|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by Peter84Jenkins on March 31, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Karl is right, I first came into the venomous community a bit too young. It is largely due to the senior SHHS membership and the resources available here, which provided me with guidance and allowed me to mature in this guild if you will.
I know there are other young and underage members here who frequent the forums, and you can detect a greater level of maturity in their posts as time goes on and they are exposed to the enlightened ones.
I must say, I had it made by having the SHHS available to me during my young years, and I was lucky enough to be a member when we were a due paying, newsletter circulating entity. More sites like this should be available; it scares me to think how many people are getting their herp education from YouTube. (with the exception of Viperkeeper's channel)
This sight promotes, morality, education through reading, respect for wildlife and the law abiding and safe husbandry of venomous herpetoculture. So, yes this site is a great asset, and it saddens me to see the trolls come in and over run the place, like a Tolkien story gone terribly wrong. It always seems after a troll attack some of our most respected and knowledgeable members disappear for a while, leaving the boards to linger in silence.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on March 31, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Rob's Reptile Discovery Center is a nature center, wildlife sanctuary, museum, and biological station. It is not a private keeper wanting to keep venomous snakes in Chicago.
Rob has no ability to change the reptile laws in Chicago, or influence permits, but the people of Chicago do. You will need to organize and find some support in changing the laws with your Legislature. Perhaps request the help of USARK.
Or, since it it Chicago, you will possibly need to bribe the right officials, LOL.
Most likely though, it would be better to move to a more reasonable state, as some states will never change their private reptile laws.
If you want to continue to post here Jenny, you need to fill in the rest of your profile. Because of the recent invasion of trolls on this site, we will not be allowing people to post who have not filled in their profiles.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by Peter84Jenkins on March 31, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Sorry Cro, I guess I prematurely deleted the post you are referring to. I felt it had nothing to do with the topic of the thread, thus it must be a troll disguised as a woman! I could be wrong, we will see if her profile gets filled in.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on March 31, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yep, Jenny, fill in your profile, and re-post if you like.
However, your question has been answered.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by jennyhots on March 31, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hmmmmm, how come you keep deleting this quote..... and why did you delete the account of the person who made it and call him a troll ?
Wow lanceheads, you actually made a good point - I am impressed ! Starting to actually use your brain I see. Yes it is true, " Millions, upon millions own dogs/horses. Millions of people DON'T own venomous snakes, much less hundreds of children." However, this statement dos not rebuke me. First of all, not all people bitten by venomous snakes are people who keep hots as pets, most are people who live in areas where hots are indigenous and get into their house and bite them, or they accidently step on one outside. The other flaw with your objection is although more people may ride horses and use plastic bags then keep hots, when you adjust the ratios properly, things like dogs or horses still hurt more people then hots. For instance, you can say out of a population of 100,000 people that keep dogs as pets, 10,000 people reported being attacked by their dogs (1 in 10 people). However, out of a population of 1,000 people keeping hot snakes, 10 reported being attacked by their snake (1 in 100). So when you adjust the math you can say: well, if 100,000 people owned hot snakes, on average, 1,000 people would be attacked. 9,000 less then dog keepers. Hence, it is safer to get a venomous snake then a dog. Again, the reason for this is because since people know the hot snakes to be hostile, they use more precaution. As where with things like dogs and horses, people are more trusting and put their gods down. Dogs and horses are also more emotionally complex animals and their behaviors can change, as where with primitive reptiles, once you figure out your animals temperament it will usually stay constant. Also, not that many people want hot snakes any way so ruining it for the few by banning them is really stupid.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by Rob_Carmichael on March 31, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Hey John, I must have missed something. Just to reiterate what John said, I am NOT a private keeper of venomous snakes. I am a curator of a nature center/living natural history museum (okay, call it a zoo) that is under the umbrella of a city government. That's the only way WE are qualified or allowed to keep venomous species..these animals are on public exhibit free of charge. Not sure what the original comment was but thought I'd chime in briefly. I have ZERO say in state law pertaining to herps; that's all done through the IDNR who do an outstanding job....great folks to work with.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by Peter84Jenkins on April 1, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Jenny, it keeps getting deleted because it does not have anything to do with the subject of this particular thread. Why do you care why we have labeled a certain individual as a troll? Are you here to learn, or are you here to delve into nonsensical and pointless debate? Please do not piggy back off of threads with unrelated topics.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by Buzztail1 on April 3, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It seems that the original intent of this thread is still being missed so I will distill it down a bit.
I have seen where people have been argumentative on this site and started emailing people here that the administrators of this site do not support private ownership of venomous reptiles.
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THIS SITE IS (OR HAS BEEN) A PRIVATE OWNER OF VENOMOUS REPTILES!!!
We all support RESPONSIBLE private ownership of venomous reptiles. The argument comes when people come here and want to rehash old arguments about what is responsible. This does not need to be an argument!
There are thousands of websites concerning keeping snakes on the web. Find one whose tenets you can agree with and join them. You are not going to get the people here to agree to lower the standards that we have agreed upon just because you say so.
Sorry for the interruption, folks.
Just tired of the same-old same-old.
And I do not like seeing emails and posts about me or other administrators of this site by people who know nothing of us that are straight-out lies.
R/
Karl
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by lanceheads on April 3, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Jenny Magarino,
The point of my post was very broad, and I stated that. However, your logic and math is flawed.
Throwing out base-line numbers as you did doesn't even come close to what I was saying. Please go back and re-read what I was saying. Again, my point was more people are injured by dog's and horses than venomous snakes. (because the ownership of these animals far out weigh owners of venomous snakes). Nothing was stated regarding people who are bitten in the field, i.e. hiking, camping, etc, by venomous snakes. My point was captive situations. I could throw in non-captive dog's, i.e., feral dog attacks but I didn't because I was talking about captive animals.
As far as your "using my brain" comment, thank you, I think!
I believe the origin of my post started with a response to Frank Martin and his un-balanced theory that a 12 yr. old should be allowed to own a venomous snake. Also, I think the "mods" deleted Martin's post, because he was "trolling". No question about that.
|
| |
|
RE: The people on this site
|
Reply
|
|
by questionaire on April 13, 2011
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Karl,
Thank you for posting this information about the site and the administrators. Can your information be made into a sticky topic or placed on the home page so it is always easy for newbies to locate?
June
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
