![]() | market - home |
![]() |
![]() |
News & Events:
|
| [ Login ] [ User Prefs ] [ Search Forums ] [ Back to Main Page ] [ Back to Venomous Reptiles ] |
Posted by: ADAMS at Wed Sep 8 05:56:57 2004 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by ADAMS ] The dictionary makes no mention of "the ability to play fetch" in it’s definition of “pet”. This has nothing to do with what you’re about. You’re saying a captive venomous snake is not a pet. But if it’s not a pet, what is it?...a commodity? A lab specimen?... Maybe in some cases, but as for me and many others, they are pets. | ||
>> Next Message: Actually, by Webster's definition of "pet", you are wrong... - psilocybe, Wed Sep 8 10:57:26 2004 >> Next Message: RE: Are we in school??? - bachman, Wed Sep 8 12:52:19 2004 >> Next Message: Here is why at least for me, snakes are not "pets"... - psilocybe, Thu Sep 9 10:40:52 2004 | ||
<< Previous Message: RE: First of all, who cares???pet..not a pet..... - bachman, Tue Sep 7 22:28:44 2004 | ||
|
|
|
|