Thery're at it again! PLEASE READ

[the toe cutter]

I can pretty much GUARANTEE you that there is a large breeder/importer/dealer in your state that could easily facilitate this!

 

[Dyn]

I dont believe there is after trying to look some up.

In Mississippi as well as needing a permit for inherently dangerous animals you have to have a 100,000 dollar liability insurance policy for every animal up to a million dollars. No idea how much that would be a month but I'm willing to bet it isnt cheap.

 

[Dyn]

Also this site seems to have some good information.

http://www.rexano.org/Federal_Canada/Constrictor_Snake_Flyer.pdf

http://www.rexano.org/Statistics/Death_Odds_Exotic_Animal_2005.pdf

http://www.rexano.org/Statistics/Constrictor_Captive_Snake_Fatality.pdf


These snakes really dont seem that dangerous... and after a quick search (didnt put a ton of effort into it) I couldnt find any deaths from scrub pythons.

 

[pitbulllady]

There are no importers here in MY state, and if you cannot get the experience to become a permitted breeder, then how would you expect to FIND one? Nice little catch-22 there.

Toe Cutter, you seriously need to check into the HSUS and their purpose, if you think my idea of them busting down doors and seizing people's animals are "silly". How about go through the archives at http://humanewatch.org/ or join Yahoo's Pet Law group, and find out what is REALLY going on, and just what a reality that "silly" notion actually is, how many people it's happened to already. It's because of people like you, who bury their heads in the sand and refuse to see what is going on around them that groups like HSUS and PETA get by with what they do and are as successful as they are. It's why more and more animals are being banned and restricted every day and more and more animal owner right go down the drain. You think it's fine and dandy to ban/restrict animals that YOU do not own, but I'd bet you'd be the first to come whining and crying when some bill or regulation comes down the line that will negatively affect YOUR animals and YOUR rights to own them.

pitbulllady

 

[the toe cutter]

PBL you are a silly person, but it is quite amusing to hear your paranoid ramblings. I read alot of these same things you are posting, and though I do not keep large constrictors, I fully advocate people owning them as I have said in every reply to this thread. I am against any ban on nearly all pets, other than rhinos, tigers and other such animals. You get far too worked up about things, you have turned into a monster to fight the monster and that in itself makes you no better than the nuts at the HSUS just another person that will go on kicking and screaming you just happen to be on the opposite side. I do remember something...hmmm...what was it... oh yeah I posted this thread to get other pet owners here attention and a chance to speak up before this went into the hearing! So you obviously are not reading what I am saying just reading a few lines and then throwing a hissy fit. I have been involved with USARK for quite a few years now and have wriiten more letters to representatives than I care to count. I do stick up for a large constrictor owners as I have alot of friends who keep/breed these animals. So every assumption you made previously is ridiculous. Be an adult here and stop your attacks on me, and I have seen much more whining on your end here on this thread. And how about Low Country Exotics in Summerville SC? They breed burms I do believe or possibly Wildside inc in Oakwood GA, you may not be too far from there either just off the top of my head. And I'm sure there are quite a few private breeders around your state. There are also numerous pet stores here in VA that breed large constrictors. I'm in the US Army and we have to do command preventive maintenance every monday morning, to ensure our vehicles in the motor pool are serviceable and safe. Right now we need to do the same stuff in this hobby, preventive maintenance. For instance, if you do a preventive maintenance service and check on the vehicle and sign off on it and due to carelessness something happens to that vehicle YOU are responsible for it! This is my point about the permit system. Why are you so opposed to doing something that will only help OUR cause and keep those people off of our backs? There is no reason other than paranoia, and you need to get over it! You need a permit to own a hand gun right? And does that stop people from owning them? Not at all unless you are a felon(in most cases anyway), not comparing the two just making a point about having to get permits! Its not that difficult and will save large constrictor owners in the long run. So what if you have no one to give you a permit like a breeder/importer the state would more than likely have to accomodate this issue. You have alot of good info on the subject you just need a bit more tact. I understand your passion for the subject and it is appreciated, but at some point kicking and screaming isn't going to solve anything. And in any right the permit system is an idea that quite a few people I know in the industry and USARK have been throwing around for the last few years, its just a matter of getting certain stipulations in order to accomodate people who live in certain states the oppurtunity to get these permits. Thanks again though, I do thoroughly enjoy the banter

 

[the toe cutter]

Dyn I love those statistics! And good info as well, thanks

 

[Dyn]

There was also one on venomous snakes.

