Why?

[natsamjosh]

You may disagree with the wording of the particular legislation, but to me it just doesn't seem wise to let any John go buy hots and large constrictors. I think it's actually a good thing for there to be proposals of this sort of legislation in the states that currently have none because it will make reptile keepers in the US as a whole look better to the government (which I might remind you has absolutely NO expertise on our animals, and for the most part thinks they're all evil monsters that are out to get them).

Irresponsible owners will still be irresponsible, so I don't agree this will make reptile keepers look any different. Florida has even more restrictive regulations, but that obviously didn't stop that idiot down in Florida from having his python escape and get blamed for killing his step daughter. IMO, I only see negatives:

1) Those who want to destroy the hobby will keep pushing for further, more restrictive legislation. This only makes it easier for them.

2) This vague bill opens up a whole can of worms as far as what safe and responsible handling means. I'm scared to do my presentations at my kids's schools now!

3) Irresponsible owners will still be irresponsible owners.

4) Responsible owners will pay the price both literally and figuratively.

5) Another controlling gov't entity needs to be created to enforce the new laws. More tax money, more ill informed gov't workers who could potentially take your snakes, etc.

Also, I don't think it's reasonable to put hots and large constrictors in the same category. Compared to baseball bats, lightning, kitchen knives, cars, and
swimming pools, large constrictor snakes present ZERO risk to the public and only a ridiculously small risk to even to the owners. We might as well make laws banning going outside (to avoid some idiot from going outside in a lightning storm.)




Thanks,
Ed