The Elephant in the Living Room

[Lepisosteus platyrhincus]

you really agree with people owning tigers and lions who aren't properly prepared?

I agree with FREEDOM and PERSONAL responcibility. It is not your job, nor anyone elses to tell me what I can or can not own. If I abuse them or fail at the animals care, then I should face the consequences.

But then thats the difference between me and many people. I believe in personal responcibility for wrong doing not nannying. Freedom will always win in my book.

 

[dxdx]

If someone wants to own a tiger or lion, make them get a permit, have their enclosure inspected by a governmental wildlife agency on a regular basis... doesn't necessarily have to be illegal.

If your hobby of keeping a tiger behind some rickety chain link fence causes me to lose my life and therefore my FREEDOM, then it shouldn't be happening. Regulate to keep the idiots from participating.

 

[kissofcrimson]

I'm all for freedom, believe me, so I do understand where you are coming from Lep but when it's for the good of others or to protect something, I don't have a problem sacrificing a bit of that freedom. When it comes to exotics, or any animals really, I like to think of their best interest first and set aside mine for the good of them. In the case of exotics, I put it this way, would that Tiger be happier living in an enclosure in my backyard or in the wild where it can do what it wants, do what it was meant to be? In my opinion most wild animals would prefer to be in a wild setting versus a domestic one. Many may not agree with me on this, I don't really care if you do or don't, but emotions and the will be to be free is not exclusive to humans, animals are the same in that way. If you gave a bird the option to sit in a cage all day or to fly away into the woods, would it not choose to fly away? Doesn't mean that it won't come back but that does mean it values the aspect of wanting to be free and to do what it wants, just like we do.. That's all I'm saying, not trying to take your rights away or preach, just trying to say animals want to be free too and it's not fair to cage them up for our own desires or just to say we have them..

If your hobby of keeping a tiger behind some rickety chain link fence causes me to lose my life and therefore my FREEDOM, then it shouldn't be happening. Regulate to keep the idiots from participating.

And that's the problem. The government isn't controlling the sale of these animals properly and therefore they are suffering.

Sent from my iPad using MonsterAquariaNetwork app

 

[snakeguy101]

you really agree with people owning tigers and lions who aren't properly prepared?

no but why should that stop those that ARE prepared? There are already tons of regulations in place to prevent impulse buys and those that are not prepared or qualified.

There should be a size restriction on the public owning exotics, this would stamp out a lot of the violence ( having to kill the animal, animal kills people ) that happens with unprepared owners. That show, Fatal Attractions on Animal planet I believe is a perfect example of this. Things like lions, tigers, bears, elephants should all be outlawed for any sort of personal keeping short of you are a scientist and need a live specimen to study.

My hate for animal planet programs aside- why don't we ban dogs? there are more than 35 fatal dog attacks EVERY YEAR. People own dogs even though they are not qualified and it ends with dogs being put down, children getting bit, and sometimes even human casualties. DOgs should be banned too using your argument.

Also, are you forgetting that most zoos are privately owned companies? should they no longer be allowed to keep these animals?

I do not condemn all exotic owners, only the irresponsible and unprepared. and the people who just want to be that guy who has a lion. the populations of these animals are reaching record lows in the wild, what in gods name are they doing in american backyards? its just one of the most f'd up things this country allows to happen.

Okay, think about this for a second. What does the wild population of these animals have to do with anything. ALL of the ones being kept privately are CAPTIVE BRED. They do not affect the wild populations. Also, with these animals in such decline, shouldn't you be glad that there is a large genetically varied group in captivity? It will ensure the continuity of the species. Zoo's are great but there are not enough to be able to maintain a deep enough genetic pool and I think that private keepers have really stepped up in this case. Breeding loans between various zoos and private keepers happen all the time. This is a good thing.

 

[crayfishguy]

no but why should that stop those that ARE prepared? There are already tons of regulations in place to prevent impulse buys and those that are not prepared or qualified.



My hate for animal planet programs aside- why don't we ban dogs? there are more than 35 fatal dog attacks EVERY YEAR. People own dogs even though they are not qualified and it ends with dogs being put down, children getting bit, and sometimes even human casualties. DOgs should be banned too using your argument.

Also, are you forgetting that most zoos are privately owned companies? should they no longer be allowed to keep these animals?



Okay, think about this for a second. What does the wild population of these animals have to do with anything. ALL of the ones being kept privately are CAPTIVE BRED. They do not affect the wild populations. Also, with these animals in such decline, shouldn't you be glad that there is a large genetically varied group in captivity? It will ensure the continuity of the species. Zoo's are great but there are not enough to be able to maintain a deep enough genetic pool and I think that private keepers have really stepped up in this case. Breeding loans between various zoos and private keepers happen all the time. This is a good thing.

Hard to follow a post like that... +1

 

[BuffaloPolypteridae]

no but why should that stop those that ARE prepared? There are already tons of regulations in place to prevent impulse buys and those that are not prepared or qualified.



My hate for animal planet programs aside- why don't we ban dogs? there are more than 35 fatal dog attacks EVERY YEAR. People own dogs even though they are not qualified and it ends with dogs being put down, children getting bit, and sometimes even human casualties. DOgs should be banned too using your argument.

Also, are you forgetting that most zoos are privately owned companies? should they no longer be allowed to keep these animals?



Okay, think about this for a second. What does the wild population of these animals have to do with anything. ALL of the ones being kept privately are CAPTIVE BRED. They do not affect the wild populations. Also, with these animals in such decline, shouldn't you be glad that there is a large genetically varied group in captivity? It will ensure the continuity of the species. Zoo's are great but there are not enough to be able to maintain a deep enough genetic pool and I think that private keepers have really stepped up in this case. Breeding loans between various zoos and private keepers happen all the time. This is a good thing.

