Carolina Shooters Forum banner
  • Please post in our Community Feedback thread for help with the new forum software! If you are having trouble logging in, please Contact Us for assistance.

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,502 Posts
Won't see me messing around in the woods down there without a shotgun handy, either!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,307 Posts
This is exactly why exotic animals should be strictly limited to zoos and other qualified professionals. We shouldn't have to worry about pythons, cobras, tigers, etc. other non-indigenous species wandering around in the U.S. Maybe the odds are low of being a victim, sure - but what if the victim is you? or your spouse or your child?

We shouldn't have dangerous exotic animals in the hands of individual private owners, from a public safety, not to mention ecological and environmental, standpoint. There is no constitutional or natural right to own dangerous, non-indigenous exotic species!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,696 Posts
This is exactly why GUNS should be strictly limited to zoos and other qualified professionals. We shouldn't have to worry about GUNS in the U.S. Maybe the odds are low of being a victim, sure - but what if the victim is you? or your spouse or your child?

We shouldn't have dangerous GUNS in the hands of individual private owners, from a public safety,
Sounded very familiar but I can't quite put my finger on it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,307 Posts
No, it's a completely different situation.

There are compelling reasons for private ownership of firearms (ie. effective means of self-defense): to defend oneself and one's family from criminals, and from tyrannical government, for starters. Also, it's in the constitution - if it wasn't, it's still one of the '....inalienable rights by which people are endowed by their Creator." In other words, a natural right.

There is no valid, compelling reason for private ownership of dangerous, exotic animals. There is no legitimate self-defense use (alligators in a mote or something ridiculous like that would be illegal, anyway). There is no constitutional or natural right. TRUE, the limits placed on private individuals be government should be minimized! However, in this instance, the near-universal potential for harm to other individuals, either directly or indirectly thru the ecology and environment is so great - AND the benefits of private ownership of these exotic animals so small, that the dangers and damage far outweigh the benefits.

Now I am all for individual liberty and individual responsibility. I am all for limited government. One of my favorite quotes is Thomas Jefferson's "The government that governs least, governs best."

But there is no compelling reason to allow private ownership of dangerous, exotic non-indigenous animals, and there are broad public safety, ecological and environmental reasons not to. Comparing it to the right to have an effective means of self-defense just doesn't make good sense, in my opinion. I respect your opinion, but I strongly disagree.

Sounded very familiar but I can't quite put my finger on it

Originally Posted by rje58:

This is exactly why GUNS should be strictly limited to zoos and other qualified professionals. We shouldn't have to worry about GUNS in the U.S. Maybe the odds are low of being a victim, sure - but what if the victim is you? or your spouse or your child?

We shouldn't have dangerous GUNS in the hands of individual private owners, from a public safety,
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,081 Posts
I had seen that photo on other forums and it was supposedly taken in several different states and countries.

On the other hand, I have a buddy that lives in Florida and he and some of his buds hang out in the Everglades to camp and shoot. He has told me about seeing a couple of huge snakes down there. I'm pretty sure that the ones that he saw won't harm anyone, thanks to a G30.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top