|
Re: Law against live feeding? V 1.0
I feel like I need to represent a side of this debate that has not had a voice. This is my first post to any debate thread as I am a new member.
BTW Ekke the expression in the US is a "Catch 22"...is it really "Catch 21" in South Africa?...neat.
Law Against Live Feeding?
I do not want to be verbose, so instead of covering all my feelings / points / pros and cons I'll just focus on 2 or 3 areas.
With all the crises in the US, I would be horrified to see a law against live feeding. Pets are personel property, albiet live property. As long as someone is not causing undo suffering or showing neglect to a pet, he/she should be able to do as they please. If certain pets show a threat, i.e. tigers / venomous / etc., I can understand laws against having them. If someone is raising dogs for fighting, I can understand throwing them in jail (cough cough Michael Vick).
But seriously guys/gals...(I cant believe Im going to say this)...I remember when I was a boy and was first introduced to constrictors...I LOVED watching them hunt and feed. Watching these awesome creatures capture prey and kill them in mere seconds without arms or legs is an awe-inspiring site that made me interesting in herps in the first place.
Perhaps when keeping captive reptiles, there are different issues at hand, represented by the myriad other posts already in this thread. However, hunting is the natural order of things and banning the live feeding of reptiles kinda takes the constrictor out of Boa Constrictor...doesnt it?
Mocha Cappuccino
|
