• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

fear mongering and lies from NBC NEWS!

there is the video in the link. it just really erks me. . I kinda let this get to me. i just feel like this is bias reporting and they have no businesses trying to convince people to think a certain way. Journalist are suppose to tell people what to think about or on but not how they should feel about it. Its not my right to tell you what you can or cant own...

libertarianism powers activate !
 
I agree it is bias reporting and I am thinking about writing to them to complain. (I recognized the reptile show he bought the baby cobra at in the "flimsy" plastic container.)
 
Geez, if only they would also mention that you don't need a permit to buy a lawn mower, but in the wrong hands they kill people too. Or maybe just add that most snakes people keep are completely harmless? Ya, that woulda been good too.
 
I'm betting they had to get the large cobra after the little one they bought just wanted to get way.

He said about the person he purchased the tiny cobra from, "they didn't even ask my name." acting all surprised.
Of course they didn't ask your name you paid cash.

90% or more of the footage was pictures of ball pythons and corns and a few other harmless species, further reinforcing the fear of the uninformed that any snakes they might see is deadly. :nope:
 
I wish i would have titled this better.... please, could a nice mod please change the title to make it a bit more catchy.I feel this is an important issue that should be viewed. I think the title needs to show this is snake related.
 
I don't disagree with the whole thing. I just am angry that they photographed mostly harmless snakes. If you are trying to make a point about venemus snakes then only film venamus snakes. I do agree that there should be some way to keep inexpairienced people from obtaining dangerous animals of any kind. All animals have their value in nature, and they are the ones who suffer the most when keptby someone who doesn't know anything about them. I felt sorry for those cobras.
 
I watched it a few times and I only saw about 10 seconds of video showing harmless snakes and at no time did they say or give the impression they were venomous. I used to travel to the PA shows and always loved seeing the vipers and cobras. I chuckled to myself over the fact that for $75 I could walk out with a baby Naja Naja.
I DISLIKE negative press about reptiles !!!!!!! BUT if there are people trying to legalize venomous in Maine well I will not stand behind them. We do all we can to promote a positive image in the Herp world including free shows everywhere we can.
GEEZ ! I know I sound like I'm defending the news article and I guess I am a little bit just for the fact that it IS that EASY to buy venomous. The guy at the show did nothing legally wrong. The guy on KS.com possibly did depending on state law where he shipped too. As the story went I believe they were fairer than most and even stated "There are plenty of snake sellers online doing the right thing. The problem is, all it takes is one to sell a snake to someone who doesn't know how to handle it and you have a very dangerous situation." That's a pretty fair statement !!
If this all falls on the thought that any restrictions on our pet rights will lead to total bans on all pets then I say this " Pick your battles and state your position in a fair and balanced way. Don't cry "bull $h1t" without being able to clearly state your opposition. AND DON'T break the law your trying to change or you will loose all creditability !!! Just yesterday, as I wandered around the show I was vending at, I saw snakes I wanted but could not own without a permit in Maine and more than once the seller stated " what they don't know won't hurt them". Well what it will hurt is all reptile enthusiasts in my state that want change!! The thought process of " I'll just cross state lines to get what I want or buy it online" will only make what we are fighting for SO MUCH HARDER ! Be fair, honest and obey the laws and fight for change!!!
As it sounds like Blue roses is, be a conscientious reptile owner.

Agree or disagree, that's called conversation amongst friends :)

thank you cornbreadandmilk (love the handle) for starting a conversation !
 
I do not support restrictions on venomous snakes. Sure lots of things "could" go wrong, but it seldom does. In response to your statement in bold, all it takes is one irresponsible idiot behind the wheel of a car to do untold damage as well, but it isn't what typically happens, thankfully we don't pass legislation based on statistical outliers or worst-case scenarios. For all all the tens of thousands of people with hots, there are remarkably few bites and fewer escapes. That indicates to me that the majority of the venomous keeping public are responsible. I could not agree less with "pick your battles." I will fight them at every attempt to dictate what we can and can not have.
 
