Holy crap!!

[Bluebonnet Herp]

Well the situation just got worse! The bill was amended today, instead of stating "all boas" it now states "all constrictors over six feet". Some female BP's get bigger than that!

Also, it used to say vipers and rear-fanged venomous, now it's just "all venomous" so add garter snakes to the list!

Even corns and bulls will get over 6 feet!
I'm going to snap like a twig if this is passed...

[NH93]

I don't mean to start anything (and I sincerely do not want a debate - I truly am curious), but I live in Canada. Our government has banned, nation-wide, all snakes large enough to seriously injure an adult human - as in, reticulated pythons and anacondas, those sorts of species along with large crocs and alligators - and all venomous snakes (not including the rear-fanged or mildly venomous like hog nose snakes).

I don't really understand the frustration against these laws...

I understand that it impedes your individual freedoms. I really do.
However, here we have had issues with people owning exotic animals like large cats, and those people have unfortunately either been very badly hurt or killed BECAUSE they didn't know how to take care of them. Which gives the animals a bad reputation that they DO NOT DESERVE. Nor do they deserve the abuse they often go through being mistreated and malnourished. That's not to say all people do this, because they don't. But some do... and that is not fair to the animals, either.

So my question is, if laws like those in Canada (or similar) are introduced to parts of the USA, do you think they serve any purpose at all?
My thinking is, they will protect people who do not understand or know how to properly care for the exotic animals which can and do sometimes harm them (as all animals can), as well as the animals themselves.
If you already own some of these animals, and do properly care for them, would you be entitled to keep them due to "grandfather laws"?

Or do you think the risks associated with keeping "dangerous" herps (not sure I agree with this term, but the kind that truly can injure or harm adult humans... not, like, a 6 foot corn snake ) outweighs the government's choices?

Looking forward to some respectful feedback and opinions
Thanks! (Also an apology to the OP for high-jacking a bit. I hope this only contributes to your thread!)

[MonkeyShuttle]

You would have a hard time convincing me that a tigers and big snakes are on the same level. Wildlife experts will just grab an enormous anaconda. Ive yet to see somebody do that with a wild tiger lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bluebonnet Herp]

You would have a hard time convincing me that a tigers and big snakes are on the same level. Wildlife experts will just grab an enormous anaconda. Ive yet to see somebody do that with a wild tiger lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True dat lol
Maybe if you just nab their tail real quick...

[MonkeyShuttle]

I could see the people having to perform this task looking at each other like "you first"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MarkS]

I don't really understand the frustration against these laws...

I understand that it impedes your individual freedoms. I really do....

Or do you think the risks associated with keeping "dangerous" herps (not sure I agree with this term, but the kind that truly can injure or harm adult humans... not, like, a 6 foot corn snake ) outweighs the government's choices?

It's BECAUSE it's a law. The Government should NOT be in the business of legislating away my personal freedoms. If I wanted to go snowboarding down a mountain of glass shards in my bathing suit I should be allowed to do that. Sure some people may think that it would be incredibly stupid to try a stunt like that and I would agree with them, but that doesn't give the government the right to tell people they can't do it. I know that this is probably an extreme example but there are many MANY things FAR more dangerous then keeping large constictors that are perfectly legal.

It is NOT the governments job to tell me how to live my life. One of our former governers said it best (if a little harshly) 'The government is not in the business of legislating against stupidity'

[MonkeyShuttle]

Well the situation just got worse! The bill was amended today, instead of stating "all boas" it now states "all constrictors over six feet". Some female BP's get bigger than that!

Also, it used to say vipers and rear-fanged venomous, now it's just "all venomous" so add garter snakes to the list!

Taint right! We have started legalizing marijuana and banning animals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[steve_r34]

Did I really click on that and it said when the snake bites u ur blood freezes up and u die and people believe that .. thats how dumb people are thats like saying the xmen are really out there and Spiderman will save the world lol .. ppl r dumb and this country is just trying to rake all r freedoms away its all part of there plan .. its up to us never forget that

[Bluebonnet Herp]

Taint right! We have started legalizing marijuana and banning animals.

Well, I'll go a little off topic here, but as MarkS pointed out with his splendid metaphor, if people want to kill themselves with drugs, I say they can go right ahead.
It's really one thing to apply risks to yourself. It's another to apply risks to someone else who isn't a recipient of it.

[steve_r34]

There legalizing bud cause when everyone starts smoking there gonna get lazy and won't care what the gov. Does so it will be easy for them to start taking over ..