What do you guys think of the idea of implementing "Exotic Pet Licenses" in the US. These would be required to own certain pets like iguanas, monkeys, large birds, venomous snakes, large cats, bears, ect. You would need to show that you have a license before being aloud to legally purchase any animal classified as exotic. Their could also be a sort of tier system to the license. So for instance, if I want to own a Tiger, I would need a tier 5 license which would require things such as a home inspection and mental health checks, while a tier 1 license would be needed for an animal like an iguana, which requires you to take a basic test to determine if you can own the animal. This is just an example and may or may not work in the real world. These licenses being required would be a major hit to people who buy animals on a whim as it would require more work prior to owning the animal.
>He thinks licenses are a good idea
Licenses are the antithesis of liberty and a free society. The state now decides what, how, to what degree, and why you're allowed to own anything to everything.
I know you mean well, but you cannot legislate and regulate personal responsibility. So don't try.
Against it, just because such a system would never ever work and it'd just end up making the animals pretty much impossible to get, regardless of how ready you are from them.
It'd be a good idea in a perfect world though.
>>2139189
go cry about it while animal control seizes custody of your special snowflake pets
>>2139192
Fantastic rebutle, bootlicker.
>>2139189
Yeah because that makes sense. Is a drivers license the "antithesis of liberty"? No, it is simply there to stop idiots from buying a car and killing someone because they dont know what they are doing.
>>2139207
It is, though. Freedom of movement is a vital right in a free society. Any restrictions must be of the strictest scrutiny.
>>2139207
Drivers licenses aren't the same thing at all.
They're an absolute necessity in our society, so they won't end up with near impossible requirements.
The UK has a Dangerous Wild Animal license that I assume this would be similar too.
You need to show that you can care financial for the animals needs, are knowledgeable about the species and their care/feeding, have an appropriate enclosure and enrichment, have a vet willing and able to deal with the animal and have someone listed to take care of the animal if you die.
It stops people from getting them if they have no idea what they are doing but allows those that put the effort in to get them.
>>2139216
Meh, you're not wrong. They are a necessity, but the have a fairly low bar to meet. I'm glad you recognize this.
The general public would not tolerate a comprehensive and exclusive drivers' license model which is why it works so well. On the other hand, the Federal government quickly and quietly eroded your right to travel by air by creating the No-Fly List in the early 2000s. It had no provision for due process and the masses accepted it. Thankfully the Supreme Court got it right for once and ruled it as an infringement on one's rights and unconstitutional.
Dig deeper my friend. The government is not there to protect you. Don't trust it to.
>>2139219
You are aware this isn't /x/ or /pol/ right?
>>2139219
>making sure an animals needs are met is a government conspiracy
>>2139166
You know most areas have these laws currently?
They are mostly enforced on a federal level, there are only two states where it is easy to own venomous reptiles, PA and FL, and even then when sojethring goes wrong it only hurts the owner.
I know there's licenses to pretty much make your home a biological reserve for different ecosystems plant-wise. There was a house a few blocks away from me as a kid that practically grew a jungle in their backyard and maintain it like any Rotary club. They would have an event on Earth day where you could come over and look at their shit for like $5 to help support them doing it full time. Pretty cool.
So I wouldn't doubt that there could probably be a permit in place to carry animals like that, but you'd have to be classified as a zoo more than likely.
Why just exotic animals? The worst problems caused by pets are from domestic ones.
Also some animals such as tigers should never ever be allowed as a pet.
>>2139222
Where does it end? One day pets. The next day children.
>>2139220
I know you think I'm being ridiculous, but you really do need to be mindful of government control of your daily life. I'm not saying there are black helicopters ready to sweep you away in the dead of night, but there are people who do mean well(or evil) that are eroding your rights with the stroke of a pen.
Don't let them do it so easily.
>>2139295
But the government already regulate that children receive basic care and will remove them from parents that don't give that care
>>2139246
You have a point. But I am looking at this from the perspective of the animals. People bought iguanas and giant snakes and now they have infested the everglades and florida.
>>2139298
You don't need a license to have a child, though.
And the only way the state takes away your children is through extreme neglect. Don't empower it.
>>2139298
Do you think *these* people are looking out for children?
Do you think the state is infallible?
Take some time and watch this. Regardless if you believe this is an isolated case, errors do happen and children are undoubtedly taken away from living caring parents.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIsnbUxAPhs
>>2139304
And if you name your child Adolf
>>2139305
>america is the only place in the world
>>2139305
To be fair, CPS is very under staffed with under trained workers, and chances are, at least in that mans case, his wife got them involved and got them all over his ass in the first place.
>>2139299
Giant snakes are stuck in a tiny area of florida. Iguanas are around, but are largely harmless.
