec 10, 2008)

Talkenlate04 said:


> Spending all this effort trying to discrediting someone’s opinion is a giant waste of time. No matter how much you might disagree with it, it's still his opinion. He obviously does not see things the same way you do, so get over it. Move on.


Talkenlate04, you are definitely a very mature and respectful person. I've noticed your posts are usually informative or level headed.

Figured I'd post it here, good as anywhere else.


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 10, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> You are pretty much distorting OW's to an evil, monstorous level. They don't bite you just because and they aren't after you. You opinion isn't smart and no matter who tells you better you still think you're right.
> TBH


If I thought OW's were evil or monstrous and out to get me, I would not keep them.  When I said they randomly bite people, I was talking about their unpredictability- not just OW T's, any T. Many people like to think they can predict a T's behavior and that they've got them all figured out.  That a T will follow their set of rules that they've concluded from months or years of observations. Most of the time that is true but not always.  
Not all adults are better than kids at taking care of T's as has been pointed out many times.  I'm sure there are many kids who are more experienced and better than me.  But should a situation occur where a T does not behave the way you expect it to, and a person gets bit, an adult has more room for error in that (as it has been pointed out very eloquently by Venom) they can weather the effects better than a young child.  Clam is the exception- he is a brute!  The legal repercussions of a person getting bit stops with the adult, not so with minors.  The real issue here is not about a minor's ability to care for OW T's or not. The real issue, which you and many young and old ones fail to grasp, is what could happen to this hobby should a young child be bitten by a species with medically significant venom.
And if you think my opinions are not smart- that's fine.  You are entitled to your opinions as I am entitled to mine.


----------



## Brian S (Dec 10, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> I beg to differ.  When a T is walking calmly on someone's hand then decides to sink its fangs into someone's knuckles when it was not threatened in any way, I call that randomly biting people.  That case was in the bite reports.


What the hell are you handling a tarantula for in the first place? If you keep it in its enclosure you will not have that to worry about. I would not handle a Poecilotheria spp like some do here just as I would not handle a black widow 



> First, I'm not for telling people what they can or cannot do.  It does not matter to me if a parent wants to let his/her kid keep an OW T.  It is ultimately their responsibility and I don't think I or anyone should tell them how to care for their kids.  I agree there are too many rules in society today so much so that I may be breaking a few of them without even realizing it and the last thing I want is more regulation.  But if we as keepers do not discipline ourselves and behave responsibly, others will see it as their duty to regulate us.  Simple as that.


Now you are contradicting yourself. You say that no kids shall have OW Ts yet you also say that it does not matter? Which side of the fence are you on here? LOL

Let's weigh the pros and cons of this issue:

Pro
Kid gets bragging rights to his friends that he has a potentially dangerous animal



> Cons
> Kid gets bitten- rushed to hospital
> Parents faced with child endangerment charges- claims ignorance(but it doesn't release them from responsibility), parents then throw breeder under the bus to save themselves.
> Sleazy lawyer arrives and convinces parents that breeder is liable and tries to sue the breeder on the parents behalf.
> ...


That's the problem with our society. People have been sued for millions when their negligence only did a few hundred dollars worth of damage. So now more and more people see an "easy" way to make some big money without having to go out and work for it so now we have to watch our asses like never before. Call me an old schooler or call me what you will but I do not believe in sueing my brother unless damage was done on purpose. Anyone who sues an honest working man for alot more damages than what really happened is lower than whale dung in my books.


----------



## somethingbig (Dec 10, 2008)

Brian S said:


> That's the problem with our society. People have been sued for millions when their negligence only did a few hundred dollars worth of damage. So now more and more people see an "easy" way to make some big money without having to go out and work for it so now we have to watch our asses like never before. Call me an old schooler or call me what you will but I do not believe in sueing my brother unless damage was done on purpose. Anyone who sues an honest working man for alot more damages than what really happened is lower than whale dung in my books.


i agree, but the point is that this is the reality of the society that we live in. frivilous lawsuits suck, yes. we should therefore do everything in our power to prevent them from hurting our hobby.


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 10, 2008)

Brian S said:


> Now you are contradicting yourself. You say that no kids shall have OW Ts yet you also say that it does not matter? Which side of the fence are you on here? LOL


Let me clarify.  I do not think it is a good idea for a young child to have OW T's.  That is a personal opinion.  Others here obviously disagree.  That is their opinion.  Just because I don't agree with them does not mean I want to impose my views on them.  Thus if parents think their kids are responsible enough- that is their decision.  Does not bother me if they do or not.


----------



## T_DORKUS (Dec 10, 2008)

Brian S said:


> That's the problem with our society. People have been sued for millions when their negligence only did a few hundred dollars worth of damage. So now more and more people see an "easy" way to make some big money without having to go out and work for it so now we have to watch our asses like never before. Call me an old schooler or call me what you will but I do not believe in sueing my brother unless damage was done on purpose. Anyone who sues an honest working man for alot more damages than what really happened is lower than whale dung in my books.


I don't know what whale dung looks like but I agree!


----------



## Brian S (Dec 10, 2008)

T_DORKUS said:


> I don't know what whale dung looks like but I agree!


You dont need to know what it looks like but only know that it is at the bottom of the sea which is really low and it doesnt get much lower than that


----------



## Scorpendra (Dec 10, 2008)

i am 17 years old and my collection includes an L. violaceopes, an H. longipes, an O. aureotibialis and an M. balfouri, as well as an S. subspinipes. in the past, i had a P. rufilata and a C. brachycephalus. i got my first OW when i was 14, the violaceopes. i have never once had a problem with any of these 7 old world inverts....besides two of them dying, of course.

it really depends on the person's specifics.


----------



## hinterwelle (Dec 11, 2008)

Brian S said:


> You dont need to know what it looks like but only know that it is at the bottom of the sea which is really low and it doesnt get much lower than that


T-Dork totally set you up on that one Brian. Nicely done. I wonder what the highest state of dung would be. Some bird? 


One thing that I wish would happen with venomous snakes is for the state government allow for aptitude testing. Simply a test of skills and knowledge needed to own them. Like a hunter safety course, but with animal husbandry instead.  Surely breeders could include the cost of the testing in the price of their animals. It would beat not being able to sell and buy them at all.  Maybe hot arachnids could have the same thing, that is to say if it starts heading towards a total ban. Work with the people, not against them.  

and yeah, the ridiculous lawsuits now over the the dumbest things are really getting carried away.  I mean, suing a haunted house because its scary?  People aren't too bright these days.  Its those darn video games I say


----------



## cmart822331 (Dec 11, 2008)

hinterwelle said:


> One thing that I wish would happen with venomous snakes is for the state government allow for aptitude testing. Simply a test of skills and knowledge needed to own them. Like a hunter safety course, but with animal husbandry instead.  Surely breeders could include the cost of the testing in the price of their animals. It would beat not being able to sell and buy them at all.  Maybe hot arachnids could have the same thing, that is to say if it starts heading towards a total ban. Work with the people, not against them.
> 
> and yeah, the ridiculous lawsuits now over the the dumbest things are really getting carried away.  I mean, suing a haunted house because its scary?  People aren't too bright these days.  Its those darn video games I say


i agree with most of this but does being smart enough or knowledgeable enough to care for a dangerous species mean that you're mature and responsible enough?    :?


----------



## Brian S (Dec 11, 2008)

cmart822331 said:


> i agree with most of this but does being smart enough or knowledgeable enough to care for a dangerous species mean that you're mature and responsible enough?    :?


If I interpret this correctly it is all one in the same


----------



## cmart822331 (Dec 11, 2008)

Brian S said:


> If I interpret this correctly it is all one in the same


im sorry. what is one in the same?


----------



## Brian S (Dec 11, 2008)

cmart822331 said:


> im sorry. what is one in the same?


In other words, if you are smart and responsible enuff to care for something it matters not your age


----------



## cmart822331 (Dec 11, 2008)

Brian S said:


> In other words, if you are smart and responsible enuff to care for something it matters not your age


i agree with that 100% what i was saying is that you can be smart enough to know how to care for them safely and properly but not responsible enough to actually do it. in other words, one could pass this aptitude test but still be irresponsible with it and get hurt or worse! so would the test really solve anything? maybe...


----------



## Brian S (Dec 11, 2008)

cmart822331 said:


> i agree with that 100% what i was saying is that you can be smart enough to know how to care for them safely and properly but not responsible enough to actually do it. in other words, one could pass this aptitude test but still be irresponsible with it and get hurt or worse! so would the test really solve anything? maybe...


You are opening up an all new can of worms here lol.
Its no different when someone can possess the skills to being a good driver yet drives like a maniac everytime they get behind the wheel lol. So in saying that, its your call. I say kill 'em all, j/k of course! or am I?


----------



## cmart822331 (Dec 11, 2008)

Brian S said:


> You are opening up an all new can of worms here lol.
> Its no different when someone can possess the skills to being a good driver yet drives like a maniac everytime they get behind the wheel lol. So in saying that, its your call. I say kill 'em all, j/k of course! or am I?


lol! which is true! anyone who drives knows that many drivers on the road probably shouldn't be! lol!  the difference would be, on the road, youre risking many lives! in this instance youre risking your own! testing would be a good thing for making sure anyone buying is educated about it, yes! but would it solve this issue? idk!


----------



## CRX (Jan 1, 2009)

Well, I'm 15 and I have enough experience to keep OW species. I'm not gonna let anyone tell me what species I can or can't own, as long as they aren't deadly. And to my knowledge, (though I know there are some pretty bad African species) there are no deadly tarantula species.


----------



## Bill S (Jan 1, 2009)

cmart822331 said:


> im sorry. what is one in the same?


I think he meant "one and the same" - in other words, being smart and knowledgeable equals being mature and responsible.  And to some extent, I'd agree.  There's a lot of people who are classified as adults only because of the date on their birth certificates.  Being over 21 does not guarantee knowledge, smarts, maturity or responsibility.  Lots of proof of that running around out there.


----------



## GrammatonCleric (Jan 2, 2009)

I'm 32 and I don't feel comfortable having the superfast hot OW's. Age is irrelavent to experience in this category IMO.


