should non adults be allowed to keep scolopendrids?

should non adults be allowed to keep scolopendrids


  • Total voters
    52
  • Poll closed .

Earthworm Soul

Arachnosquire
Old Timer
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
83
I think they should be allowed to be sold to kids. Why? Just because someone is 18 does not mean that they are responsible. Lots of adults buy things for status value and I'm sure many have bought tarantulas for that reason. Alcohol is sold to people over 19, but that doesn't mean people are responsible (hence all the alcoholics). I'm not saying 4 year olds should be keeping 13" centipedes. But i don't see why a mature educated 16 year old should be denied a pet based on his age. Besides, lots of families have dogs such as German Shepperds which on a statistical basis are known for attacks. Kids infact are left alone with these animals that are basically the size of wolves. The right kid should definetly be allowed these pets.
Because they're not legally adults. That's why.


This is a depressing thread.
 

ArachnoYak

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
224
I can't believe so many people voted yes already. The answer is a resounding no. It's not about whether they're responsible enough or not as I'm sure there are some that very well may be, but then only with full parental involvement. It's about liability and possible negative publicity that could harm the hobby should an accident occur. Don't leave it up to this poll to decide the case for you, common sense would dictate that you do not make this sale.
 

kripp_keeper

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
241
I think they should be allowed to be sold to kids. Why? Just because someone is 18 does not mean that they are responsible. Lots of adults buy things for status value and I'm sure many have bought tarantulas for that reason. Alcohol is sold to people over 19, but that doesn't mean people are responsible (hence all the alcoholics). I'm not saying 4 year olds should be keeping 13" centipedes. But i don't see why a mature educated 16 year old should be denied a pet based on his age. Besides, lots of families have dogs such as German Shepperds which on a statistical basis are known for attacks. Kids infact are left alone with these animals that are basically the size of wolves. The right kid should definetly be allowed these pets.
Yes lots of families own German shepherds, but do you know of a 12 year old that owns one alone? The problem is dogs become attached to its "masters", and most likely wont attack a child its raised with if the child doesn't give it a reason to. Even if the dog did the parents who purchased the dog would be responsible. A centipede will attack its owner with out provocation. Its far from a comparable situation. Also many of us here said selling it to the parents would be fine if they had proper knowledge on how to care for it. I have no issue with it being a family pet, and the parents being the primary care givers with the child helping.
 

RBJ

Arachnopeon
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
20
The trouble with the todays youth is that they dont like rules and wont take no for an answer.Therefor it must be up to the adults keepers to be responsible and take the necessary precautions to avoid things gettin worse than it already are,I'm thinking of the regulations/rules made to our hobby.
It wont be necassary for an underage kid to get bid.All it takes is an adult, who isn't responsibilly, to go and sell something venomous to a child without he/her parants knowing about it.And when they do,they could report it to the police and some newspapers grab that and make a big fuzz out of it.
I bet you, then there would be taking further steps in regulation for what is allowed for common peoble to keep,as they are obvious not following the laws and should therefor not be allowed these animals aswell...
Go think about it guys.Its not about underages people could or couldn't take properly care of an inverts.It's about the adult invertkeepers responsabillity for them to sell any venomous animals to underages without there parants knowledge.
I would get really pissed if anyone sold an animal to my kids (if I had one) without my knowledge.
 

PhobeToPhile

Arachnoknight
Joined
Jun 14, 2010
Messages
210
You know, I voted no for a simple reason; liability. Would you seel a pit viper to a minor? If the answer is "yes", then you have serious thinking to do. Even if the viper isn't lethal, the ensuing media crapstorm will lead to very heavy regulation of the hobby. Laws passed during such crapstorms will, invariably, be far harsher than if the same law was passed without the crapstorm taking place. Now, subsnipes is a "hot" species of pede. The SAME LOGIC applies here as in selling the snake. It's a risk that the kid can decide to take...if they are of age of majority, at which point the consequences of their decisions are theirs and theirs alone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PsychoSpider