Most deaths were pet rattlesnakes and crazy religious serpent handling displays

 

[Elytra and Antenna]

..but I'd bet you'd be the first to come whining and crying when some bill or regulation comes down the line that will negatively affect YOUR animals and YOUR rights to own them. (to user T C)

It would be too late at that point but that's always how it works.
My governor is about to use an executive order to ban exotics, apparently the Humane Society has had some trouble getting legislation passed so they're using 'deals' to get executive orders. I'm surprised they haven't made Obama ban everything with an executive order. The ironic part is the Humane Society probably gets most of its donations from pet owners.

 

[Tim Benzedrine]

That's because people believe (are misled to believe?) that the HSUS is affiliated with their local animal rescue organizations. Tip: If it's flashy, comes in the mail with free address lables and stuff, do not donate, just toss it.
Local animal welfare organizations do not have (and would not squander if they did) the resources to send tons of crap in mass mailings.

Me, I use any HSUS freebies they send that are usable after clipping off their logo.

 

[Widdle]

Be patient, I'm a noob

I'm a noob, and don't really understand what is going on with this anti-snake legislation, but I don't like any part of the government controlling any part of what I can and can't have. I don't own snakes, but I am against any law that prohibits people from having something just because it makes a small minority of the population "uncomfortable." (If that's what's going on.) Somebody mentioned PETA, so I have a feeling that is what's going on. It's the same with anti-gunners who learn about guns from "Die Hard," and they want to ban guns... What happens, only criminals have guns. The same will happen. People will still bring in the "ILLEGAL SNAKES" anyway. That will ALWAYS happen. If they banned cigarettes, they would still find their way here, opening black markets.

A brief summary of the problem, and the name(s) of who I can complain to, would be greatly appreciated. Or, who I can help by making a donation. USARK was mentioned. I'll start there...

We all must help protect each others' rights, even if we don't have pet snakes, or own firearms, etc.

 

[sean-820]

Isn't it ironic that people are more concerned about losing their rights (what "rights" do humans even have to own other animals anyways?) then they are about the actual well being of many of the actual animals.


According to some of you, I should be able to keep lions in my spare room, mayby a caimen in my backyard and how about a komodo dragon in my bathroom? We can't have any animals at all banned becasue then the govenment will ban everything! We should also stop the government from making laws as if we let them make a law give it a week and they will make it a dictatorship and we won't have any "rights". THE GOVERNMENT IS OUT TO GET US!!!!!!!!!

 

[pitbulllady]

Isn't it ironic that people are more concerned about losing their rights (what "rights" do humans even have to own other animals anyways?) then they are about the actual well being of many of the actual animals.


According to some of you, I should be able to keep lions in my spare room, mayby a caimen in my backyard and how about a komodo dragon in my bathroom? We can't have any animals at all banned becasue then the govenment will ban everything! We should also stop the government from making laws as if we let them make a law give it a week and they will make it a dictatorship and we won't have any "rights". THE GOVERNMENT IS OUT TO GET US!!!!!!!!!

Sean, IF you are able to care for and properly contain a lion, a caiman or whatever, I don't see any reason WHY you shouldn't have it. It's very, very clear that you're a hard-core Animal "Rights" supporter who does not believe that humans should keep ANY animals, am I correct on this? If not, then please tell me why YOU should decide what someone else can or cannot keep?

And yes, Sean, we DO have a right to keep animals, at least here in the US. It's called the Fourteenth Amendment, of a little document known as the US Constitution, which guarantees us the right to own property here in the US. While it does not, specifically, spell out just what "property" is or isn't, there have been several court cases here in the US in which it was ruled that animals ARE property, and therefore we have a right to OWN them. You are also making the ASSumption that none of us care about the animals, only about our rights, which also isn't true. THAT is the deliniation between you AR's/Peta/HSUS supporters and Animal WELFARE supporters. We DO, in fact, care a lot about the animals, and see a grave conflict between what YOU want-a ban on keeping animals-and animal care. Banning animals results in animals being seized and KILLED, or put into worse conditions than they came out of in the first place. Anyone who actually knows anything about animals(and most AR's don't know squat, since you can't know much about something you've had no first-hand experience with) can look at the so-called "animal rescues", especially of "exotic" animals, and see that they basically went from the frying pan to the fire, IF they were even in the "frying pan" in the first place. Many AR's, having no clue how to actually care for an animal, mistake commonly-accepted husbandry methods as "cruelty" or "abuse", and then ascribe anthropomorphism to the animals in question. On varous reptile forums, I've read of high-profile raids in which snakes were seized on the basis of there being dead rodents in the freezer! To an AR supporter, this is horrible! To someone who owns snakes or carvivorous lizards, it's no different than having a bag of dog food in the pantry for your dog. Dogs are seized and KILLED(again, please tell me how this benefits the animal)because the owner had a treadmill and spring pole, which to the AR's(not knowing anything about animals), these two things are clear signs that the owner was a dog-fighter. They fail to realize that Cesar Milan also advocates the use of those things to excersise dogs, and that many professional show dog handlers have them, as well, but of course, the AR position is that these folks shouldn't be showing or training dogs in the first place, since the dogs aren't "property".

