That may be true, but read this proposed legislation closely (although we don't have the full text):



"It shall be unlawful for any person to keep, maintain, or have in his possession or under his control within the Village any poisonous reptile or any other dangerous or carnivorous wild animal, insect, or reptile, any vicious or dangerous domesticated animal, or any other animal or reptile of wild, vicious, or dangerous propensities."



That is very broad language and encompasses a lot.



I know I'll probably come under fire for this, but in a way this is understandable: 50 years ago no one would have considered this necessary because the idea of owning some of these animals as pets just wasn't on the radar. That municipalities are scrambling to play catch-up is no surprise. I suspect that one reason that the language is so broad is so that it can be used to anticipate future pet fads and trends.



That a village of 6000 ( that is tiny!!!) should 'borrow' a template from elsewhere should come as no surprise to anyone.

[ Show Entire Thread ]