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
233
The problem is yes, like everyone else is saying, liability. The local exotics store doesn't sell pedes, some scorps, and some t's to minors because of the liability. One more thing to say to people in this thread: exaggerate much?
 

l.MetalHead.l

Arachnopeon
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
19
Yes lots of families own German shepherds, but do you know of a 12 year old that owns one alone? The problem is dogs become attached to its "masters", and most likely wont attack a child its raised with if the child doesn't give it a reason to. Even if the dog did the parents who purchased the dog would be responsible. A centipede will attack its owner with out provocation. Its far from a comparable situation. Also many of us here said selling it to the parents would be fine if they had proper knowledge on how to care for it. I have no issue with it being a family pet, and the parents being the primary care givers with the child helping.
Weather its a family pet or not is irrelevant to the situation. I personally have been attacked by a German Shepperd and a dalmatian, both of which were family pets. A centipede will attack its owner regardless, but on the bright side, centipedes if cared for properly are in an aquarium and cannot escape. Dogs on the other hand are free to roam. Lots of families leave babes alone at times in rooms with family dogs. Regardless of the "bonding experience" I would trust no dog capable of eating a child. In my area there is actually a new by-law that tarantulas cannot be sold in the northern end of the gta or something of the like. I don't know what the exact law states but reptilia, a large reptile dealer in my area is no longer allowed to sell it's tarantulas and scorpions. I think this is because tarantulas and scorpions have a reputation of being creatures the public is afraid of. Dogs on the other hand are socially accepted as family animals (which is fine.) But i betcha more dogs have killed/done more damage to their owners statistically than any centipede. Besides, centipedes are a very small hobby, it's extremely unlikely that one will ever see one in a store and buy it on impulse. In fact I have never seen one in stores. To the best of my knowledge most people get them from breeders or reptile expos and such. Therefore that shows that one must be interested enough to find one in the first place and therefore probably has a bit of education behind them. I think that because they are hard to get and that people have to search for them, regardless of weather you are 15 or 65, the buyer would still have to be slightly educated in order to obtain them. Scary enough, any moron can get easy access a dog, even an abused dog.

After reading more posts it seems as though many people are conserned about "liability." Liability seems to be a very wierd perspective to look at, I really don't care who would be responsible, be it the seller, the buyer, the parents for allowing a child to get one, a bite is a bite, regardless of whos fault it is. We should focus more on how to properly educate people on how not to get bit, what to do when one is bit. I think a youth should be allowed to purchase one of these animals if they prove to the seller that they are educated enough to handle the animal. and i think that THAT SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR ADULTS TO. Just because someone is 18, it does not mean that they are educated in what they purchase. I think anyone who owns a "dangerous" animal should prove there knowledge in the subject before they get one. Regardless of theyre age.
 
Last edited:

kripp_keeper

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
241
Weather its a family pet or not is irrelevant to the situation. I personally have been attacked by a German Shepperd and a dalmatian, both of which were family pets. A centipede will attack its owner regardless, but on the bright side, centipedes if cared for properly are in an aquarium and cannot escape. Dogs on the other hand are free to roam. Lots of families leave babes alone at times in rooms with family dogs. Regardless of the "bonding experience" I would trust no dog capable of eating a child. In my area there is actually a new by-law that tarantulas cannot be sold in the northern end of the gta or something of the like. I don't know what the exact law states but reptilia, a large reptile dealer in my area is no longer allowed to sell it's tarantulas and scorpions. I think this is because tarantulas and scorpions have a reputation of being creatures the public is afraid of. Dogs on the other hand are socially accepted as family animals (which is fine.) But i betcha more dogs have killed/done more damage to their owners statistically than any centipede. Besides, centipedes are a very small hobby, it's extremely unlikely that one will ever see one in a store and buy it on impulse. In fact I have never seen one in stores. To the best of my knowledge most people get them from breeders or reptile expos and such. Therefore that shows that one must be interested enough to find one in the first place and therefore probably has a bit of education behind them. I think that because they are hard to get and that people have to search for them, regardless of weather you are 15 or 65, the buyer would still have to be slightly educated in order to obtain them. Scary enough, any moron can get easy access a dog, even an abused dog.