I have to ask you Sean, and you still have not answered this: who are YOU to decide what another person can or cannot keep, take care of? By what authority or better yet, by what EXPERIENCE? AND, who do you think will stick up for YOU should laws negatively impact YOUR right to keep YOUR animals, IF you have any, that is? Do you honestly believe that your choices should be kept sacrosanct, while the rest of us should not be able to choose what kind of animals we keep or don't keep? If so, I'd sure love to know what makes YOU so special that you should not be held to the same bans, restrictions, etc. that the rest of us are facing. Your attitude is so perfectly an example of the AR mentality: "If I don't like it, or wouldn't want to have it, NO ONE should be able to have it. They can take away everyone else's animals, but don't DARE come after MINE! I am better than everyone else, so I can therefore decide what everyone else can or cannot keep. The government is my friend and they would never pass any law to hurt me or MY animals and I don't care what they do to yours. We need MORE laws...as long as they don't affect me, of course. People who don't want more laws against owning animals are just being paranoid while I don't have anything to worry about since I don't keep those kinds of animals anyway, and I'm better than those other people so I know I'm safe no matter what laws are passed. I'm above all that. Who CARES about the other peoples' rights?"

pitbulllady

 

[sean-820]

Sean, IF you are able to care for and properly contain a lion, a caiman or whatever, I don't see any reason WHY you shouldn't have it.So, it's your opinion that I should be allowed to keep say a pitbull in a crate 24/7 as you said it was practically my right. I don't know about you, but if i kept pitbulls id prefer to get a permit if available to insure irresponsible and cruel owners can't do this and that irrisposible owners can't get HOT snakes without having experience so they arn't putting themselves and those around them at risk It's very, very clear that you're a hard-core Animal "Rights" supporter who does not believe that humans should keep ANY animals, am I correct on this? If not, then please tell me why YOU should decide what someone else can or cannot keep? I'm a hobbiest recognizing this industry needs some regulation, not banning. The regulation prevents irrisponsible keepers from obtaining certain animals not knowlegeable hobbiest from getting a speices. This is the main thing you havn't realized. If you have a plan for the animal once it's past the "cute" baby stage im fine with that keeper, but not those who didnt even realize a dwarf caimen isn't small and their huge 30g tank doesnt seem so huge anymore.