----------



## AphonopelmaTX (Jan 2, 2009)

Well sure minors should be allowed to own species of tarantula from countries other than the Americas.  I can't believe this would even be debatable for a few reasons.  Tarantula venom, in general, only makes one very, very ill. We're not talking about species of spider which are well known to the general public to be dangerous.  Maturity level and experience level is very subjective and no one person or group of people should judge another's ability to maintain highly defensive species of tarantula based on age.  It's better worth the time to debate and discuss the ease to obtain deadly snakes and how those hobbyists who keep them put a strain on the nation's supply of antivenom. Any level headed parent would know to keep a child away from any potentially dangerous animal, venomous or not, and the parent will know at what age would be appropriate for the child to work with any type of spider.

It's odd to me that folks who frequent these boards almost tend to demonize tarantulas from certain areas of the world.  Sure, their some species' venom potency is more potent than those from the Americas but some forget to realize how rare bites are and when they do occur, it seems the circumstances surrounding that bite is ignored.  Somehow I doubt a few isolated instances of a child being hospitalized for an accidental tarantula bite would catch the attention of law makers and jeopardize the tarantula hobby.  They're just not well understood.

Oh and by the way,  the question for this poll is very narrow in scope and doesn't take into consideration that there are new world species of tarantula that are just as defensive and "dangerous" as old world species.  I got the pleasure to work with a 7 inch mature male T. blondi that would embarrass any 5 inch Haplopelma lividum or adult Poecilotheria sp. 

- Lonnie


----------



## D-back (Jan 2, 2009)

Hi,
I voted for yes. I think, non-adults should have an OW T, but only if their parents think he's ready... Some kids are mentally matured to take care of a "dangerous" animal and some aren't. Some kids are over 200lbs, some are under 60. Some have serious illnesses, some don't. It's very individual. The parents have to consider these things, do their research about T's and then decide if their child is prepaird...
PS. I can imagine that a bite from a Poecilotheria or a Stromatopelma could cause serous problems for a kid who's for example 55-60lbs. I don't think that a coma for example is probable, but in my opinion we can't rule out the possibility. It's improbable, but if happens, in my state, the parent is going to the jail!!!!!!   I don't know the US law, but in my country, the parents are responsible for their kids. By law, they HAVE TO protect them....if they allow their kids to bring a "dangerous" animal to the house, and something happens, they are responsible. They broke the law....


----------



## T-Harry (Jan 2, 2009)

T's are not dangerous animals as unfortunatelly some people might think they are.
Lots of people who don't really know about T's told me that they thougt a T could kill a human before I explained them otherwise. I like to tell them, that dogs are dangerous animals, not T's. Haven't you heard on the local  news once in a while that a dog killed a kid? Have you ever heard something comparable of a T? No? And you still think dogs are cuddly pets and T's are monsters?

So I voted "yes".


----------



## D-back (Jan 2, 2009)

T-Harry said:


> T's are not dangerous animals as unfortunatelly some people might think they are.
> Lots of people who don't really know about T's told me that they thougt a T could kill a human before I explained them otherwise. I like to tell them, that dogs are dangerous animals, not T's. Haven't you heard on the local  news once in a while that a dog killed a kid? Have you ever heard something comparable of a T? No? And you still think dogs are cuddly pets and T's are monsters?
> 
> So I voted "yes".


You have a very good point with the dogs. I used to say, that keeping a T is less dangerous than play soccer... ....But unfortunately the vast majority of the people perceive T's as dangerous animals and it's hard to convince them.... (my personal experience).......The parents have to decide, if the kid is ready for an OW T...And they also have to decide if they take the risk of buying a big dog with temperament while they have a small child at home.....


----------



## cmart822331 (Jan 2, 2009)

Bill S said:


> I think he meant "one and the same" - in other words, being smart and knowledgeable equals being mature and responsible.  And to some extent, I'd agree.  There's a lot of people who are classified as adults only because of the date on their birth certificates.  Being over 21 does not guarantee knowledge, smarts, maturity or responsibility.  Lots of proof of that running around out there.


i dont know, im sure there a are people out there that are smart and knowledgeable about T's... know everything there is to know about them but are just immature and irresponsible about owning them. regardless of age!


----------



## vvx (Jan 2, 2009)

If it were to be written as a law by politicians what would they use to divide the allowed species from the disallowed species? My guess is they would disallow "venomous" pets. Not just pets that have a venom beyond some measurable number.

To my knowledge no tarantula is fatal. It might hurt a bit (a lot?) but won't do permanent harm.

So to me, I'd say the kids should be allowed to have the spider. However, and just like any other pet, they should have parental/guardian permission. I wouldn't want my kid coming home with a kitten anymore than another pet.

The ultimate reason is not the harm in my eyes but rather the responsibility and financial ability to care for those pets.

Now, should kids be allowed to have lethal pets? I don't know.


----------



## Bill S (Jan 2, 2009)

vvx said:


> If it were to be written as a law by politicians what would they use to divide the allowed species from the disallowed species? My guess is they would disallow "venomous" pets. Not just pets that have a venom beyond some measurable number.


Very good point.  There are plenty of bad laws out there that came from good intent.  If the people here on this forum can't come to a general consensus despite having overall more understanding and awareness of tarantulas, think what a botched job politicians could make of writing a set of policies about who can or cannot keep tarantulas.


----------



## Endagr8 (Jan 3, 2009)

That depends.........Is maturity relative?..........OF COURSE IT IS.


----------



## burmish101 (Nov 24, 2009)

I didnt read this whole thread but ill put in my 2 cents. Tarantulas arent exactly lethal. When I was 16 I was nailed by a 2in. juvie H. maculata, and believe me when I say this, that bite made me learn FAST and taught me to not get comfortable and gave me a higher respect of t's. If you play with fire your bound to get burned one way or another. Personally I learn from making mistakes as im the only person I know in my area that keeps this kind of stuff, so I have to teach myself as I go along, this is a small hobby afterall. I'm all for minors of sound mind owning t's as long as theyre doing it for the right reasons. I believe it should be up to the parents to judge how mature and responsible their children are. I wouldnt trust small children with possibly medically significant species though, ie. pokies, Stromatopelma ect.


----------



## Exo (Nov 24, 2009)

I vote "no", I've seen what an adult H.mac can do to a full grown man, so there's no way I'd let anyone under 18 keep an OW.


----------



## jbm150 (Nov 24, 2009)

Exo said:


> I vote "no", I've seen what an adult H.mac can do to a full grown man, so there's no way I'd let anyone under 18 keep an OW.


Really?  What'd it do?  I've heard burmish's story but its hard to find juicy bite reports from H. macs.  Most I've read are pretty mild


----------



## Exo (Nov 24, 2009)

jbm150 said:


> Really?  What'd it do?  I've heard burmish's story but its hard to find juicy bite reports from H. macs.  Most I've read are pretty mild


His heart rate was all over the place, he was vomiting, he was having trouble breathing, his vision was blurry, and he had spasms on the left side of his body. (He was bitten on his left hand)

He was in the hospital for two days, and he had trouble using his left arm for a week afterwards. Man, it was bad.


----------



## Clement (Nov 24, 2009)

i really thinks it depend on the person, i had some OW when i was 16 years old and didnt have any problems, so if i can do it, other peaple can keep them even if they are under 18.


----------



## The Spider Faery (Nov 24, 2009)

Arguably, pet dogs can be capable of inflicting more serious harm and minor injuries than a spider and there are more reports of injuries suffered from dogs than from pet spiders, often times, so should say a 17 year old who is living on their own, be denied the right to own a dog?  However, dogs tend to reason and have intelligence as far as how they communicate before an attack, whereas an OW spider might bite without warning or signal since they won't flick hairs first, etc, so I think the margin for an accidental bite is more to be feared by an OW spider than a dog, but I'm just throwing the dog comparison out there for the sake of discussion.  IMO, _children_ shouldn't be allowed to own an OW T.  If I had a child, I wouldn't allow my kid to keep one in his or her room, and if I owned one of the medically significant venomous OW T's and also had children in the house, there would be a strick 'hands off' rule and possibly a locked door to keep them out if necessary.  I think of 16-18 year olds as 'young adults' so I'd vote 'Maybe' for that age category, but as far as a child under that age, I'd say 'No'.


----------



## jbm150 (Nov 24, 2009)

Geez, that is bad!  Did he ever have any symptoms well after the bite?  Like months later?  


I haven't read this beast of a thread and I'm sure a lot of it is off-topic bickering but as for the original question, well, there are plenty of kids out there that are more than capable of taking care of them safely.  Just as I'm sure there are that can take care of venomous snakes.  And there are more than plenty that can't/won't.  There are hot scorps, centipedes, and trues and these are restricted to minors.  The way I understand it, there are no hot Ts and the best a seller can do is set their own personal restrictions or warn and educate the buyer.  A seller should cover their bases and have a procedure in place for selling to minors that gets parental signatures.  A seller that is lazy and passes them off to just anybody to make a sell deserves any repercussions that may come.  Until there is a standard, yeah, minors should be allowed to own OWs as long as there is shared responsibilities (seller, minor, parents).


----------



## Exo (Nov 24, 2009)

jbm150 said:


> Geez, that is bad!  Did he ever have any symptoms well after the bite?  Like months later?


He had a "tingling" sensation (like his hand was asleep) on and off for about a month after the bite, but all other symptoms were gone after a week.


----------



## whitewolf (Nov 24, 2009)

I'm gonna say maybe only because I know some adults who shouldn't own them and some kids on here who do one heck of a god job with them. More the person them self for me.


----------



## Rick McJimsey (Nov 24, 2009)

Rick McJimsey said:


> Absolutely yes.
> Age != maturity.
> Granted, sometimes it does, but there are several underage persons on this forum that keep OW species, and hot species (myself included), and sometimes they are much more responsible and mature with them than several adults. I have also noticed that the majority of incidents (bites, stings etc) have occurred in adults, not in younger persons. Limitations of what can/cannot be purchased by an individual should be regulated by the experiance level of the person, and if any past incidents have occurred.
> Granted it would be alot more work for sellers, but it could possibley make the hobby much better for us, and for future generations.