After reading more posts it seems as though many people are conserned about "liability." Liability seems to be a very wierd perspective to look at, I really don't care who would be responsible, be it the seller, the buyer, the parents for allowing a child to get one, a bite is a bite, regardless of whos fault it is. We should focus more on how to properly educate people on how not to get bit, what to do when one is bit. I think a youth should be allowed to purchase one of these animals if they prove to the seller that they are educated enough to handle the animal. and i think that THAT SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR ADULTS TO. Just because someone is 18, it does not mean that they are educated in what they purchase. I think anyone who owns a "dangerous" animal should prove there knowledge in the subject before they get one. Regardless of theyre age.
You are correct that dogs have a higher statistic for harming their owners, so why don't we keep it that way by being responsible and selling to adults. You keep comparing the invert hobby to the dog hobby, and I personally don't want the hobby I love to turn into what the reptile or dog hobby is now. You can only have 2 dogs here over 3 or 6 months of age , and you have to pay to register your dogs. That registration fee goes up for dog known to be more aggressive. I don't want to have to pay $300 per OW T and be limited to 3 tarantulas over a certain size. This child is 12 years old getting a venomous centipede with parents who might not have a clue about how to deal with it. There is a massive difference between headlines about dog bites and a headline about a 12 year old hospitalize because of a centipede. If this kid is hospitalized over a bite it will cause a major reaction. From insurance being denied to people being refused more often when trying to rent homes. That is something that can affect hobbies nation wide. The way the government is in the states now they would love a chance to say they are making kids safe by banning "dangerous insects". If my son was 12, and wanted a tarantula I would have no issue getting him one, but I would be the primary care giver. Yes he would be able to help with feeding. Yes I would show him how to properly care for it. Never would I let him do anything with out me being right there, or let him have it in his room at 12 years old. As a parent I can tell you if I didn't know anything about the hobby, and my son was seriously injured from a centipede he was sold I would be furious. I would be asking the guy who sold it to him "why didn't you say this could hurt him so bad", and I would be blaming the seller completely. When you step into parents not knowing about the hobby, and the care that is required that is dangerous for everyone in the united states that is in this hobby.
 

kripp_keeper

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
241
Is this what you want a 12 year old to feel? Your own words.
Don't remember how many times I've been bit.
last bite I was tagged on the thumb(base) by an 8 incher.Felt like I had just chiseled my thumb off at first, the pain got really bad as it spread up my arm.Swelling was bad ,almost my entire arm was swollen to about x3 of it's original size.Boneache and a major migraine ensued for the 3 days after the first bite.
 

l.MetalHead.l

Arachnopeon
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
19
You are correct that dogs have a higher statistic for harming their owners, so why don't we keep it that way by being responsible and selling to adults. You keep comparing the invert hobby to the dog hobby, and I personally don't want the hobby I love to turn into what the reptile or dog hobby is now. You can only have 2 dogs here over 3 or 6 months of age , and you have to pay to register your dogs. That registration fee goes up for dog known to be more aggressive. I don't want to have to pay $300 per OW T and be limited to 3 tarantulas over a certain size. This child is 12 years old getting a venomous centipede with parents who might not have a clue about how to deal with it. There is a massive difference between headlines about dog bites and a headline about a 12 year old hospitalize because of a centipede. If this kid is hospitalized over a bite it will cause a major reaction. From insurance being denied to people being refused more often when trying to rent homes. That is something that can affect hobbies nation wide. The way the government is in the states now they would love a chance to say they are making kids safe by banning "dangerous insects". If my son was 12, and wanted a tarantula I would have no issue getting him one, but I would be the primary care giver. Yes he would be able to help with feeding. Yes I would show him how to properly care for it. Never would I let him do anything with out me being right there, or let him have it in his room at 12 years old. As a parent I can tell you if I didn't know anything about the hobby, and my son was seriously injured from a centipede he was sold I would be furious. I would be asking the guy who sold it to him "why didn't you say this could hurt him so bad", and I would be blaming the seller completely. When you step into parents not knowing about the hobby, and the care that is required that is dangerous for everyone in the united states that is in this hobby.
Hm, very interesting post. I see your point about a 12 year old for sure. I was thinking more to do with 15-17 year olds. I dought though any 12 year old would have access to buying a scolopendra without parent supervision anyways. By saying though you "be responsible and sell to adults" assumes that adults are responsible. They are more responsible than a 12 year old kid, I'm not trying to argue that. But a interested educated young adult should not be barred off. I see your point of the 12 year old going to a hospital over a centipede bite, and i do agree 100%, that could be detrimental to the hobby. I feal the government is always trying to ban things that may have a slight danger. It's becoming very "Nanny like." That really sucks about dog registration fees. I live in Ontario and in my area my mother had to register her dog in case it got loose. It costs money and it is a 4.5 pound toy Pomeranian. Hell, we have to pay for licenses to go fishing yet there is millions of gallons of oil flowing into the sea. Life is unfair. I wouldn't want to see a interested youth being barred of from the hobby by the government and liability problems, but on the same token i definitely see your point where it would be detrimental for our hobby to be ruined or brought into public light over a bite to a child that could have easily been prevented.
 

