It has been shown in breed bans and similiar dangerous dog legislature that bans are ineffective. The issue lies in the owner, not the animal. It has also been the case that one ban will lead to another. It is setting up a precedence to ban exotic animals. Any person with some common sense and a love of something other than goldfish, hamsters, cats, and dogs should be worried.Originally Posted by knox
Okay, I understand that one ban could lead to another, Pandora's box, and all of that.
Correct me if I am wrong, but aside from the Boa Constrictor, all the other snakes are HUGE snakes like Rock Pythons, Anacondas, Burmese, Reticulated...
I have yet to see someone on any forum post a pic of their bedroom size enclosure for such a massive snake.
Call me in the minority, but I don't see a problem with banning these snakes. Why have so many wound up in the Everglades? They are simple to purchase, but very tough to house.
I am open to correction and discussion
You own snakes but you don't care if other people's rights to own animals are impeded? That's hypocritical and narrow minded. It is this kind of irrational group think that is ruining our freedoms in this country. As long as it doesn't affect you then it doesn't matter?
Irresponsible people are going to go on doing irresponsible things. The real people punished are the responsible owners that follow laws and regulations. Why punish someone that is responsibly keeping these animals? Just because you don't like big snakes doesn't mean you should turn a blind eye to a fellow reptile enthusiast.
The point is that I'm emphasizing is that you should punish the people that are the problem. You should not punish the people responsibly owning these animals. That is counterproductive to the results desired. In this country I believe you are innocent until proven guilty but who knows, that might change next?
Regards,
B
Reply With Quote