UPDATE: California

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oroborous

I have read over parts of the bill and stand by my thoughts that it is not bad at all. Particularly section 10.40.010. It's basically requiring people to do for their animals what they should be doing anyway. And if you read through it you'll see it is mainly referring to dogs and cats. And it's all in the LA county, where there are problems with animal neglect and cruelty every day. And agian, if you have more than fifty animals in your home, you're gonna be there more often then not, so the whole staffing thing still doesn't seem to apply there. The last thing I want to say is, the bill doesn't say you are a criminal for owning 50 animals, only if you do not comply with the conditions of the bill, which are things people owning that many animals should be doing already.

---

you're giving the bill too much leeway . Perhaps the intent was good, but that doesn't matter if some of it is terrible. Imagine a bottle of aspirin with "mostly" aspirin but a few cyanide tablets in there...

If you're there "most of the time" you're not there 24/7 and you would be subject to prosecution. This alone is ridiculous. The language is such that it puts people who have done nothing unreasonable at an unnecessary risk. If you decompose the logic, you should see that there are many individual cases that exemplify the failings on a whole. you HAVE to take this at face value and at face value it is ridiculous. Now, perhaps if they referred to JUST cats and dogs they could address this issue, but INDIVIDUAL records for fish? that would take an entire staff of hardworking, incredibly observant employees just to record the information. Can you IMAGINE trying to chart for feeder goldfish? The idea is preposterous.

Wooow, that's nonsense. They should put people who actually know about these things into office.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Auletto

Every time you look a new law is proposed to destroy our hobby. It's getting to the point where it's only a matter of time a piece of legislation going to hit us where it hurts. I hope that day doesn't come, but it's getting to that point.

---

Very true. However, a few things we need to remember are:

1) Do you ever remember a time when the government created bills that actually helped a situation without causing more destruction elsewhere? We have to get used to that fact that this is what governments do. They make feeble attempts at fixing things while not fully understanding the repercussions of their actions. Dems or Repubs. It doesnt matter. I am convinced they are specifically here to make the lives of Americans miserable. They do a wonderful job of it thus far.

2) People fear what they dont understand. This goes for the S373 bill as well. People are grown to fear snakes and reptiles to the point that it takes a true animal lover with an open mind to get past the fears instilled into us as a kid. This is prevalent whenever we get asked "OMG, you have a snake! Does it bite? Arent you scared of its venom?" ::RollsEyes::

People simply are not educated about it, and that creates a cycle of fear we cant escape.

3) I am completely new to the ball python (snakes in general) game. But already i realize it is imperative that we, the educated and open minded, have a responsibility to share and educate what we have learned from these incredible animals to those that "just dont get it".

What i find incredibly humorous about all this is that if people were nearly as docile as ball pythons, the world just might be a better place. Not to mention if people had their picky eating habits we probably wouldnt be leading the world in terms of obesity population.

Yeah, seriously? This thing is just completely absurd. I don't live in CA (thankfully), but I have more than 50 animals here--snakes and geckos. They are so low-maintenance that on some days all I have to do is run through with a quick check to make sure no one has spilled their water. 24/7 staffing...for what?

For anyone that thinks allowing government more and more control of your everyday llife, you really need a reality check. What is the purpose of this law? If it's to assure the "animals" are being kept properly, I'm sure there are more than enough laws on the books to guide oour lawmakers. If it's being considered to control the citizens even more than they already are, then of course this is wrong.

California government has a history of needing to guide their citzens in their everyday life, so I'm unsure of their reasoning behind this bill.

But if you like being told what to do, then you will not see anything wrong with this bill.

If this is the case, then you will get what you deserve.
Jim Smith