Why?

[pavlovk1025]

^ People like Hamilton and Adams would disagree.

However, I too believe that there should be state laws in place for required permits to keep large constrictors and hots. This is not going to take my animals away from me, this IS going to show that there are existing laws in place and a national ban is not needed. So you have to jump through a few hoops and pay a few permit fees. Big deal. Try living in another country where 50% of your paycheck goes to socialist programs and then complain.

That mentality is going to cost you your animals and even your liberty one day. You'll feel safer giving up this for that, this for that, until you have no more to give because you gave it all away. Why not give up a little bit of freedom in exchange for that oh so tangible feeling of security. Thinking that going tit for tat, quid pro quo or vis a vis...whatever you wanna call it...with the government is going to help you keep your animals is foolish. They won't stop. Keep thinking that and one day you can line your rack with the Bill of Rights.


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety..."

Benjamin Franklin

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."

Patrick Henry

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

George Washington