kripp_keeper

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
241
Hm, very interesting post. I see your point about a 12 year old for sure. I was thinking more to do with 15-17 year olds. I dought though any 12 year old would have access to buying a scolopendra without parent supervision anyways. By saying though you "be responsible and sell to adults" assumes that adults are responsible. They are more responsible than a 12 year old kid, I'm not trying to argue that. But a interested educated young adult should not be barred off. I see your point of the 12 year old going to a hospital over a centipede bite, and i do agree 100%, that could be detrimental to the hobby. I feal the government is always trying to ban things that may have a slight danger. It's becoming very "Nanny like." That really sucks about dog registration fees. I live in Ontario and in my area my mother had to register her dog in case it got loose. It costs money and it is a 4.5 pound toy Pomeranian. Hell, we have to pay for licenses to go fishing yet there is millions of gallons of oil flowing into the sea. Life is unfair. I wouldn't want to see a interested youth being barred of from the hobby by the government and liability problems, but on the same token i definitely see your point where it would be detrimental for our hobby to be ruined or brought into public light over a bite to a child that could have easily been prevented.
Specifically subspinipes morphs.I ask because I'm considering selling one to a kid who is 12 that knows quite a bit about them.This thread will decide.

This thread is specifically about selling to a 12 year old, and I doubt this 12 year old is really telling his parents how venomous it really is. Just because this kid shows responsibility in front of S-P(the seller) doesn't mean he will when he has it alone in his room.
 

l.MetalHead.l

Arachnopeon
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
19
This thread is specifically about selling to a 12 year old, and I doubt this 12 year old is really telling his parents how venomous it really is. Just because this kid shows responsibility in front of S-P(the seller) doesn't mean he will when he has it alone in his room.
I thought it was about if non adults should be allowed to keep scolopendrids. But okay, I say, tell the kid to bring in his parents to purchase it for him.
 

CAK

Arachnoknight
Old Timer
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
299
Because they're not legally adults. That's why.


This is a depressing thread.
I agree with you Jay!

Same result, but different approach... Why don't we sell cigarettes to minors? Why don't we sell booze to minors?
 

l.MetalHead.l

Arachnopeon
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
19
I agree with you Jay!

Same result, but different approach... Why don't we sell cigarettes to minors? Why don't we sell booze to minors?
We don't. But we sell them vitamin water, pop, and fast food instead ;)
 

Reclusive Duck

Arachnopeon
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
14
No, no, and finally....No!!

I really don't think it's a good idea for someone under 18 to keep scolopendrids.

I would just like to make it clear that I have no doubt that there are many people here under 18 here who love their pedes and act responsibly and are probably more mature (and knowledgable for that matter) than most adults.

But it must also be considered that some scolopendrids are dangerous, and even a strong, fit adult man can expect a trip to hospital if he has an allergic reaction to a bite. Imagine how much more serious an allergic reaction would be if it were a child, I just don't see how it's worth the risk. Regardless of how safe or careful we like to think we are the fact still remains that accidents do happen.