And yes, Sean, we DO have a right to keep animals, at least here in the US. It's called the Fourteenth Amendment, of a little document known as the US Constitution, which guarantees us the right to own property here in the US. While it does not, specifically, spell out just what "property" is or isn't, there have been several court cases here in the US in which it was ruled that animals ARE property, and therefore we have a right to OWN them.For starters im not american. Secondly, im not talking legally, im talking ethically. IMHO one should have no rights to posess an animal unless they have the proper resources to take care of it. If you can financially afford to keep it, house it and feed it i'm fine with that. Do you think its ok for petsotres to sell caimens to people who consider 100g aquariums to be huge? Is it ok to send animals practically to their death as it's obvious most people can't take care of a full grown caimen. Based on your retorts, i'll assume you will reply what about those responsible keepers? They can still get a caimen. A permit prevents inexpereinced keepers from obtaining such animals not people who have the resorces to properly take care of it. Im sure you will wonder what makes somebody qualified? Since this is just an opinion i havn't formulated all the rules and regulations so obviously a basic idea will have loopholes. You are also making the ASSumption that none of us care about the animals, only about our rights, which also isn't true. I'm not making that assumtion at all. I know people do care for animals and thats why im saying some regulation is needed to prevent people from owning certain animals for the wrong reasons (aka a lion to be cool...) while still allowing experienced keepers to keep those animals they love.THAT is the deliniation between you AR's/Peta/HSUS supporters and Animal WELFARE supporters. We DO,You talk as if everbody in the world cares about their animal's well being as much as you. Many people get into the hobby on impulse and end up with some neglected animal that is in inadequet housing as they didn't realize that the little starter kit some lps employee suggested will only last them a month. in fact, care a lot about the animals, and see a grave conflict between what YOU want-a ban on keeping animals-and animal care. Banning Did i say ban all animals with no exceptions?animals results in animals being seized and KILLED, or put into worse conditions than they came out of in the first place. Anyone who actually knows anything about animals(and most AR's don't know squat, since you can't know much about something you've had no first-hand experience with) can look at the so-called "animal rescues", especially of "exotic" animals, and see that they basically went from the frying pan to the fire, IF they were even in the "frying pan" in the first place.This would be alot better of an argument if I was with one of these oranizations, but im not. I don't beleive I ever even suggested that it should be PETA to dictate who has what credentials to keep which animals Many AR's, having no clue how to actually care for an animal, mistake commonly-accepted husbandry methods as "cruelty" or "abuse", and then ascribe anthropomorphism to the animals in question. On varous reptile forums, I've read of high-profile raids in which snakes were seized on the basis of there being dead rodents in the freezer! To an AR supporter, this is horrible!Thanks for this info., i'll go take it back with me to PETA headquarters...O wait... I'm not in any animal rights groups, im just a hobbiest like you To someone who owns snakes or carvivorous lizards, it's no different than having a bag of dog food in the pantry for your dog. Dogs are seized and KILLED(again, please tell me how this benefits the animal)because the owner had a treadmill and spring pole, which to the AR's(not knowing anything about animals), these two things are clear signs that the owner was a dog-fighter. They fail to realize that Cesar Milan also advocates the use of those things to excersise dogs, and that many professional show dog handlers have them, as well, but of course, the AR position is that these folks shouldn't be showing or training dogs in the first place, since the dogs aren't "property".

I have to ask you Sean, and you still have not answered this: who are YOU to decide what another person can or cannot keep, take care of? By what authority or better yet, by what EXPERIENCE? I am a hobbiest with an opinion, a view of a pet industry that runs on actual pet care rather then profit. As of now most stores don't care who they sell some animals too as long as they sell them. When you go in a fish store and see pacus at 5$ each do you seriously beleive that whole tank of pacus will go to people with ponds or 500g plus aquariums? Are you really that nieve? Wouldn't you rather have those people with the pond get a permit while the other people who dont have the means to take care of a pacu unable to or is your view on rights making you fine with thousands of animals dying knowing that since the beginning yhou knew that only a select few of them could actually be properly housed. Like i said before I keep piranhas so i know about bans. Piranhas are banned in many of the southern USA states. Justifibly no, but if their was some way for keepers in those states to keep them legally (like a permit) im sure they would. With piranhas commonly in the 1ft range, i know many people can't even keep a fish this size and way less can keep larger fish like pacus or red tailed catfish that are commonly available to ANYBODY in chain fishstores. A permit is to detour those irrisponsible keepers from obtainingsuch animals not to punish the responsible ones like you seem to think. AND, who do you think will stick up for YOU should laws negatively impact YOUR right to keep YOUR animals, IF you have any, that is? I'd be fine with getting a permit like i'm suggesting if it means an inexperienced keeper can't keep the same species of animal i love.Do you honestly believe that your choices should be kept sacrosanct, while the rest of us should not be able to choose what kind of animals we keep or don't keep? Once again I never said to ban your animals I said regulate (regulate the entire industry for all I care) by a permit system or something. If so, I'd sure love to know what makes YOU so special that you should not be held to the same bans, restrictions, etc. I never said I wouldn't be subject to them. If the animals I kept were in question and i could get a permit I don't see a problem. I have spent thosands in this hobby so a bit more on a permit if needed would be nothing.that the rest of us are facing. Your attitude is so perfectly an example of the AR mentality: "If I don't like it, or wouldn't want to have it, NO ONE should be able to have it. When did i say I don't like lions, caimen or retics? Once again your putting words into my mouth. I'm fine with the animals. I'm NOT fine with their too often inexperinced keepers who get them when they are small and cute, but have no idea what to do with them when they are adults. They can take away everyone else's animals, but don't DARE come after MINE! I am better than everyone else, so I can therefore decide what everyone else can or cannot keep. The government is my friend and they would never pass any law to hurt me or MY animals and I don't care what they do to yours. Screw rules and regulations. YAY for anarchy. Lets go out together and burn down all govenrment building as all their laws are to stop our rights. Pretty soon it will be a dictatorship. I don't know about you, but I dont want to live in a lawless land. Same thing from our society apples to our hobby... some govenrment and regualation isn't bad. I doubt you would want to live in a lawless land with no regulations where anything goes nor do i approve of a hobby with no restrictions. What's the govenrment doing with a drinking or driving age!!! Their taking away our rights!!! We must band together as they are out to stop every thing I love! Or.. Mayby, just mayby some laws, rulesand regulations ARE neededWe need MORE laws...as long as they don't affect me, of course. People who don't want more laws against owning animals are just being paranoid while I don't have anything to worry about since I don't keep those kinds of animals anyway, and I'm better than those other people so I know I'm safe no matter what laws are passed. I'm above all that. Who CARES about the other peoples' rights?"

