snakes will always be the "bad guy"

[JimmyDavid]

The "normal" citizen (mind you that we are the freaks, yikes!!) will never believe that a snake can also be a docile creature. No sir.
I have an aunt that can't stand snakes. Of course, she never had one, therefore. But she did have a german sheppard for several years that just woke up one day and decided to kill her (nearly did). But i guess the snake will always be the bad guy, anyway.

Every now and then, comes to mind that famous case of that woman from Vancouver that was ordered to get rid of her 5 meter python. They said it was a vicious animal that could kill her son at any second (sure, look at the pic below and you'll see they are the deadliest of enemies).
When she explainned that the snake was very tame, they still came up with "justification", it carried salmonella. Those gentlemen seem to forget that any Amazon parrot can have 3 times more salms than a python. But i understand them...birds are cute, snakes are not.

[Lrptls]

sad world isn't it? no matter how long humans and snakes will live on this planet thats how it will be. just as people dont understand how i love snakes, i dont understand how they hate them. i see a snake and see its beauty and they always amaze me. some people dont care, some people scream in terror. it boggles my mind. i just try to forget about the people who hate snakes and kill them or atleast want them dead and look at my snakes and hope i'm doing the best i can for them.

[nita]

It is true, very sad. On the issue of that woman though, I saw on the interview with her the child was sucking on the snakes tail!! Obviously they were not practicing proper hygene after handling if the children were allowed to chew on the snake. Personally people like that help to give it a bad name because they probably would have ended up with Salmonella piosoning.

Twice we have taken snakes to the kids classes for their show and share and one one occasion my husband set the snake down on the floor so the kids could see how they move and a mom that was there grabed her baby off the floor like the snake was going to eat it!! It was a ball python for crying out loud!! LOL

[JimmyDavid]

If there's something worse than stupidity, it's compulsive ignorance! There's no treatment for that...

Here's an example: In North America there are local laws against the keeping of Burmese pythons. But, at least, the reasons for that seem to be related to potential danger (fine). But here in Europe there are also laws like that, only they are said to exist to PROTECT AN ENDANGERED SPECIES. I'm trying to get a grip, i'm trying to get a grip, i'm trying to get a grip... ahrrghhhhh!!!!....


:mad: If i had a dollar for each burm out there, i could kick Gates's ***. Besides, i think it's more than realised by now, that the herp hobby is the number one tool to raise individual numbers of any species. You can't expect people to start and finance breeding projects for any species out of their good intentions...you need to create a market where one can make a living out of it. THEN, you get breeders.
:mad: basic economics...

[BOAS_N_PYTHONS]

:)

[gonesnakee]

Also in reguarsd to the "famous case" quoted. The woman was on welfare, not only could she not support herself & her children, but she could not afford to properly house & feed the snake either. She & her family were "wards" of the governmet. The snake was allowed to "free roam" always, it wasn't kept in an enclosure & proper husbandry was not followed. As already stated it wasn't uncommon for the young toddler to suck on the snakes tail or to "play" with the snake unattended. Again very unwise both safety & health wise. This lady is/was not a good example of a good herper at all.

That said I agree with your points though but you picked a bad example, Cheers Mark

P.S. I also like that when people find out I breed snakes they always assume that they are "loose" all over the house LOL. "Oh you have a snake room?" They then assume they are all just loose around that room LOL I have 2 basic rules in reguards to Animals & Children: Controlled & Contained, NUFF SAID!

[JimmyDavid]

Originally posted by gonesnakee
Also in reguarsd to the "famous case" quoted. The woman was on welfare, not only could she not support herself & her children, but she could not afford to properly house & feed the snake either.

Shouldn't she be the judge of that?

[gonesnakee]

Not when the rest of the country are paying to support her & her children. If you can't even support yourself & your children , you shouldn't be bringing pets into that situation as well. The amount of negative press this woman brought onto the CDN herping community was phenomenal. So back to the orginal topic (snakes being the bad guys) all this woman did was support the claims of those pushing for the bans etc. & create a lot of bad press for us herpers. Imagine if something were to have happened to the child due to her negligence what the CDN Herping community would have been forced to deal with. Just MHO ; ) Mark

[JimmyDavid]

There's no law saying you can't keep a pet
for the period of time you are on welfare, neither should it be talked about as some sort of crime, since me or you or anyone else can fall in the same situation at any time.
Other than that, i won't say this or that about the woman and the case in question because nobody knows what was involved for sure. All we heard was what the press made out of it, and we all know better than to trust the press.
In the end, all i remember is a woman fighting to keep her child and her pet, something i would also do myself.