I stand by this, a year later.


----------



## Xian (Jan 4, 2010)

Rick McJimsey said:


> Absolutely yes.
> Age != maturity.
> Granted, sometimes it does, but there are several underage persons on this forum that keep OW species, and hot species (myself included), and sometimes they are much more responsible and mature with them than several adults. I have also noticed that the majority of incidents (bites, stings etc) have occurred in adults, not in younger persons. Limitations of what can/cannot be purchased by an individual should be regulated by the experiance level of the person, and if any past incidents have occurred.
> Granted it would be alot more work for sellers, but it could possibley make the hobby much better for us, and for future generations.


Spoken like a mature individual. I whole-heartedly agree with Rick on this one.


----------



## rasputin (Jan 5, 2010)

Oh, wow - I'm not gonna read through this whole thread to put my two cents in based of the input of others but I'll just answer the title question. I'm sorry if my post matches any one of the 11 pages of posts.

I personally believe that it's possible that minors can care for OW species, it's really based on experience and not age. Take, for example, the program I'm working on setting up at a local Boys & Girls Club - I'm trying to get an arachnology/entomology program set up so as to give the youth something to do other than  get in trouble in a town already biased against the youth and tear down stereotypes and phobias. Said program will not just be aimed at teens but the expected draw will be adolescents who may already be interested in the hobby and this will be the best way for them to develop husbandry skills and respect for the animals that they come in contact with. Point is, with proper education and guidance, I feel, that minors are perfectly capable of learning to be a responsible OW keeper. Of course, it's much like selling a case of beer to an adult at the liquor store - if you don't know them personally, you don't know if they are gonna drink that case on the drive home and then kill someone in an accident but once you've sold them that beer, it's up to them to be responsible with it. I feel like I'm rambling - this comes from the fact that I'm using the laptop in the invert room so I'm under IR light and my mind's not really focused on the computer. Anyways, my opinion, for what it's worth.


----------



## Avicularia Man (Jan 5, 2010)

I came in this thread expecting to vote no, but then I read some of the comments. That got me to thinking back to when I was a kid and dealing with snakes. By the time I was 17, I was bored with the reading part of snake keeping because it was so rare to read about something I didn't already know. By 17 I had already caught a few venomous snakes like a Agkistrodon contortrix mokasen, Sistrurus catenatus catenatus, and Crotalus horridus. I see no reason why a kid into spiders like I was snakes, shouldn't be allowed to own a OW. My vote is yes.


----------



## ReMoVeR (Jan 5, 2010)

not this thread again :X


----------



## pouchedrat (Jan 5, 2010)

I feel age has nothing to do with maturity, and many minors are far more capable, intelligent, knowledgable, responsible than adults far older than them.  My brothers are more mature than most adults I meet on a daily basis 

I wouldn't trust some adults with a common pet like a cat or dog, much less something venemous.    

However, there's a limit.  Obviously a 5 year old shouldn't have a pokie or H. mac.  At least shouldn't be solely responsible for it's care.  Although my coworker's nephew goes HUNTING with his 5 year old son!!!  Seriously, if some people can trust a child with a freaking rifle, who's to say what they can or can't have or do????  Quite honestly I feel trusting your kid around guns at that age is irresponsible as well....


----------



## Xian (Jan 5, 2010)

It all boils down to education. Whether we are dealing with dogs and cats, or tarantulas and guns? Seriously, it's not a trust issue as much as an education issue. If youth are well informed and educated, then there really are no problems. If people do not teach their kids, then there are definitely going to be some issues, trust being one of them.


----------



## Draychen (Jan 5, 2010)

Anyone who is compitent enough to properly care for a OW species, should have the right to. However, I believe that a adult/guardian should be required to purchase any T irregardless.

  I also support that this guy should not touch any T, period ------> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAAOb...eature=related 

Though, you have to admire how calm he was when he was bit..


----------



## Warren Bautista (Jan 5, 2010)

Warren Bautista said:


> Why not? I own an OBT and H. Lividum and I'm only 12.:?


Ah yes, I remember this old thread.

I still firmly believe that it should not be about age, but judged by the amount of experience someone has.

And by the way, this OW list has grown to 4 large adult female pokies and a large female  and a relatively large colony of OBTs.

Go me!


----------



## JDeRosa (Jan 6, 2010)

Venom said:


> Medically significant species should not be sold to underaged persons, who have, due to their age, a medical susceptibility toward many venoms; and who, due to their age, are not legally competent if an accident should occur.
> 
> Because: minors are more vulnerable to an envenomation, and so will incur both greater harm to themselves, and greater legal damages to the hobby if bitten/ stung, than if they were adult.
> 
> ...


This made me reconsider my point of view.


----------



## JDeRosa (Jan 6, 2010)

To all those that voted, "MAYBE"...the law see's things in black and white, not shades of grey.
I was talking to an online dealer about a well known T experts 16 yo daughter that got bit by an adult pokie and spent a week in the hospital. 2 years later she still has some nerve damage in her hand.


----------



## paul fleming (Jan 6, 2010)

No


----------



## Avicularia Man (Jan 6, 2010)

JDeRosa said:


> To all those that voted, "MAYBE"...the law see's things in black and white, not shades of grey.
> I was talking to an online dealer about a well known T experts 16 yo daughter that got bit by an adult pokie and spent a week in the hospital. 2 years later she still has some nerve damage in her hand.


You don't keep up with American laws, do you? There are a LOT of laws that are "gray". A lot of laws are not clear and left for local law enforcement to "interpret". Even though I voted yes, I fully understand the "maybe" vote.


----------



## jebbewocky (Jan 6, 2010)

The topic post, and the topic question ask nothing of laws.  Hence why I voted "maybe."  Age and maturity are different, but maturity does correlate with age (IMO) that is--the older someone is, the less likely they are immature.  So, speaking as a general rule--your "average kid" should not have an OW T.  Exceptions are commonplace however, so ultimately it depends on the individual kid.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 6, 2010)

*depends on what one says own/care is...*

my answer is given in the following scenario:

An 8 year old talks mom who spoils the kid rotten into buying this 'pretty blue tarantula' (yes, a friggin' cobalt blue, pretty much the most aggressive and poisonous old world tarantula out there - ya gotta love Burma) and takes it home, gets nailed by it after school while mom and dad are still at work for the next three hours, let's say the thing dumped a full load into the poor kid, and due to small body mass size and perhaps succeptability to venom (be it bee sting, etc.), stops breathing after a short stint of dibilitating pain. Say he/she was too young to know the danger and do 911, and the 15 year old baby sitter is too busy with the cell phone to notice anything, especially with the TV on and playing with the ipod. OK, so nobody in the uSofA has YET been know to die from a bite from a tarantula, most probably because we have a robust medical system, but others in the world have - and now we've just added our federation of States to the list...

OK, enough with the scare tactics - the answer is NEVER without adult supervision. I mean the cage is one that is able to have a Yale lock on it, and the kid can only watch the critter while the adults are away and have absolutely no access to the key which is kept with the adults at all times. The cage is unlocked ONLY when an adult is there to supervise the feeding, watering, etc. So, the kid 'owns' the thing, and technically 'cares' for it, but in reality this is a cop out as the first time the 'pet' needs something more (bad molt, etc.), it's off to the vet with it - so WHO is actually 'caring' for it? 

Final comment: I have nothing but sympathy for the old world tarantula that gets 'owned' by some child that is still figuring out the meaning of life. 

We find consulations, we learn tricks with which we deceive ourselves, but the essential thing - the way - we do not find. Listen to the river...


----------



## sharpfang (Jan 6, 2010)

*I voted maybe as well......*

I could see a teenager 14-17.....bein' resposible enough....possibly....

An old tarantula buddy of mine raised and bred many thousands of T's.....and he helped me get over my fears { Thanx - Henry }, and his young son.....16
@ the time....would Hold suntigers and Ornamentals sometimes........neither were Ever bitten.......very educated though!
My daughter is almost 10, and she loves the Ornamental beauties......But prefers handling all her T's....mostly Mexican varieties.......I raised Her to respect and Not fear all Creatures......her 3rd word was gecko {"gecca"}.
We have started again w/ a P. Metallica to raise-up.....Mom made us part with Ornata.............Jason


----------



## Teal (Jan 6, 2010)

*It ALL depends on maturity, as someone else said.

As for the 'minors are more susceptible to venom' arguement - it's not age that depicts that, it is size. You can have a very large 12 year old, or a very small adult... either way, it's the size of the body and the immune system attached to it that determine how badly someone is affected by a bite. Turning 18 and becoming an adult does not magically give you any sort of resistence to venom.

Animals have been my passion since I could lift my head up enough to see the world around me. I got my first T as a birthday present when I was 13. Proper research, proper care, and proper respect means I did my best to ensure my safety and the safety of Ituri. 

I know PLENTY of 20- and 30-somethings that I won't let anywhere near my Ts because the maturity level to have respect and caution is just not present, nor is the desire to listen to the information needed to keep them and the Ts safe... whereas I find curious children are MUCH more apt to listening to the warnings I give them in regards to being around the tarantulas.*


----------



## Xian (Jan 6, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> my answer is given in the following scenario:
> 
> An 8 year old talks mom who spoils the kid rotten into buying this 'pretty blue tarantula' (yes, a friggin' cobalt blue, pretty much the most aggressive and poisonous old world tarantula out there - ya gotta love Burma) and takes it home, gets nailed by it after school while mom and dad are still at work for the next three hours, let's say the thing dumped a full load into the poor kid, and due to small body mass size and perhaps succeptability to venom (be it bee sting, etc.), stops breathing after a short stint of dibilitating pain. Say he/she was too young to know the danger and do 911, and the 15 year old baby sitter is too busy with the cell phone to notice anything, especially with the TV on and playing with the ipod. OK, so nobody in the uSofA has YET been know to die from a bite from a tarantula, most probably because we have a robust medical system, *but others in the world have* - and now we've just added our federation of States to the list...
> 
> ...




Just a couple things here, you have proof of the deaths due to tarantula bites, since you made note of that.

