Eating humans isn't the same as hunting humans in my opinion. They don't seek us out. They don't track us. A human can be eaten if they happen along and the snake is big enough (and this particular one wasn't nearly that big) but that's it. They just decided to use a scarier sounding word for sensationalism. Also, it's pretty rare. I'd hazard a guess that in countries where these snakes are only found as pets that more people are probably eaten by cats & dogs than snakes. I know I've seen stories where someone dies in their apartment and are consumed by their cats but for some reason these stories aren't hyped up as much as when a snake escapes and nobody gets hurt.
By saying that it "hunts humans", it's aggressive & hard to handle, etc... they're trying to create an impression to their readers that people shouldn't be allowed to keep these species of snakes or that is is massively irresponsible to do so (whether they got out or not).
I think the point Valyrian is trying to make is that these same exact points can also be applied to animals like dogs that are commonly accepted as "normal" pets. Actually, they may apply BETTER to dogs because dogs actually are capable of hunting prey rather than just eating whatever happens to walk up really close to them.
Additionally, "hard to handle" is ambiguous. Does it mean that they're likely to attack you, or simply that their size makes it hard for one human to carry them regardless of how friendly they may be? This allows them to imply that the snake is dangerous but still hide behind the other interpretation if anyone tries to call them out (whether this was intentional or just a happy accident of wording).
Reply With Quote