[gonesnakee]

Of course it isn't a crime to be poor, not saying that, but don't expect the Govt. (or should I say Tax Payers) to pay to keep your exotic pets that they would rather have banned & then provide them with all the reasons why by showing them how not to keep them. In reguards to her childs welfare, I don't care what anyone says but Large Boids & toddlers do not mix. Letting a 5 metre Boid free roam with your less than 2 YO child is not responsible Herping or Parenting & is exactly the kind of story the media loves to try & make "them" hate "Us". Personally I think the lady was/is a complete idiot for risking the life of her child, irreguardless of any press coverage. I for one trust a snake to be a snake & thats all in life I do trust. I'm done here Nuff Said! Cheers Mark

[gonesnakee]

Oh & I forgot to mention that it was right after "her story" that all of BCs (the province where she was from) main Cities etc. took steps to bring into place all out reptile bans & some successfully did as a direct result of her "plight" THX Lady!

[nita]

I agree 100% with Mark. If you can not support your family why on earth would you have a large, expensive to feed animal??? I personally do not have a problem with helping out families in need but those families should be doing everything possible to help themselves as well, including cutting back to what is nessesary, pets as much as we love them are not nessesary, so that you can get on your feet again. Not to mention if you can't afford the proper care for any animal you should not have it. Canadian welfare system sucks, way to many people take advantage of it, they will never fix it though.

[JimmyDavid]

Well, as i said, i wouldn't want to talk too much about the woman's case because i'm an outsider (we all are) and don't have enough info to correctly judge it beyond error.
I do know, however, that every citizen (yes, even a guilty person) shouldn't have his affairs exposed to public scandal like that. Such civil rights exist to protect us from getting labeled by society and therefore excluded. Seems to me that there was little intention from the law to keep a low profile about it. In fact, it seems like a typical case of using someone to set an example.
So, forget about the woman, she's just a collateral victim of it all, the whole thing is about the law giving us, the herp hobby idiots, a wolf's eye blink and wispering in challenge "we r watching u!..."

[nita]

Originally posted by JimmyDavid
So, forget about the woman, she's just a collateral victim of it all, the whole thing is about the law giving us, the herp hobby idiots, a wolf's eye blink and wispering in challenge "we r watching u!..."

The problem being that the woman brought it on herself. If I knew someone was doing what she did I would report her to Children protection services as well. If those children are out at a friends playing with pet rats/rabbits/gerbils etc. They come home smelling like dinner and go hug the burmese and what kind of press would that give the herp community when they are killed due to the snake reacting to the smell of dinner. The idiots as you call them need to be watched, they are after all the ones that give the responsible keepers a bum rap.

[JimmyDavid]

In part, i agree. But again, it's the exposure that i don't agree.
Mixing kids and large snakes: I know it's a mistake, you know it's a mistake, does the rest of the world need to know that? Think of it?...that's when we start all paying just the same, because people put as all in the same bag.
People doing mistakes will always be around. But exposure doesn't have to.
That's where the law and the press became our enemies, right there. When they decided to use that example against us all.

[JAdkins2451]

Originally posted by JimmyDavid

I do know, however, that every citizen (yes, even a guilty person) shouldn't have his affairs exposed to public scandal like that. Such civil rights exist to protect us from getting labeled by society and therefore excluded.

Unfortunitley thats how it happens its a story that will "get ratings"

But that comment is like saying no one has the the right to know about sex offenders being released in you neighbourhood. Those end up to be huge scandals. Look at the Micheal Jackson case. Its a big scandelous case but it all over th T.V.

So even though she should have the rights not to have her situation exposed. It happens and its her own stupidity for allowing that to happen. And I am almost sure she was bragging about it or how else would the newa company find out.

Just my opinion.

Jamie

[JimmyDavid]

When you represent the law or the press you must realise that you hold too much power: The power to deliver YOUR side of the story to the people and therefore control the masses. The way i see it, the negligent use of that power is a crime as well because you can hurt inocent people.
Take the Michael Jackson case; What if they start talking about that scandal in a way that could sound to include artists in general? What if they start saying he's probably guilty because artists are excentric, so what should one expect? Wouldn't they be giving ALL artists a bad name, then?

[JAdkins2451]

Originally posted by JimmyDavid
.Take the Michael Jackson case; What if they start talking about that scandal in a way that could sound to include artists in general? What if they start saying he's probably guilty because artists are excentric, so what should one expect? Wouldn't they be giving ALL artists a bad name, then?

Yes and no in my opinion, if I shooting happens at a school the blame Mr. Manson and his "type" of music. A shooting happens at a night club they blame rappers. But not all rappers are bad and not all are good either way its a lose-lose situation. I geuss it just depends how people look at stuff and the media always looks at the bad. It makes for a better story,

Jamie