Secondly, I'm still trying to figure out the meaning of life, and I'm retired.


----------



## the nature boy (Jan 6, 2010)

Absolutely.  I think P. murinus is the best beginner T on the market.  Indestructible.  Easy.


----------



## iluvcreepystuff (Jan 6, 2010)

read my signature Im 12 I have no OW t's yet but I know I could care for one I get bit too bad I'll live.
I don't think a 6 year old should have one because of lack of knowledge but most kids my age would have no problem caring for an OW if they weren't such chickens;P


----------



## paul fleming (Jan 6, 2010)

Be pretty hard explain how a minor got tagged by an OW when you took him/her to the ER.
I am a parent and I don't want to have to do that.
As adults,we are responsible for our own actions.......where minors are concerned......IT is a bit different.
If a minor got tagged by a pokie,lightfooti or S.calceatum......imagine how impressed the doctor treating him/her would be.
Paul


----------



## EightLeggedFrea (Jan 6, 2010)

That would depend on how experienced/knowledgeable the potential owner is. Clam seems to be a good example of this, and he's younger than me. I'm 22 and I own 2 OBTS, a Pokie, and even some deathstalker scorpions.


----------



## paul fleming (Jan 6, 2010)

I thought the discussion was about minors.........not adults.
At 22....you are classed as an adult BTW.
This has nothing do do with knowledge/experience......


----------



## ¥AMEON (Jan 6, 2010)

*[¥] Vote [¥]*

*I Voted: maybe.*

Took me a while to read through this Thread .. many has 
made some good point's here .. im not the most Experienced 
Tarantula owner around and im not that well versed in law as 
well, but here's what came across my mind:

Legally there can be a "Maybe" if certain condition's are met.

*I'E:* Parental Concent .. Evaluation of potentual Customer
in regard of expertice and Knowledge and so on, done by the
Seller, in this case.

To me it is most important to do what is most right for the 
hobby and our Chosen Pet's.. and not to get to dug in to the 
whole "Young vs old" Scenario .. we as a whole got to protect 
our hobby .. young and Old alike. "The young ones of today will 
be the old one's of the future and all that l.o.l"

If there is a fear that un'just rules may be applied to our
hobby .. then one thing we can do to to delay this and 
hopefully even negate this scenario is make our own Rules
meanwhile .. and potentially if law has to enter our Domain
mayhaps we would make thing's easyer for them by making 
our own set uf rules they can go by, rather than having to 
invent their own .. as this may save them time.
But for that to work we got to have a real tasty set of rules 
set up .. it has to be well done and well composed for them
to bite "So to speak" .. and also a System that is flexible 
enough to allow exeptions to some rules if the "Condition's" 
are right.

This can all be done by some of the Veterans amongst us
getting together and coming up with possibly several ideas
for set's of rules that could later on be voted on in Poll's
by all of us .. so we then all agree in the end .. or at least 
the mayority.

Suggestion's to this Code of Ethic's "could" be:
*[1]* 
have parent's Signing a type of Release Form for specific 
"Hot" Species if the customer is under age.
Condition's could also be "built in" to this Release form
*Such as*: that the Parental Guardians agree and guarantee 
to that the Species in question will be kept under their 
supervision.
*[2]*
"Hot" Species ownership Certificate/licence Pursued by the 
Customer and paid for by the Customer .. obtainable after 
passing a written exam potentially.
*Need not be too costly or Complex to function i imagine*

*[SideNote]:*
I give Credit to you all for inspiration to this post ^^


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 7, 2010)

*fascinating...*



Xian said:


> Just a couple things here, you have proof of the deaths due to tarantula bites, since you made note of that.


Page 145 of "The Tarantula Keeper's Guide", plus there's more you can find on the internet - just look... such as:

Extracted from IndMED Banerjee K; Banerjee R; Mukherjee AK; Ghosh D; Kalyan Banerjee; Raghubir Banerjee 120, Apcar Garden, Asansol-713 304  
Tarantula bite leads to death and gangrene.  
Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology. 1997 Mar-Apr; 63(2): 125-6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
ABSTRACT: Chilobrachys hardwikii-giant black hairy spider bite produced two deaths, one case of gangrene of the foot and urticarial rashes in another person in a remote village of Churulia 30 km from Asansol.  
KEYWORDS: Spider Venoms; Gangrene  
References: 4 
Record Identifier: TB3374

The real info is "There has never been a known death from a tarantula bite IN THE USA in recent history" (ALL qualifiers are necessary to be truthful!) and this is because we mostly play with new world tarantulas (whose ulcerating hairs are the most dangerous part, not the venom), and typically we do not have access to the old world ones that can, and are, quite deadly - plus we have a robust 911/medical system to save our citizens. HOWEVER, in other countries in the old world, ESPECIALLY asia and africa where the notorious old world tarantulas are (that do not even have ulcerating hairs), people die in the jungles, remote villages, etc. ALL THE TIME and never get reported due to their remoteness, or are dismissed by the impudent as never happened since they could not examine the case themselves (sic).



Xian said:


> Secondly, I'm still trying to figure out the meaning of life, and I'm retired.


We find consulations, we learn tricks with which we deceive ourselves, but the essential thing - the way - we do not find. Listen to the river...

:?


----------



## DamoK21 (Jan 7, 2010)

the simple factor of this is that "you always see a smart arse who thinks they no it all" .... yea its guna happen one day to a young child hobbyist and for that reason id have to say no i think its a bad idea not because of the fact there immature or anything alike its for the fact that it may which is more than likely cause a hell of alot more damage to youth than a bite would to an adult ...

one of these days a kid is guna get bit by an OW ... and when that does bang goes the hobby itll be banned for the simple fact that n under 18 has been bitten by a ..... "what the papers would say" "A DEADLY TARANTULA" by all means that may aswell be the case for some of our OW species bites towards a child but not only then would people be lead to belive that "Tarantulas can kill you in one bite within 10 min's" theyll also be slanderd and forced into more of a deep hole than what T's are oready in .. i mean therse beautiful creatures have such a horrible and very very untrue "rep" and if this was to occur which it will eventually then our beloved T's will then be given worse names and rumors than what they oready have which will just kill the hobby completly ... people will belive anything they hear god if i had a penny for every person that came up to me and said "aint you scared they will escape i mean they lay eggs in your ears and can kill you" id be rich by now although belive me i set them straight but this is the rep they have now it would be a shame to ban the hobby and give them an even worse rep because if that happend how long do you think it would take before being able to be allowed to keep tarantulas in captivity again a very long time


----------



## iluvcreepystuff (Jan 7, 2010)

DamoK21 said:


> the simple factor of this is that "you always see a smart arse who thinks they no it all" .... yea its guna happen one day to a young child hobbyist and for that reason id have to say no i think its a bad idea not because of the fact there immature or anything alike its for the fact that it may which is more than likely cause a hell of alot more damage to youth than a bite would to an adult ...
> 
> one of these days a kid is guna get bit by an OW ... and when that does bang goes the hobby itll be banned for the simple fact that n under 18 has been bitten by a ..... "what the papers would say" "A DEADLY TARANTULA" by all means that may aswell be the case for some of our OW species bites towards a child but not only then would people be lead to belive that "Tarantulas can kill you in one bite within 10 min's" theyll also be slanderd and forced into more of a deep hole than what T's are oready in .. i mean therse beautiful creatures have such a horrible and very very untrue "rep" and if this was to occur which it will eventually then our beloved T's will then be given worse names and rumors than what they oready have which will just kill the hobby completly ... people will belive anything they hear god if i had a penny for every person that came up to me and said "aint you scared they will escape i mean they lay eggs in your ears and can kill you" id be rich by now although belive me i set them straight but this is the rep they have now it would be a shame to ban the hobby and give them an even worse rep because if that happend how long do you think it would take before being able to be allowed to keep tarantulas in captivity again a very long time


I would then be #1 outlaw in my county, just like my cousin lol


----------



## Xian (Jan 7, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Page 145 of "The Tarantula Keeper's Guide", plus there's more you can find on the internet - just look... such as:



TKG- " ...only anecdotal reports....." page 145.

Death by infection, does not equal death by tarantula.

And We Can ALWAYS Believe Everything We Read On The Internet!



> We find consulations, we learn tricks with which we deceive ourselves, but the essential thing - the way - we do not find. Listen to the river...
> 
> :?


:?<That is correct.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 7, 2010)

*...meaning and reality are not hidden somewhere behind things, they are in them - in all of them*



Xian said:


> Death by infection, does not equal death by tarantula.


The first two died, period. 

The third lost a foot (possibly due to infection, more probable due to loss of circulation from extensive tissue damage), and the fourth just developed some extensive rash (probably didn't get a full bite load). Both the third and fourth cases are rather nasty incidents, but not as bad as the first two of dying... still, death does occur and we needn't trick ourselves into believing anything else...

And this particular report was from the Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology, not just some illegitimate posting on the internet. Do some research, you'll find more.:3:

"One species whose venom has been studied extensively is the Chinese bird spider (Haplopelma spp.), a tarantula of the subfamily Ornithoctoninae. The venom has been found to contain numerous novel toxins, is effective at killing mice, and has been blamed for at least one fatality in China."

"The Chinese Bird Spider is a rather aggressive species, which will not hesitate to bite humans if disturbed. Its venom is the subject of much toxicology research, and while the effects of this spiders' bite on man is not well-documented, it is frequently lethal in small doses to laboratory animals such as mice and rats. As a result, it is generally regarded as a venomous specimen. There is at least one report of a *small child dying* after receiving a bite from this spider. The venom itself is a rather complex neurotoxin, containing numerous compounds capable of blocking neurotransmitters."

btw - TKG Pg. 145: 'anecdotal reports' just means they were not published in some journal, not that they did not happen. Besides, the one above was published and still people are in denial - so, what does it take to make some people understand, something on YouTube? (heh, heh):wall: http://www.badspiderbites.com/spider-bite-video/

Most literature on tarantula bites reads like this:
"Tarantula bites are extremely rare and nonvenomous, but agitation of the spider may cause it to throw needle-like hairs. The hairs act as foreign bodies in skin or eyes and can trigger mast cell degranulation and an anaphylactoid reaction (eg, urticaria, angioedema, bronchospasm, hypotension) in sensitized people, usually pet owners who handle the spider daily."
BUT - We're not talking about your average tarantula in this thread, but rather these old world tarantulas typically not sold in pet shops (which is what most literature on tarantulas not having a dangerous bite is about...). So, reported deaths in India, China, etc., are from 'modern/civilized' countries, and there's the many 'backwards/uncivilized' countries that don't get into the filtered mainstream media for us to think about, too. Anyway, I have rescued a couple of old world tarantulas from pet shops - one let me have the cage and all they were so afraid (PETCO), and the other had broken off three of her legs trying to avoid it and had resorted to not feeding or watering it, just waiting for it to just die and go away (Pet Company). Morons!


