Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 1,565

0 members and 1,565 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 76,073
Threads: 249,220
Posts: 2,572,808
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, LeonoraOrdonez5
Results 1 to 10 of 66

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Registered User enchantress62's Avatar
    Join Date
    12-03-2011
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    254
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 28 Times in 23 Posts
    I'm coming in at the eleventh hour but I did vote about two weeks ago. I think Ohio and the HSUS is thinking too black and white. Take dogs for example, my sister in law found a wolf pup and was required by the state to have it registered, permitted, and she had to meet certain safety requirements in order to keep it. That was fifteen years ago and the dog is no longer alive but each year she had to meet state regulations and complied. Her wolf never bit anyone but my Chihuahua bit everything and everybody who came near.

    My point is judging an animal by it's proximity to the wild is as bad as judging us for race or religion. An animal is only a threat when people try to make it human. Ohio could solve this problem by simply setting up guide lines for dangerous exotics and enforcing them. Banning every exotic is only going to damage the economy even more then it is now.
    "Life isn't about finding yourself. It's about creating yourself." George Bernard Shaw

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to enchantress62 For This Useful Post:

    zeion97 (01-02-2012)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1