Yeah and if you would have read my whole post you would have found that I agree with what your saying. exotics are fine in the hands of people prepared and capable of keeping them. and if there are so many then there should be more programs trying to re introduce the specie in question to the wild. it shouldn't be focused on keeping the specie alive in cages, but on preparing them to go back to the wild.

There is a VAST difference between a family owning a lion and a zoo owning a lion and I figured people would understand what I meant without having to elaborate further. the thing is there is a huge black market for big cats in this country and the system of checks right now is on the state not federal level as far as I know, and some states don't even regulate the exotics, then they end up in big dog kennels essentially with nothing but a dog house to go in.

I'm all for professionals owning these animals but only professionals. there was a story about a family in the Bronx who wanted to start a zoo, so instead of getting the zoo first they somehow got 2 lion cubs and a tiger cub, the zoo never happened and he managed to sell the lions but not the tiger, and it got to adult size in his apartment on the twenty something floor (resulting in someone finding it, calling it in and the cops having to evacuate that floor and put a guy down on a pulley system to tranquilize it from the window, while the thing was jumping at the windows). the feds need to come in and regulate these animals. period. and if you aren't for that (a hugley better and more strict federal system) then you have no valid points. there's no reason random people should own those animals. only zookeepers, zoologists, biologists, trainers, handlers, not the layman who has always wanted to go on safari but can't so he brings the safari to him.

that story plays out far too much in this country.
Sent from my DROID4 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[dragonfish]

Haven't seen it but will look for it. Sorry, but there are a lot of animals that do not belong in the hands of the general public. Having massive amounts of money to take care of it's needs is great, but if you have that kind of money that's not your only concern. Either you pay other people to take care of it or it doesn't get the required care. In either case why did you get it to begin with?

As to those screaming freedom and personal responsibility, get over yourselves. Hear that same whine from the same people when they want what they want, everyone else be damned. So your going to own up to the consequences if your animal escapes and kills someone? How big of you, I'm sure that will be of great comfort to some kids parents. Your personal freedom ends when it infringes upon someone else's safety and the well being of the animals.

Since when did we become a country of I get to do whatever I want no matter how bad or dangerous it is to others without any regulation or restriction. Seems like those are the type of people who need to move instead of crying all the time and telling others to.
Rant over.
Sent from my SGH-T679 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[Rivers2k]

I agree with FREEDOM and PERSONAL responcibility. It is not your job, nor anyone elses to tell me what I can or can not own. If I abuse them or fail at the animals care, then I should face the consequences.

But then thats the difference between me and many people. I believe in personal responcibility for wrong doing not nannying. Freedom will always win in my book.

I am all for freedom and personal responsibility but freedom does not mean being able to do what ever you want. That is called Anarchy. At the risk of sounding like George Kastanza we live in a society. And we elect official the determine laws and the extent of our freedom. And currently in the state I live in it is illegal to keep dangerous exotic pets. I am grateful for that. Everyone thinks they are the responsible owner until something goes bad and some neighbors kid gets killed and that families life is changed for ever. They lost a someone they love because someone wanted to feel the power of "controlling" a wild dangerous animal.

To the person that compared the owning of exotics to owning a dog. Dogs have been proven to be a companion that is trainable and stable for 100's of ears. In ratio to dog owners to people there is a small amount of fatalities compared to exotic owners. In My town kids got to see a circus performer get mauled to death by a tiger and this person was supposedly an expert.

So I will step up and I don't care if i am PC or not people should not be allowed to own dangerous exotic pets and that is not me say who and can and cannot do it. If you polled society as a whole I am sure majority would be on my side. You don't want to bring a Tiger into my neighborhood where kids are playing in the yards. It wont be there long. And yes I am also not PC and I don't care when saying the life of a child IS more important than the live of a pet.

 

[BuffaloPolypteridae]

no but why should that stop those that ARE prepared? There are already tons of regulations in place to prevent impulse buys and those that are not prepared or qualified.



My hate for animal planet programs aside- why don't we ban dogs? there are more than 35 fatal dog attacks EVERY YEAR. People own dogs even though they are not qualified and it ends with dogs being put down, children getting bit, and sometimes even human casualties. DOgs should be banned too using your argument.

no, because dogs are not exotics so had no place in my argument. the difference between dogs and exotic attacks is a dog attack is not instantly fatal. as you said, only 35 deaths a year. not bad for a country of this size. If a tiger gets you, your done unless it was through the cage, and even then you could still be screwed. You have a good chance of fighting off a dog, not a lion tiger jaguar panther or mountain lion. if those get out, and hunt you, then your done. and there are so many domestic canines in this country there is no possible way banning them would work. Honestly you shouldn't go anywhere w/o a taser or pepper spray or at least a knife and any of these would stop a dog attack. not an adult tiger.

if there were as many big cats attacks as dog attacks, then the death rate would be disgustingly higher. also, even qualified lone owners shouldn't be in posession of any big cat, if they have a nervous breakdown or become suicidal, like the guy in Ohio they can go and let them all out. I'm pretty sure that day ended with a giant pile of dead big cats and a few bears.

that's what I mean by private ownership, if the thing is in your backyard then anyone who wants to can let it out, or go try to play with it or some dumb nonsense. its quite different with zoos and sanctuaries, people keep others in check.


Sent from my DROID4 using MonsterAquariaNetwork App

 

[Miguel]

Where can one see it on the web?