----------



## Xian (Jan 7, 2010)

btw- definition of anacdotal -
1 a : of, relating to, or consisting of anecdotes <an anecdotal biography> b : anecdotic 2 <my anecdotal uncle>
2 : based on or consisting of reports or observations of usually unscientific observers <anecdotal evidence>
3 : of, relating to, or being the depiction of a scene suggesting a story <anecdotal details>

"Evidence in the form of an anecdote or hearsay is called anecdotal if there is doubt about its veracity; the evidence itself is considered untrustworthy."


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 7, 2010)

*Have you not learned anything, grasshopper?*



Xian said:


> btw- definition of anacdotal ...blah, blah, blah...


Merriam-Webster: noun - French, from Greek 'anekdota' = unpublished items, period.:clap:
(fyi: root of the word definition - where the 'word' came from originally, true meaning)

OK, so now we're down to semantics? Aren't we getting 'off topic'? Isn't it about saving lives - better to err on the side of caution? Tell you what, you let your grandchild play with a nice old world tarantula and I'll tell mine I'll knock his head off if he ever does!!!

This is the end of this rant :worship:


----------



## Xian (Jan 7, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Merriam-Webster: noun - French, from Greek 'anekdota' = unpublished items, period.:clap:
> 
> OK, so now we're down to semantics? Aren't we getting 'off topic'? Isn't it about saving lives - better to err on the side of caution? Tell you what, you let your grandchild play with a nice old world tarantula and I'll tell mine I'll knock his head off if he ever does!!!
> 
> This is the end of this rant :worship:


I don't think you can just use part of a definition however.

You are correct, quite a bit off topic. Sorry about the thread hi-jack.


----------



## paul fleming (Jan 7, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> The first two died, period.
> 
> The third lost a foot (possibly due to infection, more probable due to loss of circulation from extensive tissue damage), and the fourth just developed some extensive rash (probably didn't get a full bite load). Both the third and fourth cases are rather nasty incidents, but not as bad as the first two of dying... still, death does occur and we needn't trick ourselves into believing anything else...
> 
> ...


Seem to remember an argument recently concerning this......someone told me I was talking ....well you know.
Although I still believe that 99.9999% of T's are incapable of killing a person (venom wise and not through anaphylactic shock)
Paul


----------



## Sevenrats (Jan 8, 2010)

With all the "newb" shouldn't keep blah blah on this site it is amazing how so many think it's ok for kid to be exposed to a potentially dangerous situation.


----------



## Avicularia Man (Jan 8, 2010)

Sevenrats said:


> With all the "newb" shouldn't keep blah blah on this site it is amazing how so many think it's ok for kid to be exposed to a potentially dangerous situation.


Newb has nothing to do with age.


----------



## ReMoVeR (Jan 8, 2010)

Every case is a case... so end of story ? ;o xD


----------



## Arachn'auQuébec (Jan 9, 2010)

Maybe It will be time to change things if a minor dies or suffer serious injuries(other than having a seriously bad time). A tarantula bite, even OW, is nothing else than a good life lesson and an incredible(and temporary) pain in the ass. IMO, the thing is people already think tarantulas are nasty, deadly baby eaters. IMO again, a child death from a tarantula won't even surprise the public. As long as our hobby does not becomes a "social tendency"(wich is far far far from happening), where every stupid and irresponsible joe in america(90% of pop. IMO anyway(sorry, i'm no mysanthrop(I just hate most people)))starts owning tarantulas of all species, an isolated case of a child dying will not trigger an overreaction from all america. I mean if 95% of the population don't even know someone owning a tarantula, they won't be scared(though I've been surprised before).Even those who know someone owning a tarantula should not be scared(though I've been surprised before), since often they are(hopefully) educated by them.

 I don't see why minors should not be allowed to keep them, since they are way safer than a pellet gun or a steak knife:you got to pay attention when playing with them. Parents(hopefully) educate their kids about them, as everything else(hopefully...).


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 9, 2010)

*correction?*



Arachn'auQuébec said:


> A tarantula bite, even *OW*, is nothing else than a good life lesson and an incredible (and temporary) pain in the ass... I don't see why minors should not be allowed to keep them, since *they* are way safer than a pellet gun or...


I believe you meant '*N*ew *W*orld', not '*O*ld *W*orld' tarantula (typo?), for *they *which are way safer... 

...and _THEN _I fully agree ;-)

However, we *DO *need to be more specific - this is where the info stays 'contradictory' and thus confuses the issue. (i.e. There has never been a known death from a tarantula bite *IN THE USA in recent history*... the 'qualifier' is indeed necessary to be truthful and not deceptive!)


----------



## Jmugleston (Jan 9, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> I believe you meant '*N*ew *W*orld', not '*O*ld *W*orld' tarantula (typo?), for *they *which are way safer...
> 
> ...and _THEN _I fully agree ;-)
> 
> However, we *DO *need to be more specific - this is where the info stays 'contradictory' and thus confuses the issue. (i.e. There has never been a known death from a tarantula bite *IN THE USA in recent history*... the 'qualifier' is indeed necessary to be truthful and not deceptive!)


The post above makes sense as it was written with "Old World". The post reads "even OW" species. One can take this to mean that all T bites, including the OW species that are said to be worse than most, are not much more than a temporary painful lesson. (One that I haven't nor desire to experience, but a lesson nonetheless).

In the case of your post, why is this qualifier is necessary? i.e. Do you have information to show that some minors have died outside the country or in this country sometime in the past? (I'm not talking about the rumors involving a young girl in SE Asia, I mean actual evidence). If there are no known deaths, then there are no known deaths. Do we know every case, no, but until more evidence is presented, it is fair to say there are no known deaths from T bites. 

As for my opinion on the topic, I don't think there should be anything to keep a minor from owning an OW species provided they have the proper experience needed and the intelligence to care for the animal. Pterinochilus, Poecilotheria, and Heteroscodra were some of the first genera I had in my collection when I was a teen. Granted I was caring for animals long before this so I didn't see it as that big of a deal. Maybe stores should be a bit careful who they sell to though. I don't think anyone under 18 should be able to purchase an animal without a parent's or guardian's consent, but provided they have their approval, then there should be no problem.


----------



## D-back (Jan 9, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> I believe you meant '*N*ew *W*orld', not '*O*ld *W*orld' tarantula (typo?), for *they *which are way safer...
> 
> ...and _THEN _I fully agree ;-)
> 
> However, we *DO *need to be more specific - this is where the info stays 'contradictory' and thus confuses the issue. (i.e. There has never been a known death from a tarantula bite *IN THE USA in recent history*... the 'qualifier' is indeed necessary to be truthful and not deceptive!)


Hello BatGirl!

Being a healthcare professional, I have my own opinion on this. I also think (but I don't have any hard evidence, just an opinion) that in some cases, people have died after T bites in Africa or Asia. But you have to remember, that in the case of the majority of the so called 'anecdotal' reports (at least in the case of reports I've read) the death wasn't caused by the venom itself......it was caused by complications like infection....I think in one case, the cause of death was tetanus in the other sepsis.....if these reports are true, we can ask some question: 1. was their death caused by a T?......the answer is yes   2. was their death caused by OW T venom?....the answer is no...OW Ts have much more potent venom than NW Ts but OW venom still isn't as dangerous (although I THINK-don't know, just think-that the venom of for example of a Pokie or an S. cal might be strong enough to kill a person with SERIOUS illnesses, for example serious heart failure or a very small child....or even kill a healthy adult, even in a developed country with quailty healthcare IF the T bite is located in a vulnerable area like the neck or especially the tongue (I know it is unlikely that a T will bite someones tongue, but who knows?)--I don't think a bite into these parts of the body has to have serious consequences, but the odds are higher because if serious local swelling occures, the victim could suffocate befor the ambulance could arrive ).

To anyone who reads this and disagrees: this is only my opinion, I don't want to say that I have to be right....just on opinion.....so please don't want to kill me with a flame-thrower...

Best wishes!

PS. If I was a parent, I would allow my child to keep an OW T on his own over the age of 16 (if he was healthy). Before that, he could have an OW T, but I would do the maintenance.

PSPS. Sorry for my English!


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 9, 2010)

Jmugleston said:


> ...died outside the country or in this country sometime in the past...


We are only sure about our own country and its recent history on this issue, and indicating information on this issue without the qualifiers is tantamount to saying something of which we know nothing about like we do know, yet we really don't know - which is deception, is misleading, and in this case can be deadly (kind of like the statements on WMD's in Iraq)...

NW would be like the pellet gun mentioned (ownership controlled by a merchant) - OW would be like a loaded .45ACP (ownership controlled by the BATF) - either could cause harm and perhaps no death, but the latter is more prone to putting you in the ground...only anecdotal reports on this and no firm facts to back this up mind ya!


----------



## Arachn'auQuébec (Jan 9, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> We are only sure about our own country and its recent history on this issue, and indicating information on this issue without the qualifiers is tantamount to saying something of which we know nothing about like we do know, yet we really don't know - which is deception, is misleading, and in this case can be deadly (kind of like the statements on WMD's in Iraq)...
> 
> NW would be like the pellet gun mentioned (ownership controlled by a merchant) - OW would be like a loaded .45ACP (ownership controlled by the BATF) - either could cause harm and perhaps no death, but the latter is more prone to putting you in the ground...only anecdotal reports on this and no firm facts to back this up mind ya!