Chip said:
I do not support restrictions on venomous snakes. Sure lots of things "could" go wrong, but it seldom does. In response to your statement in bold, all it takes is one irresponsible idiot behind the wheel of a car to do untold damage as well, but it isn't what typically happens, thankfully we don't pass legislation based on statistical outliers or worst-case scenarios. For all all the tens of thousands of people with hots, there are remarkably few bites and fewer escapes. That indicates to me that the majority of the venomous keeping public are responsible. I could not agree less with "pick your battles." I will fight them at every attempt to dictate what we can and can not have.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, the statement in bold is from the news story.

We do pass legislation based on stats or worst case scenarios. We have speed limits based on them. We have air bags, seat belts, etc, etc based on them. Transportation of goods and people is a necessity so vehicles even with their much higher inherent dangers will never be illegal to own but they are heavily regulated. Owning "hots" or any other pet for that matter is not a necessity so it is much easier to ban than regulate. Of course it is ridiculous to take our right to own pets away but since they already have then this is why I say "pick your battles". In Maine, since most reptiles, amphibians, arachnids, mammals, aquatics are NOT on the "unrestricted" list, to jump right to fighting to legalize venomous would be suicide for Maine herpists. Hence again why I say "pick your battles". Lets work on Iguanas or Womas (examples) first. It will take baby steps with our governing state department as we have found out already. My rant was in the context of my state of Maine. If "hots ARE currently legal in your state and they want to make them illegal then I support you in your fight against it.
Back to the news story. Venders selling over the internet should be aware if hots are legal or not in the state they are shipping too. It doesn't take much time to search it but it is easier to play ignorant to make a buck. The seller shipping to a buyer in my state isn't helping the cause. The buyer and seller are doing reptile owners in my state a disservice. Every raid here for illegals is bad publicity for our industry in general.

(I got to stop watching TV and posting ! LOL As I re-read my first post it does jump around a bit )
 
Thanks for clearing that up.

Obviously, we aren't going to agree and that is okay. But I do want to point out that the more we allow ourselves to be divided, the more we will lose. "Pick your battles" sounds incredibly selfish to me. Should we only stand up for corn snakes? What about hognose? They are rear fanged venomous. Mussarana? There is a big spectrum of venomous out there. At some point you are choosing to draw a line to what rights you don't mind other hobbyists having stripped because they don't affect you.
 
Chip said:
Thanks for clearing that up.

Obviously, we aren't going to agree and that is okay. But I do want to point out that the more we allow ourselves to be divided, the more we will lose. "Pick your battles" sounds incredibly selfish to me. Should we only stand up for corn snakes? What about hognose? They are rear fanged venomous. Mussarana? There is a big spectrum of venomous out there. At some point you are choosing to draw a line to what rights you don't mind other hobbyists having stripped because they don't affect you.
Click to expand...

Chip, Thank you for having a friendly conversation.
Surprisingly here in Maine eastern hognose are unrestricted and I also possess them.
I appear to be using the term "pick your battles" incorrectly based on your responses to it.
Your last statement is not my position.
My statement that I would not support unrestricted ownership of venomous in my state at this time is true. That does not mean I would not support you in your state to fight against restrictions or bans if it comes up.
Let me define my position a little more .....
In Maine, as in a few other states, we can own almost any animal with a permit. We also have a "unrestricted list". This is a very SHORT list of animals that we can possess without applying for a permit. BUT the bottom line is permits are rarely approved on the restricted!
In NC, as in other states and please correct me if I'm incorrect about NC, except for a few mammals, nothing is restricted and they leave it to the city level to regulate.
So based on the two state laws, you are fighting to keep your favorable pet ownership rights and we are fighting to get back our pet ownership rights.
We are already in the jail looking out where you are on the other side of the bars looking in. (hope that analogy makes sense. I seem to be terrible at using them lol).
Here in Maine, IMO it makes more sense to pick a winnable battle by choosing an animal that's low on the restricted list in terms of "dangers" than one that is high and work our way up from there.
Based on what I believe is your states laws or others if not. If there is legislation to regulate or ban "hots" I was not saying "well skip that one and wait for an easier one". One regulation will lead to others.
In Maine we basically started with every pet animal regulated and must petition to UN-regulate. Our list grows slowly even though they have restricted Iguanas, red ear sliders recently.

So I think we are united towards the end result but due to our states very different laws we must approach them from different directions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top