new NC snake law

[aaramire]

I found this article this morning and I am completely furious. I did not even know this type of legislation was being considered in my state, and I find the whole article to be ridiculous and completely untruthful. I am incensed right now!

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/bre...ry/825961.html

[West Coast Jungle]

Here is athread on it from a while back.

http://www.ball-pythons.net/forums/s...ad.php?t=91559

Although the article you posted has some ridiculous facts the law itself is not as unresonable as others. It basically says if you own a large or venemous snake you are required by law to keep it in a secure escape proof cage and if does escape you are liable for any harm it does. It in now way outlaws owning these animals, just puts laws in the books making people responsible.

Ball pythons, boas and other smaller snakes are not affected by this law.

[Ben Biscy]

edit

america, land of the greed and home of the slave.

[mainbutter]

Here is athread on it from a while back.

http://www.ball-pythons.net/forums/s...ad.php?t=91559

Although the article you posted has some ridiculous facts the law itself is not as unresonable as others. It basically says if you own a large or venemous snake you are required by law to keep it in a secure escape proof cage and if does escape you are liable for any harm it does. It in now way outlaws owning these animals, just puts laws in the books making people responsible.

Ball pythons, boas and other smaller snakes are not affected by this law.

good to hear, this is legislation I can support.

[aaramire]

You support it? What about your fellow keepers like myself who own "giant" constrictors? This is just the beginning, next it will be any snake, or they will start banning.....

[West Coast Jungle]

You support it? What about your fellow keepers like myself who own "giant" constrictors? This is just the beginning, next it will be any snake, or they will start banning.....

I dont support it necessarily but it is not as extreme as other laws that have been presented. Have you read the actual law? USARK helped draft it. It basically says own a hot, croc, large snake, buy a secure cage or be liable. Seems like common sense but as we all know people buy pets but not the proper equipment to heat it let alone secure it. Which is bad for all of us.

I personally feel this law could be used as an example of a compromise by those extremist who do wish to ban. This law takes their arguement away or at least weakens it

If someone owns a hot or any other potentially dangerous animal I dont think it is too unreasonable to make them house it securely to protect the safety of others.

[snakecharmer3638]

I don't see anything wrong with this law. It is an attempt to make people responsible for their pets. If you are one of those people that is already a responsible owner then you have nothing to fear. They are not asking you to declare that you own snakes, register them, or even putting a restriction on how many you can own. They are simply saying if you own, secure them or you will be liable if something goes wrong.

[llovelace]

he once found a 20 ft python under a house........yeah right

[aaramire]

I understand that and I agree that it is not as bad as it could be. I am just frustrated with the supposed facts in the article, and the way that people think about things like this in general. Its frustrating that we do all we can to keep our animals the way they should be, and then because of a few dumb people, we all have to pay for it.

[Ben Biscy]

he once found a 20 ft python under a house........yeah right

he did! it survived the winter too!!