Did I say OW? sorry, I meant *O*ld *W*orld

I couldn't disagree more with you pushing my comparison further with the .45ACP. A .45 acp will most likely kill a child shot anywhere on his little body. It won't put him in bed for 3 days. It WILL kill him. Heck, even the recoil from the gun could be harmful to a child.

As far as we know, *O*ld *W*orld species never killed an american child. They sure could, if they bit in the eye, on the tongue(by asphixy as mentionned before) or if by some incredible bad luck it bit a kid in the neck and the fangs reached the carotid. So could a pellet gun MAYBE, in case of extreme bad luck kill a child if he was shot in the eye, temporal area or if it could by some exceptional shot reach the carotid. The bottom line is that Tarantulas, even *O*ld *W*orld are extremely unlikely to kill a child as bites are ridiculously unlikely to happen in these areas.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 9, 2010)

Arachn'auQuébec said:


> As far as we know, *O*ld *W*orld species never killed an american child.


*Exactly!!! *- tarantuals have never (in recorded history - qualifier needed here for accuracy) killed an American...

But just because something does not happen in America does not mean it does not happen elsewhere... which is what is _implied _when we say 'nobody has ever died from...' rather than 'no american has died...' which is closer to the truth.

Contrary to popular belief, the world does not revolve around the uSofA, and anyone claiming that something which does not exist in the uSofA 'official' database just does not exist (i.e. is just considered fantasy) is absurdly conceited (i.e. very American!).

Finally, the entire Merriam-Webster (collegiate) definition for _'anecdote': unpublished; a usually short narrative of an interesting, amusing, or biographical incident._... essentially just an _unpublished incident_, nothing about it meaning some made-up story, some lie, some form of propaganda, etc. as it has been accused of on this board.

As far as _"Do we know every case, no, but until more evidence is presented, it is fair (sic) to say there are no known deaths from T bites"_ is just absurd - it is indeed _not_ 'fair to say', it's just the opposite! This is like saying 'Do we know every species, no, but until more evidence is presented, it is fair to say there are no other species from earth" (sounds ridiculous , eh? *Exactly!!! *)


----------



## Arachn'auQuébec (Jan 9, 2010)

You are right, the world does not revolves around the USA, but the laws of USA, and the medias of USA, wich is what the discussion here is all about (comotion caused by a minor seriously injured by a tarantula), does revolves around the USA. It's sad to say, but nobody here really cares if a child died of a post-bite infection 10 years ago in thailand. If this child was an american, though, it would be totally different. But the thing is, here the wound would most likely have been properly sterilised.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 9, 2010)

Arachn'auQuébec said:


> ...the world does not revolves around the USA, but the laws of USA, and the medias of USA, which is what the discussion here is all about (comotion caused by a minor seriously injured by a tarantula), does revolves around the USA. It's sad to say, but nobody here really cares if a child died of a post-bite infection 10 years ago in thailand. If this child was an american, though, it would be totally different...




Tell ya what, I'm gonna just go pound sand... (essentially the world revolves around the united States of America, nobody cares about others or anything else in the world, and all is right in Disneyland) WOW! :wall:


----------



## Arachn'auQuébec (Jan 9, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Tell ya what, I'm gonna just go pound sand... (essentially the world revolves around the united States of America, nobody cares about others or anything else in the world, and all is right in Disneyland) WOW! :wall:


Sorry girl, welcome on earth. Legislations are selfish, as I said before, this topic does speaks of a world that revolves around USA: The laws of USA. Basically, caring about others does not mean control them, so something as special but maybe *to some really unlikely extend* dangerous as a tarantula should not be forbidden to minors in order to protect them, as most minors getting an *O*ld *W*orld tarantula will give them the respect they deserve at this point.

Freedom isn't dumbproof

My whole point is that people won't take our Ts away for an hypothetic case that never happened, is really unlikely to happen, and probably won't even cause that much of a commotion if, by some incredibly improbable bad luck does happen someday in USA.

Lets remove our thin foil hat, and not impose ourselves more legislations than is already necessary to comfort the country wives affraid of bush, obama, ben laden, honest plumber joe's deer huntin rifle and the little neighbor's slingshot.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 9, 2010)

*Should non-adults be allowed BY THE LAW to own/care for OW T's?!?*

I thought the thread was about whether _*parents *_should allow their kids to own/care for _old world tarantulas_, and if their judgement should be based upon evidence that _old world tarantulas _were too dangerous for small children considering the history of harm and deaths (uSofA 'official', unpublished incidents, or otherwise) attributed to these _old world tarantulas_, but, that new world tarantulas were fine (which is why pet shops only carry them and not the _old world tarantulas _that would clearly be more of a liability - these typically require special mail order)...



... SOooo, we're talking about _actual_ *laws *forbidding parents from allowing their kids to own/care for _old world tarantulas_? Is somebody off topic?!?


----------



## Xian (Jan 10, 2010)

It wasn't about laws or parents. It was just "should Non-adults be allowed to own/care for OW species". It's an opinion question, plain and simple. The parent and age topic is for the maybe choice, again all opinion.


----------



## Arachn'auQuébec (Jan 10, 2010)

Xian said:


> It wasn't about laws or parents. It was just "should Non-adults be allowed to own/care for OW species". It's an opinion question, plain and simple. The parent and age topic is for the maybe choice, again all opinion.


You got it right, all I am saying is 100% oppinion. Don't think I am going too much off topic either, if something is to prevent minors from owning a tarantula, *O*ld *W*orld or *N*ew *W*orld, it will be either conventional ageement between petshop/tarantula dealers, parent decision or a law. All three have been discussed, and all tree belong in this topic *I*n *M*y *O*ppinion.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 10, 2010)

Control of Tarantulas to Minors: 

1. ageement between petshop/tarantula dealers (n/a - very easily bypassed with direct mail, online, etc. order by kids and/or parents)

2. parent decision (only true option to control kids, but needs conscientious responsible parents for this one to work)

3. law (n/a - unenforceable due to #1 above, underground activities, smuggling, catch yourself, etc. - "OK tarantula, pull over - you're under arrest!": the _Tarantula Police_)

Moving right along - Another scenario (inspired by a vision in my dreams last night that was a lot of fun actually): You got your kid a nice pretty OW tarantula, and the kid is mature and knows what it is doing - all is well and everybody feels good about themselves. BUT, their friend who visits is immature, mischievous, and while junior is on the toilet, the friend plays with the OW tarantula and gets nailed, doesn't say anything to your kid (doesn't want to appear not cool) and leaves because the kid is now feeling 'funny' - on the way home dies, or gets home and winds up losing a foot, or winds up suffering severe nerve damage for the rest of its life, etc. - you get sued and are now one of the homeless...


----------



## Arachn'auQuébec (Jan 10, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Control of Tarantulas to Minors:
> 
> 1. ageement between petshop/tarantula dealers (n/a - very easily bypassed with direct mail, online, etc. order by kids and/or parents)


Yes it's applicable. Tell you an example relative to firearms again. Sure a parent could buy a crate of 7.62 and an AK 47(wich need a correct ID, and a maching credit card, a simple system quite tough to bypass by a kid), and then give it to their kid and tell them go play with you friends without further warning. What kind of parent is this? Still the kid wasn't able to purchase it by himself



BatGirl said:


> 2. parent decision (only true option to control kids, but needs conscientious responsible parents for this one to work)


I couldn't agree more, parents need to control their kids. But let's look around and open our eyes: a lot of them are spineless and will let their kids do pretty much anything.



BatGirl said:


> 3. law (n/a - unenforceable due to #1 above, underground activities, smuggling, catch yourself, etc. - "OK tarantula, pull over - you're under arrest!": the _Tarantula Police_)


HAHA, AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE LIKE A SUIT, WITH LIKE 8 LEGS, AND INSTEAD OF A GUN THEY WOULD LIKE, CARRY A SILK THROWER HAHAHA.

Seriously, laws and police are there for numerous reasons. When a guy beats his wife and the neighbors call the police, the wifebeaters policeman does not shows up. Believe it or not they are more versatile than that(though, again, I have been surprised before). What's an enforcable law? Speed limits on the road do not prevent everyone from busting them, however they do change something. A law against tarantulas would have prevented most people here from having a room filled with 10+ Ts. A parent finding a tarantula in his kid's room, knowing it's forbidden by the law, will most likely force him to get rid of it.



BatGirl said:


> Moving right along - Another scenario (inspired by a vision in my dreams last night that was a lot of fun actually): You got your kid a nice pretty OW tarantula, and the kid is mature and knows what it is doing - all is well and everybody feels good about themselves. BUT, their friend who visits is immature, mischievous, and while junior is on the toilet, the friend plays with the OW tarantula and gets nailed, doesn't say anything to your kid (doesn't want to appear not cool) and leaves because the kid is now feeling 'funny' - on the way home dies, or gets home and winds up losing a foot, or winds up suffering severe nerve damage for the rest of its life, etc. - you get sued and are now one of the homeless...


Are you suggesting that a kid, feeling his heart beat increase dramatically, a foot swollen twice it's normal size, totally cramped and in an incredible pain won't tell it in order to be cool?

Though as I see you had much fun dreaming of people getting homeless because a kid lost a foot, suffered severe nerve damage or died, again this is a ridiculously unlikely scenario, as our medical system is effective enough to prevent the infections that could make the story end that way.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 10, 2010)

*Dream Weaver Alert*

"dreaming of _people getting homeless because a kid lost a foot, suffered severe nerve damage or died_" - SOoo, telling others what they dreamed.  The dream 'inspired' this scenario as duly noted, the dream was NOT the scenario itself (dreams are not that organized... but if you must know, the dream centered around children and the chaos they are capable of, which WAS a lot of fun if you happen to be one of the kids in the dream creating the chaos [I think I was aboard the Star Trek Enterprise and the crew kept wanting we kids to act like adults, but the crew got resistance instead], yet this was also a vision that kids are unpredictable - and that inspired the second scenario)


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 18, 2010)

*just more 'data'...*

Pg. 18 "The Guide to Owning a Tarantula" - Jerry G Wells ~ talking about the tarantulas from the African continent: '...known to cause human deaths in rare cases.'