People only freak out about them because of "le spooky reptiles xD" domestic shit like cats and pigs are millions of times more damaging but no one cares about those or ever proposes regulations for them.
I live in louisiana and there is a system like that in place
>>2139308
And that's the point. That the state is far from perfect and that it's filled with imperfect people with agendas and biases. Don't surrender your rights and liberties to other people.
>>2139315
But how does that have anything to do with requiring people to know what the hell they are doing when buy a pet?
>>2139319
Who decides what you know? Who decides your means and state of mind? People. People with preconceptions and their own thoughts, desires, and even misconceptions. And these people have the power to take away your rights. These people have the power to take away your animals.
>>2139323
>Who decides what you know? Who decides your means and state of mind?
Bureaucrats, people bound by rules and held accountable by extensive documentation.
>>2139323
Dude, literally all I am saying is that people should be tested to prove that they know how to care for an animal. They are not taking away animals from people who actually are good owners.
>>2139329
You put far too much faith in the bureaucracy. It is very open to abuse, corruption, and persuasion.
Why put your fate in someone else's hands if you don't need to?
>>2139330
Who creates the tests? Who administers them? Who evaluates them? Who enforces them? These are all VERY important questions and each one leads to avenues for abuse.
>>2139333
This system already exists in other countries and works well.
I'm sorry your government is shitty and corrupt.
>>2139335
Its not, this guy is fucking delusional.
>>2139331
>It is very open to abuse, corruption, and persuasion.
it is more closed to abuse and corruption than any other system and being open to persuasion is also know as flexibility, which is highly desirable and honesty a bureaucracy's weakest aspect.
>Why put your fate in someone else's hands if you don't need to?
in this instance?
to decrease animal abuse at the cost of a test or tests I could easily pass and possibly a nominal fee
>>2139335
>The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men Gang aft agley
>>2139333
I dont know, say that the Humane Society administers them and evaluates them and it would be business are then required to not sell animals to people who havent been tested. A business would be fined for selling an animal to someone and that person will be required to either take the test or the animal will need to be returned to the original owners/business
>>2139340
>to decrease animal abuse at the cost of a test or tests I could easily pass and possibly a nominal fee
>Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
>>2139342
And what if the person in the humane society didn't like the look of your face and thought you'd be a poor owner? Boom. You're now unfit to own such pets. Tough luck pal. Better luck next time.
>>2139348
Jesus fuck. What if they dont see your face? Its just a form you submit and it is reviewed by someone and you get called saying if you passed or not and then some in to receive your certificate or some shit. I just wanted to ask a fucking question, I dont need your psycho paranoid bullshit.
>>2139345
>>Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
1. welcome to society, that's pretty much the basis of it.
2. I have no interest in sucking off the rotten dicks of our founding fathers
3. exotic pets are not an essential liberty
4. "doing what I want with no permit" is not liberty, doing what I want is.
There should be permits needed for domesticated animals, too
>>2139348
>Better luck next time.
in this instance you realize next time would be mailing the form in again. it'd take like 3 minutes
>>2139357
Wot
>>2139304
>You don't need a license to have a child, though
I bet you're a virgin.
>>2139350
>What if they don't see your face
You realize you now live in a society where most people put their entire lives on a publicly available medium where everyone is free to view it, right?
>>2139352
>First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
>Because I was not a Socialist.
etc. etc.
>>2139362
Tough talk big guy, but no, I am not.
>>2139295
People should absolutely have to prove they can actually be a good parent before they are allowed to reproduce. Holy shit, have you looked around at the utter train-wrecks/trash of society.
>>2139402
What better way to purge the politically undesirable than to deny them the right to reproduce through bureaucracy?!
I mean, I knew /an/ was full of short sighted children and women, but this is really too much.
I'm not going to get into the political side of this too much since this thread wasn't like a war on licenses. I would very much like the idea of that simply because I would love to own a pet whitetail doe, which are considered "exotic pets" but there exists no license I could try to obtain to protect my ownership of her.
>>2139441
For deer, as far as I know the only restrictions on ownership are the fencing needed and allowed by law.
>>2139442
Is there anywhere I can read up on deer ownership?
>>2139454
Check your state's laws and regulations. Game wardens don't fuck around and they will screw you if you break the law.
>>2139401
Fuck off, delusional little shit
This actually exists in my country, and it's almost impossible to get this license, what makes for everyone illegal to keep this kind of animals.
Drugs are also illegal.
Do you think I can't buy drugs where and when I want? The same would aply here.
>>2139166
>baby needs goberment to tell him want he can or cannot do.
In Texas, you have to have a license/permit to own things like tigers, venomous snakes, etc. ("dangerous animals"). You also need a permit to own wildlife like deer (unless you're in good with game warden and he needs a home for abandoned baby animal).
