Congratulations, Quig, on quitting smoking! That's great. From experience, let me say that it's the same as giving up drugs & alcohol, all it takes is to give into the temptation just one time and here we go again. Ahh, but you can do it, you'll make it.



After smoking for 15 yrs I quit for 2 1/2 yrs but started back, like an idiot. I just haven't made up my mind to quit again. After giving up alcohol, drugs, and even sex (I've got 2 kids & I figured out what caused 'em. Ha! Ha! j/k) I use cigs as a crutch. Shame on me.



Anyhow, I decided to post here because I know you won't take what I'm about to say personally and I didn't want anyone to think I was jumping on them or anything.



I've somewhat followed the Deltona venomous snake case since it began & from what I can tell someone with authority in Deltona found the man's name on public records of licensed keepers of dangerous animals (venomous license, in this case). Out of ignorant fear, I believe, they then tried to satisfy their fear by eliminating the reason for their fear. Get rid of the venomous snakes, one way or another. Pushing their ideas and agenda on anyone/everyone.



I don't buy into conspiracy theories. I do not think that the US government, or some members thereof, are set out to extinguish all or most personal freedom/rights merely in the name of control. Most laws are made with good intentions, albeit how misguided they may be.



However, it is our responsibility as citizens to ensure our personal rights are not infringed upon, even in the name of good intention. I'm sorry folks, but there is absolutely no reason why I shouldn't be allowed to not wear my seatbelt if I'm alone in my car. It will have no affect on anyone else's life but mine.



I can see both sides of the argument of living next to a venomous keeper, especially since I have a 13 yr old daughter & a 9 yr old son. I am also a venomous keeper.



What happens when we only look at things from our own, personal perspective? As a venomous keeper I think, "Heck, I keep mine well secured, no escapes to date. It's not that hard to do and I know of no injury or death from an escaped venomous snake."



A person/parent that isn't a snake enthusiast or knowledgeable in the records of venomous snake keeping (bites, deaths, injuries, escapes, etc...) might think, "Those things can kill someone. What if one gets loose & crawls into my backyard where my kids play?"



Even though statistics show that it's the keepers that are getting bit, and very, very few result in death, and there's no records that I'm aware of where someone else was bitten by an escaped venomous snake, this person/parent has a right to be concerned.



As a venomous keeper & parent I think, "Well, I know nothing about this person's capabilities or experience, they may not be near as careful as me or the average keeper." For the most part, what I don't know won't hurt me. For the most part, I said. There is a fine line, the questios are "where to draw the line & who should be the one to draw it". It's not an easy task, no matter what side of the fence you're on.



But the fact is we stand a better chance of hitting the lottery or getting struck by lightning than being attacked by an escaped venomous snake or tiger. Shall the government ban lightning? Look at how many innocent lives are claimed each year by automobile "accidents". Why aren't they banning automobiles? It is a legitmate question; one person likes to drive but another may not, and one person likes to keep venomous snakes but another may not. It's a choice that we should have.



The story Tosha spoke of about her neighbor trying to get them in trouble with their snakes is a prime example of how some people play upon other people's fear to get their way. Take a look at the Federal Wildlife Service's recent inquiry of the larger pythons, anacondas, etc. They're asking the public for all kinds of information but say there's no agenda or plan to enact a federal ban on them. Well, why do they want to know what my state and local laws are concerning these snakes? Their inquiry may be somewhat innocent, in general, but history shows that someone will use that information to drive their agenda. Don't forget that all responses will be posted to the open public. Any bets?



For the most part I believe that the US government means well, but I don't think it's their place to tell privately owned businesses (or individuals) what they can or can't do, to an extent of course. The smoking ban everyone's cheering or crying about. I am a smoker, unfortunately. However, I always take into consideration other people's rights. But not everyone does, obviously & unfortunately. I don't smoke in restaraunts, mostly because I don't like to smell smoke when I'm eating. I'm their to eat, not smoke. I don't like to eat smoke. Ha! However, I believe it's an owner's right to cater to smokers or non-smokers, just as it's my right to support a smoking or non-smoking business.



Your rights stop where mine begin, and my rights stop where yours begins.



If any of you think that government knows best, how about asking those in the UK and EU just how great their government health care is. Governement may mean well but they make a mell of a hess of just about everything they put their hands on. Can you say "Social Security"? And, no, it ain't split among party lines, either. They're both at fault, for one thing or another. In other words, ain't none of us perfect.



All I ask is for everyone to try to put theirself in other people's place before casting judgment or making hasty decisions. And for Pete's sake, you fellow smokers, don't be hangin' out right by the doors of establishments blowin' your smoke in everyone's breathing space. You don't want to smell their flatulence. Ha! Now there's a good secret weapon for you non-smokers. Just pass gas right before you come upon a smoker at an entrance. Hahaha!!!



Ya'll carry on, and have a great day!

HH
-----
Due to political correctness run amuck,

this ol' hillbilly is now referred to as an:

Appalachian American

[ Show Entire Thread ]