----------



## xhexdx (Jan 29, 2010)

That's not 'data'.  I could write a book and say 'tarantulas are poisonous', but that doesn't make it true just because it's in a book.

Until you get some kind of evidence that the spider bite (NOT complications from said bite) was the cause of death, you're still spewing garbage.

(+1 post count)


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 30, 2010)

xhexdx said:


> That's not 'data'.  I could write a book and say 'tarantulas are poisonous', but that doesn't make it true just because it's in a book..


You could actually get it published? Bold statement young man (heh, heh)... let's just wait until you do before we blunder much further 



xhexdx said:


> Until you get some kind of evidence that the spider bite (NOT complications from said bite) was the cause of death, you're still spewing garbage.


I've already posted info from medical publications (i.e. non-anecdotal) and from a few books and other places on the subject... but this is not enough for those having an obsessive denial syndrome crisis... for help please see psycological advice given here:
http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=48449&page=10 :clap:


----------



## xhexdx (Jan 30, 2010)

Way to stay on topic...:wall:


----------



## violentblossom (Jan 30, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> people die in the jungles, remote villages, etc. ALL THE TIME


But how can you know this if they were not reported? I'm not saying that is not possible, but if something isn't reported, then it cannot be known for certain.


----------



## Zoltan (Jan 30, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Extracted from IndMED Banerjee K; Banerjee R; Mukherjee AK; Ghosh D; Kalyan Banerjee; Raghubir Banerjee 120, Apcar Garden, Asansol-713 304
> Tarantula bite leads to death and gangrene.
> Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology. 1997 Mar-Apr; 63(2): 125-6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...


Ok, so has anybody actually read this paper?

Interesting that you can't find it on the homepage of IJDVL: http://www.ijdvl.com/

The citation says 1997 Mar-Apr 63(2) - the contents of this issue are found on the webpage: http://www.ijdvl.com/showBackIssue.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=1997;volume=63;issue=2;month=March-April

Strangely there's no trace of this "tarantula bite death" article!?

P.S.: it _hardwicki_, not "hardwikii".


----------



## PhilR (Jan 30, 2010)

Zoltan said:


> Ok, so has anybody actually read this paper?


I have, and it's not worth the paper it's printed on. Seriously.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 30, 2010)

violentblossom said:


> But how can you know this if they were not reported? I'm not saying that is not possible, but if something isn't reported, then it cannot be known for certain.


...and if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to see or hear it, does it still not happen?

btw - some were reported, and some were even published - two deaths in india, one in china, etc.



Zoltan said:


> Strangely there's no trace of this "tarantula bite death" article!?


Apparently the website is missing pages 125-126 noted in the extract, for if you go to issue 3 it clearly jumps over these pages (denial conspiracy??). It wouldn't be the first time a website is messed-up - you know software engineers...

Contact them for the pages if interested in the gory details  (I just did!)

Then got this today:

From: Devinder Mohan Thappa 
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 10:12 AM
To: ................
Subject: Re: Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol query...
Those pages were not scanned and put on web as they did not have useful information. *(at least not to detmatologists!)*
Dr. DM Thappa,
Editor, IJDVL
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Ms. Jaimie Blackstone, PE <editor@ijdvl.com> wrote:
Name: Ms. Jaimie Blackstone, PE
Email: ...............
looking for pages 125-126 in the Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology. 1997 Mar-Apr; 63(2) which appears to be missing from your website... can you help?


----------



## Arachnobrian (Jan 30, 2010)

Wow, I can't believe this thread still continues.

My views have not changed with regards to the original title.

However, as this is a "hobby/pet" related question. Perhaps we should only consider "hobby/pet" related bites, and any deaths reported. 

So far to date, reading the bite reports on this site, no deaths. Not sure, but it's possible AB bite reports could possibly be most extensive list to date within the hobby.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 30, 2010)

*OK, now we're getting silly, eh?*



Arachnobrian said:


> However, as this is a "hobby/pet" related question. Perhaps we should only consider "hobby/pet" related bites, and any deaths reported. So far to date, reading the bite reports on this site, *no deaths*. Not sure, but it's possible AB bite reports could possibly be most extensive list to date within the hobby.


Let us now pray it stays that way...

BUT - if someone has already died, how exactly would that get posted on the arachnoboard bite report section anyway? Their ghost? Their grieving family that don't even know this place exists? How about those that have no internet access whose pet just dropped his baby brother?

Just a thought... perhaps I really should revise my will to include that if I die after being bitten from my Burmese cobalt blue, my executor shall notify the arachnoboard bite report section... done!


----------



## xhexdx (Jan 30, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Let us now pray it stays that way...


Dear G...



BatGirl said:


> BUT - if someone has already died, how exactly would that get posted on the arachnoboard bite report section anyway? Their ghost? Their grieving family that don't even know this place exists? How about those that have no internet access whose pet just dropped his baby brother?


...od, Please let it stay that way.  Amen.

D'oh! :wall:


----------



## Mack&Cass (Jan 30, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Pg. 18 "The Guide to Owning a Tarantula" - Jerry G Wells ~ talking about the tarantulas from the African continent: '...known to cause human deaths in rare cases.'


In the book Firefly Encyclopedia of the Vivarium: Keeping Amphibians, Reptiles, and Insects, Spiders and other Invertebrates in Terraria, Aquaterraria, and Aquaria by Alderton it says that South American tarantulas have a deadly bite and there are no tarantulas in Africa.

Sorry Ceratogyrus, Citharischius, Encyocratella, Hysterocrates, Pterinochilus, Heteroscodra, Eucratoscelus (among many others) - since books are always right, you guys aren't from Africa. 

And before you say something about how that book isn't based solely on tarantulas, so mistakes are more common, here are some more examples:

In Tarantulas and Scorpions by W. Ranking and J. G. Walls, there's a picture of a tarantula and scorpion in the same enclosure. And it's not provided as an example of how not to house your inverts.

In Tarantulas by John G. Browning, there was a picture of a tibial spur on a MM and it said to make sure you inspect your pet for broken legs. Looks like we were wrong all along about tibial spurs - they're not spurs at all, some males break their legs in their ultimate molt. We all better start patching up their legs so they can heal.

Cass


----------



## Satanika (Jan 30, 2010)

*Admin Note*



BatGirl said:


> Let us now pray it stays that way...
> 
> BUT - if someone has already died, how exactly would that get posted on the arachnoboard bite report section anyway? Their ghost? Their grieving family that don't even know this place exists? How about those that have no internet access whose pet just dropped his baby brother?


I can't take it anymore. My silence is now lifted. I refuse to allow you to continue to spread misinformation to my users here. I just can't allow it anymore ... 

What is it going to take to get it through your extremely thick skull, that there are NO confirmed deaths DIRECTLY from an actual bite? :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:

Really .... is it that you have an issue comprehending what you read? Having a "reaction" is NOT the same as dying from a bite *directly*. Dying from a rash is not directly a cause from the bite. Dying from gangrene is not directly a cause from the bite. Seriously, why is it so difficult for you to get it through your (apparently) thick skull? Ignorance maybe? :?

Or is it that you just are here to be a troll and think that all of your statements can never ever be wrong or misguided or misinformed? If you have all of the answers to everything, well why are you here? Please do NOT tell me it is to share your (lack of) knowledge? You have been nothing but confrontational with every single person here that has tried their very best to help steer you on the right track and correct what you thought was correct information. Yet all you can do is be argumentative and fight them every step of the way. Is that how you think you learn? 

Maybe, just maybe, if everyone else is on the same page but you, then they're not the ones with the "obsessive denial syndrome" ...


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 30, 2010)

Mack&Cass said:


> In the book...


Wow, those are pretty funny! 

Good thing none of the absurdities are corroborated in other literature, eh? Now, as far as the 'Guide to owning a tarantula', and 'Tarantula keepers guide', and... seems some corroboration exists it these books and in many other places, therefore we have issues with being told we can not say what is corroborated... that old world tarantuls can cause death in rare cases.


----------



## Xian (Jan 30, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> Wow, those are pretty funny!
> 
> Good thing none of the absurdities are corroborated in other literature, eh? Now, as far as the 'Guide to owning a tarantula', and 'Tarantula keepers guide', and... seems some corroboration exists it these books and in many other places, therefore we have issues with being told we can not say what is corroborated... that old world tarantuls can cause death in rare cases.


The misinformation continues, in two different threads no less. You might as well start a third thread in case somebody hasn't seen these other two.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 30, 2010)

Satanika said:


> What is it going to take to get it through your extremely thick skull, that there are *NO* confirmed deaths DIRECTLY from an actual bite? :wall::wall::wall::wall:


I think the :wall::wall::wall::wall: would do it...:worship:



Satanika said:


> you just are here to be a troll and think that all of your statements can never ever be wrong


Actually, I have admitted errors in several places ~ nobody's "perfect" (or are they?)



Satanika said:


> they're not the ones with the "obsessive denial syndrome"


But the symptoms are classic all the way down the list! I mean... really.



Xian said:


> The misinformation continues, in two different threads no less. You might as well start a third thread in case somebody hasn't seen these other two.


fyi - I've started a few threads - I'm only getting attacked en mass in two... fighting a two front war it seems, and it is difficult to watch my back. If only you guys would stop going at me then I'd have no reason to defend myself and I can get on with enjoying the board. But as soon as one stops attacking another starts attacking, then the ones who stopped go into a feeding frenzy again and join in.


----------



## xhexdx (Jan 30, 2010)

You're not defending yourself; you're picking fights.


----------



## Satanika (Jan 30, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> fyi - I've started a few threads - I'm only getting attacked en mass in two... fighting a two front war it seems, and it is difficult to watch my back. If only you guys would stop going at me then I'd have no reason to defend myself and I can get on with enjoying the board. But as soon as one stops attacking another starts attacking, then the ones who stopped go into a feeding frenzy again and join in.


