The one and ONLY python BAN thread (HR511)

[Aaron_S]

Alessia, I understand pitbull bans but they aren't the topic of discussion here. I use it as proof that a domestic dog has been banned.

Secondly, I don't get where people say it'll just worsen the problems we're having. If you can't just walk into a pet store and buy any of these animals how does this worsen the problem?

Someone pointed out on another forum I belong to that we had our chance to police ourselves. We failed. The bad apples ruined it for all of you good, responsible keepers. Blame them.

I will say that I have yet to hear someone debate my safety argument if one of these got out on their own and someone ended up in my dwelling and injured myself or a loved one. I will put it out there, if any child died due to someone wanting to keep their pet do you think it's fair to the parents who had to bury that child? No. Put yourselves in those people's shoes before you ONLY think of yourself and YOUR wants when fighting this ban.

[alessia55]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

Alessia, I understand pitbull bans but they aren't the topic of discussion here. I use it as proof that a domestic dog has been banned.

I brought it up only because you brought it up as a parallel or similar argument.

Secondly, I don't get where people say it'll just worsen the problems we're having. If you can't just walk into a pet store and buy any of these animals how does this worsen the problem?

With the ban, it won't be illegal to buy burmese pythons within the state. So people can still just as easily acquire them so long as they find a breeder near them. The reason I said banning them would worsen the problem is because it'll create a black market and then regulation really will be out the door.

Someone pointed out on another forum I belong to that we had our chance to police ourselves. We failed. The bad apples ruined it for all of you good, responsible keepers. Blame them.

Just because there are a few bad apples out there, it doesn't mean we should all pay for their actions. As I said, I think it would be better to make stricter rules and regulations about buying/selling/keeping giant snakes (read back to Kim's post) that will enhance the pool of giant snake keepers, and fine/punish the bad apples.

I will say that I have yet to hear someone debate my safety argument if one of these got out on their own and someone ended up in my dwelling and injured myself or a loved one. I will put it out there, if any child died due to someone wanting to keep their pet do you think it's fair to the parents who had to bury that child? No. Put yourselves in those people's shoes before you ONLY think of yourself and YOUR wants when fighting this ban.

No, it is not fair to the parent who loses their child to someone's pet... but neither is the parent who loses their child to that drunk driver, the driver who was texting and driving, the angry man with a gun, etc. That doesn't mean we should ban driving, drinking, or owning a gun all together, does it?

Lets keep it civilized here

[red ink]

Originally Posted by alessia55

With the ban, it won't be illegal to buy burmese pythons within the state. So people can still just as easily acquire them so long as they find a breeder near them. The reason I said banning them would worsen the problem is because it'll create a black market and then regulation really will be out the door.

That's actually a sad social comment on the reptile hobby.....

Just because there are a few bad apples out there, it doesn't mean we should all pay for their actions. As I said, I think it would be better to make stricter rules and regulations about buying/selling/keeping giant snakes (read back to Kim's post) that will enhance the pool of giant snake keepers, and fine/punish the bad apples.

If banning them as you say will create a black market and taking the regulations out the door. Would be fair to say that if people are prepared to create a black market for them a few strict regulations isn't going to amount to anything either....

It would be good for the responsible keepers, but it does'nt solve the peoblems of the bad ones. Which is effectively what the ban is trying to do. It's a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water, but unfortunately it's a baby they are willing to sacrifice.

No, it is not fair to the parent who loses their child to someone's pet... but neither is the parent who loses their child to that drunk driver, the driver who was texting and driving, the angry man with a gun, etc. That doesn't mean we should ban driving, drinking, or owning a gun all together, does it?

I'm not trying to argue here and I understand the point your trying to make with this... But all thise things you mentioned are illegal, therefore effectively a "ban". All those scenario those people are breaking the law by commiting something they are banned from doing and the result is someone dying.

Lets keep it civilized here

Agreed, hopefully I'm not being rude in my comments, I'm just throwing some points out there.