What worries me in this particular instance is that the OP stated that the parents did not like inverts, therefore it would be just the child in charge of a potentially dangerous animal, where's the sense in that? At some point he will have to come into relatively close contact with the pede, feeding, mateinence etc. It doesn't matter how responsible he is, or how careful, there's still a risk, albeit a small risk, of him getting seriously hurt

Suppose he did get bitten, common sense would tell you that if he was in charge then it would be his responsibility if he were bitten. Yet we all know how precious little common sense there is these days. Here in Britain (and i'm going to assume that the US is no different here) if a child acts irresponsibly then every excuse possible is used to absolve that child from blame. The current mindset appears to be that no matter what, a child cannot be held responsible for his or her actions, therefore someone else must be to blame irrespective of what common sense would tell you. Who would be to blame in this case? The parents? Fat chance! They'd just deny any responsibility and claim they had no idea that their sons little creepy crawly was so dangerous. It doesn't take a genius to see where the blame would lie, the evil nasty man who sold the little darling the centipede in the first place. If an accident were to happen I GUARANTEE that's how the media would portray it. Then we can all wave goodbye to keeping pedes for good.

I'd just like to make it clear again that i'm not trying to offend any under 18's here who keep pedes. I fully accept that there are just as many irresponsible adults, probably more actually, as there are children. And i'm also sure that there are many children who keep these with no problems whatsoever and do so with maturity. It's not the children who worry me, it's the do-gooders and the faceless people in authority who worry me.
 

Galapoheros

ArachnoGod
Old Timer
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
8,991
I'd say to sell it to the parents after they've researched it and let the parents supervise it after that.
 

the toe cutter

Arachnobaron
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
424
And when the parents leave and the teenage buddies come over? Peer pressure is a b!#*% especially for your average teenage looking to fit in. Lets not forget the things we did as children that were possibly not even as foolish as having an animal capable of inflicting such a monstrously painful bite. I once broke my toe by dropping a large solid wooden chair on it, and from what I read these guys are far worse than that and that incident stopped me from working for 4 days. What kind of effect would the venom have on an individual who is 80-115lbs, on average? How much school do you think a kid would miss after getting tagged by that, after the hospital ofcourse? Are there any lasting residual effects of the bite? What would the school say about parents who let their kid get bit by a venomous animal? Do you think child services wouldn't get involved? If you say they wouldn't you're not too familiar with state and local regulations about child safety are you? And then what would happen to the animal? Not to mention AGAIN the HSUS issue. Maybe we are not thinking about everything we should be, huh?

This shouldn't be an issue that even needs a thread this long. I have 2 kids, an 11 year old daughter and a 19 month old son, and while I do have some pretty hot animals my children are not allowed near any enclosures I am working in or around and I prefer them not even to be in the same room. Which is locked by a key that only my wife and I have access to. I would NEVER let either of my children even touch the cages of my hots regardless how responsible they think they are! I would be an irresponsible parent if I did. :wall:
 

cacoseraph

ArachnoGod
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
8,328
subspinipes and alternans should really only go to responsible adults. partly just because adults have a larger chance of a big body mass.

off all the centipedes out there, there is a tiny percentage that we know can really mess up your day or week. why jump into something like that? heck, i think there would be a definite statistical improvement in symptoms between bites in 12yo and 15yo just from the body mass issues.

heros can be just about as bad as subspinipes, it looks like. and are on record for having cytotoxic components to their venom, but in a relatively minor way.




centipedes are one bug i consider totally unpredictable. add that to lightning quickness (though a relatively slow top end speed, imo) and i think it is more prudent to plan for manageable bits in small subadult humans, rather than banking on avoiding a bite.


plus, kids that age lack the hardwiring for fully understanding grave consequences. while they are not likely to end up *in* the grave from any pede bite... some suck worse than i would really wish on any kid.


considering there are plenty of species that don't have a bad bite or are at least a crapshoot giving a kid a species with a known hellbite just seems like a bad prospect
 
Top