LOL! Ok, you can quit the persecution complex right here and now. Not buying it one bit. No one attacked you or waged a war against you. You were corrected on your faulty information and then got all offended and pissy about it and started to lash out at those who were trying to help you get the correct information. Honeslty, at this point, it is like beating a dead horse (or a stubborn mule). 

FYI, a war would imply 2 active parties, so if you want to be done with it, then just stop responding and trying to have the last word. Pretty obvious to me. 

Sigh.


----------



## ¥AMEON (Jan 30, 2010)

*[¥] Tryes not to add Gasoline to the Fire [¥]*

Seem's to me that similar mind's play well 
together ... even though their opinion's 
may differ ...

"Or how did that ole wordsay go"

One way to move forward can be to Agree 
to disagree ... as some wont easily change 
their opinion.

Alas ... i do enjoy debates .. as long as 
they're kept Civil and done in style.

Freedom of Speach is the right and all that,
And thus it is up to the educated to 
inform and enlighten ... and at the same 
time all may not be easily educated.


----------



## ribonzz (Jan 30, 2010)

If the kids are smart and well known by the spider, that would be fine


----------



## xhexdx (Jan 30, 2010)

ribonzz said:


> If the kids are smart and well known by the spider, that would be fine


It's arguable that spiders are too primitive to be able to recognize someone or to be 'tamed'.


----------



## Mattyb (Jan 31, 2010)

xhexdx said:


> It's arguable that spiders are too primitive to be able to recognize someone or to be 'tamed'.


I agree with this.


----------



## ¥AMEON (Jan 31, 2010)

*[¥] ¥AMEON wonder's a bit [¥]*

*xHexdx* Wrote:
Quote:*It's arguable that spiders are too primitive to be able to recognize someone or to be 'tamed'.* :EndQuote

Makes me wonder about those Docile Tarantulas 
that let's their owner Pick them up and manually
Re'locate/handle them .. and does show no 
defensive behaviour.

Wonder what kind of "Stimulus***" is going on there.


*** Stimulus: for lack of a better Description of above
mentioned reaction to said event.

**** Also not saying they would be "Tamed"

***** This may be material for a whole different
Thread.


----------



## BatGirl (Jan 31, 2010)

*goodby - the point is made, everything else is subterfuge*



YAMEON said:


> Freedom of *Speech *is the right and all that, And thus it is up to the educated to inform and enlighten ... and at the same time all may not be easily educated.


Just correcting the spelling of 'speech'... seemed an important statement!


----------



## Arachnobrian (Jan 31, 2010)

me me me me, the last word is mine. LOL

Give it a rest. :wall:


----------



## ¥AMEON (Jan 31, 2010)

*[¥] ^^ [¥]*

Thanks *BatGirl* 

Yep ... im the king of Typos he he.

"And now i got the last word, he he he"


----------



## splangy (Jan 31, 2010)

Wow.... this thread took off.

My two cents... I grew up with entomologists for parents.  That meant we went traipsing around through jungle after jungle in search of ants (exciting I know).  But my parents raised me around exotic animals. I remember catching and milking rattle snakes when I was like... 10. 

Because of that, I have an appreciation and immense respect for every kind of animal (not just the cute ones).  And I also have more understanding of how invertebrates behave, and how not to piss them off.

I think that's really important, and I intend to instill that same kind of education in my own children (I love the picture of the little girl with the Ts!)

As to the parents who would go off and buy a cute, blue spider for their child without taking any action to protect their child... Yeah, that happens.  It's unfortunate and the kid could end up really getting hurt.  BUT.... that's probably the same parent that has their kid doing lots of other dangerous things.  If the T doesn't get 'em, something else will.  I think the T market is fine.  You have to really look for them, and I don't think a lot of people impulsively buy slings.  I think they're more likely to impulsively buy something like a rose.


----------



## splangy (Jan 31, 2010)

YAMEON said:


> *xHexdx* Wrote:
> Quote:*It's arguable that spiders are too primitive to be able to recognize someone or to be 'tamed'.* :EndQuote
> 
> Makes me wonder about those Docile Tarantulas
> ...


You can pick up Ts in the wild like that, and they will behave the same.  Also, a pet T that has never been handled could be docile as a cat.  It just depends on the species.


----------



## ¥AMEON (Jan 31, 2010)

*[¥] I Live and Learn [¥]*

Oo ... i never knew that ... that is interesting indeed.
Thanks for the Information there *spangly* ^^

Maybe it depend's on the person Picking them up to
know the "right" moves too .. I'E: how to behave and
some knowledge in what trigger's this and that 
behaviour/responce/reaction.


----------



## splangy (Jan 31, 2010)

Yeah.  I've never personally done it, but a lot of my dad's coworkers would do it.  I think it's just a matter of practice, to get to the point where you can predict exactly how they will move.  

We used to go on scorpion hunts a lot when I was little, though.  We'd head out with a black light into the desert (a group of like 5 or 6 researchers), and catch scorpions.  There would always be at least one person who would just grab the scorpions free-handed, no protection, very rarely would they get stung.  They were good at it through lots of practice.  Scorps would be a whole lot harder to handle in the wild than Ts.


----------



## BatGirl (Apr 28, 2010)

*History Channel "Black Blizzard" (2008)*

The History channel a few nights ago in a special about the 'Dust Bowl' dust storms of the early 1900's, indicated that the extreme dryness during that dark time of US American history had forced many insects (and of course arachnids) to enter into unsuspecting homes across the midsection of the country, and 'death by spider' was among the causes of many deaths attributed to the dust bowl event. The visual the History Channel gave when telling this part of their story was of course a tarantula (gotta love major media!).

Probably most of the spider deaths were by 'other than tarantula', but with the conditions these people were enduring during this time, the increase in insect activity into homes looking for water and subsequent increase in bites, and the less than optimal healthcare provided during those early years, even a few of these deaths were probably a result (indirectly, if nothing else) of some of our native tarantulas.

Don't think the tarantula pet industry had any contribution to the deaths, though...:clap:


----------



## Warren Bautista (Apr 28, 2010)

Hmm... I'm afraid this might be one thread that might not have needed to be brought back up......


----------



## jbm150 (Apr 28, 2010)

BatGirl said:


> The History channel a few nights ago in a special about the 'Dust Bowl' dust storms of the early 1900's, indicated that the extreme dryness during that dark time of US American history had forced many insects (and of course arachnids) to enter into unsuspecting homes across the midsection of the country, and 'death by spider' was among the causes of many deaths attributed to the dust bowl event. The visual the History Channel gave when telling this part of their story was of course a tarantula (gotta love major media!).
> 
> Probably most of the spider deaths were by 'other than tarantula', but with the conditions these people were enduring during this time, the increase in insect activity into homes looking for water and subsequent increase in bites, and the less than optimal healthcare provided during those early years, even a few of these deaths were probably a result (indirectly, if nothing else) of some of our native tarantulas.
> 
> Don't think the tarantula pet industry had any contribution to the deaths, though...:clap:


From an aphonopelma bite?  Really?  You mention indirectly; that is the only way an aphono bite could lead to a death.  And that would be from a staph infection.  Which you can get from bumping your leg against a table.  Is that really what you're hinging your "death by tarantula" argument on?


----------



## Rick McJimsey (Apr 28, 2010)

I don't think that non-adults should be allowed to own Brumese Colbalt Blues, as they are _very_ dangerous.


----------



## mhill (Apr 28, 2010)

reclusa said:


> It all depends on the individual. I know some people over the age of 30 that should not have anything venomous in their possession. On the other hand, many younger people show respect for the animals, and keep them correctly.
> 
> John


 +1 on this. Ive met 12-14 yr old more mature than some 30+ 40+ people I know.


----------



## J.huff23 (Apr 28, 2010)

Warren Bautista said:


> Hmm... I'm afraid this might be one thread that might not have needed to be brought back up......


+1... We dont want this debate to get started again.


----------



## BatGirl (Apr 28, 2010)

*ODS alert*



jbm150 said:


> From an aphonopelma bite?  Really?  You mention indirectly; that is the only way an aphono bite could lead to a death.  And that would be from a staph infection.  Which you can get from bumping your leg against a table.  Is that really what you're hinging your "death by _tarantula_" argument on?


I think it is the *History Channel's* phrase not mine, and FYI they used the term 'Death by _Spider_'...


----------



## Scoolman (Apr 28, 2010)

Age is relative. 
Responsibility and maturity are much better indicators of ability.


----------



## ZergFront (Apr 28, 2010)

Scoolman said:


> Age is relative.
> Responsibility and maturity are much better indicators of ability.


*nods* Yeah, check this kid out. Definately doesn't go flaunting his baboon spiders on his hand and does a pretty good job maintaining his collection.

http://www.youtube.com/user/dobo1005


----------



## gromgrom (Apr 28, 2010)

Scoolman said:


> Age is relative.
> Responsibility and maturity are much better indicators of ability.


this, but this topic is beaten to death; young people are still much more susceptible to OW venom and hairs, heck, even unhealthy adults. And to go with that, is the age of the person; theyre under 18, and a seller can get in major trouble for selling, let alone having a non-adult get bit.

Both points, mine and Scoolman's, are right on, and are discussed every few weeks anyway.


----------



## chrisacres (Jun 2, 2015)

*This old dog*

Let's get this bad boy resurrected! Batgirl-  any more thoughts?


----------



## The Snark (Jun 2, 2015)

You mean aside from burying the thread in an unmarked grave?

Should non-adults be allowed to own/care for OW species?

Let's boil it down, and down some more and a little more yet. There are adults out there that I wouldn't trust to put air in the tires of my jeep. There is a 15 year old young lady in a village an hour from here who is a very responsible capable mother, not only of her own 2 children but takes care of several siblings and relatives children.
Lastly, there are some people who would write and promote legislation regarding who can keep what animal that are such completely ignorant, biased, corrupt a-holes that you wouldn't want them making decisions about anybody or any animal's life or welfare.

Pardon me here but I really need to ask, 
JUST WHAT IN H*** IS THIS -TURNS 18- SWITCH  WHERE A SUPPOSED IMBECILE SUDDENLY BECOMES A RESPONSIBLE COMMON SENSE LADEN CAPABLE ADULT??

Reactions: Like 4


----------