pitbulllady

..................

 

[Tim Benzedrine]

Wow. Try the quote tags next time! Your response was a little hard to follow, despite the use of underlining. At least it was for me.

 

[Tleilaxu]

Yawn Pitbulllady once again owns the thread.

 

[Earthworm Soul]

Yawn Pitbulllady once again owns the thread.

Pitbulllady seems a bit... unhinged and longwinded.


Also, I love your name, Tleilaxu.

The spice must flow.

 

[pitbulllady]

Most of you here don't own the actual animals that are directly under attack, at least for NOW you don't. You tend to look at the AR movement through pretty rose-colored glasses and say, "it will never happen to ME...they won't ever bother coming after MY animals". I breed large constrictors, so MY freedom to do so IS being directly and immediately challenged by people who DO ultimately want to abolish all animal ownership, whether or not you head-in-the-sand types want to admit it. Yeah, I'm worked up about it-these are MY animals that some of the people here want to ban. It's just as if those people were breaking into my house, telling me, "I'm here to take away your animals and destroy them, and there's nothing you can do about it because I'm right and you're not". I don't know which group I have more contempt for, the people who really want to do that, and not just to MY animals, or the ones who believe it can't happen to them and so it's no big deal.

pitbulllady

 

[sharpfang]

Fight 4 your right - 2 Party!

Isn't it ironic that people are more concerned about losing their rights (what "rights" do humans even have to own other animals anyways?) then they are about the actual well being of many of the actual animals.


According to some of you, I should be able to keep a komodo dragon in my bathroom?

I wonder how we'd feel if Aliens captured us, and put us in cages - suppose we would have a difficult time debating their "right" to, w/ them.......anyone out there that can Translate Martian ? Oh nevermind....they use Telepathy

What's wrong w/ a Komodo Dragon in the Bathroom :? I support that "right"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOF4YPdYELg
Mine Helps me wash off Bacteria -oh- I mean the "venom" that is splashed @ me Daily *Tee-Hee* Peace - Jason

 

[sean-820]

Another thing for your (PBL) property argument... It wasnt logn ago that slaves were concidered property and people had a "right" to own them. "Rights" are made by humans and humans change their views.

 

[Kaimetsu]

Alot of really stupid arguments here, I'm sort of surprised to see them on a forum meant for people who keep arachnids that some people could consider dangerous. Calling putbulllady unhinged for being protective of her pets is ridiculous. Theres nothing wrong with being passionate about wanting to protect your family, and for many people our pets are a part of our family.

PBL made another good point, what happens when they come for the animals you love? Certainly dogs and cats are too mainstream to be banned anytime soon, but this is primarily an arachnid forum, what happens when it comes time to ban tarantulas, because of their "deadly poison" or whatever uneducated lawmakers want to say, and because some people are not responsible for them. Afterall it's only a matter of time before an irresponsible owners 3 year old gets bitten by a P regalis or whatever and has a bad reaction, i doubt the media will handle that very well. We shouldn't allow the worst of us to force legislation on the best of us, Abusive pet owners and the sort of people who would attempt to keep komodo dragons in bathrooms or whatever are going to find ways to abuse animals no matter what the laws say.

On the subject of ownership and rights, the slavery comparison is kind of warped and disgusting. I don't think of my pets as possessions, they are more like children who i am the guardian for and who will never grow up. I think of them as family and provide for them as such. I am a naturalist and i have strong feelings for these animals and their natural environment, if it were possible i would live my life in the rainforest observing them everyday. Unfortunately i can't afford to do that, but luckily i can keep a piece of the rainforest inside my own home. I think i care about the animals i live with much more than the so called animal rights wackos who usually don't know the first thing about the animals they claim to want to protect. It's a shame that groups that should exist to protect the well being of animals, in the wild and as part of human families, have been hijacked by vegan wackos who seem to hate animals so much that they don't want them around.