I must have missed the part of the Constitution where it says you have an inalienable right to import and keep dangerous animals (mambas, boas, pythons, tigers, etc.) as pets because you have a very unusual social pathology/obsession compared to the vast majority of the population.
Surely you would agree that there is a need for some laws providing for the health and safety of citizens. Just because you happen to like snakes—and possibly make a profit out of their sale—doesn’t mean that society at large has to give you unfettered license to enjoy your hobby. Child molesters would like that freedom of action too, but we have laws to prevent them from exercising their dangerous perversions without limits.
Throwing around names ad hominem instead of answering the arguments I put forth for sensible regulation is a tactic that Saul Alinski taught.
Reptile owners are equivalent to pedophiles.
Got it.
Wildbill, you did not fail to amuse in your post.
An exceedingly valid case can be made that a venomous animal (mamba) and a 4-500 pound carnivore (tiger) are ‘dangerous’; but then you invalidate you case by including non-dangerous animals that you just happen to dislike. Talk about a strange pathology. Comical argument really.
So, I figured you would take the argument to the Constitution. Allow me to re-argue my point.
It is WRONG to take punitive action towards responsible persons for the irresponsible actions of others. And your proposal IS punitive.
And, no, I do not sell or trade these animals, for pleasure or profit.
Your position is based solely on a dislike founded in ignorance. Pure, unadulterated ignorance.
Since you brought up the Constitution, perhaps we could discuss that. It was 2ritten to defend freedom, to allow our pursuit of happiness. Of course, to eliminate your specious example of child molesters, that pursuit should be bound up morally.
So, tell me wildbill, how many people die yearly from theseveral ‘dangerous’ boas and pythons?
I would that more (Many More) die from dog bites. Where is your call for punitive registration, licensing and insurance?
How many die each year from spooked livestock (cattle, horses)? Many more than from my Anaconda.
My point here is, I AGREE that there is a problem with invasive species. Further, that the irresponsible persons causing that should be beaten with sticks, repeatedly and publicly.
So, your problem is not with me or Salamander, except that we keep those ‘icky’ animals too.
And, in keeping them, no one in my home is in danger and certainly no one outside my home is either. So, my keeping of snakes, be they small or large, is a non-public-issue. And yes, there need to be laws to protect the public, and there ARE! Animal owners are required to control their animals, such that others are not harmed. And should harm occur, they are liable. See?
But, no, just like lefties, living in their fear bubble, you cry out for MORE LAW!! “Those snakes are Scary! And I icky and probably have ooze smells! Save me by taxing and licensing.”
So, why don’t you focus on real wrongs, immoral wrongs, such as child molesters, and leave those of us Doing No Wrong in peace. Think of it as Domestic Tranquility.