So called "exotic" animals may no longer be kept in certain areas if the current trend continues. Ohio had a incident and action is being taken to see to it that it never happens again.
Are the animals to blame? Or is it the owners who are responsible when that cuddly monkey, (or pit bull?) that was hand-fed and raised by 'nice' people harms someone?
Exotic pet owners don't seem to think their animals pose any threat to anyone. Do you?
"Its not the pit bull, its the owners." (It's not the gun, its the gun owner) See a theme here? Or do you draw lines between potentially dangerous "domesticated" animals and wild animals?
I read a facebook post today by a monkey owner who said that monkeys "don't do well around children" because they "see them as other monkeys and want to impose dominance on them."
Here's some of the fallout from the Ohio incident, wherein several dozen lions, tigers, and bears killed a guy and escaped, to be 'put down' later by authorities:
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/...cid=hero_media
What right do people have to own potentially dangerous animals of any type? Does it depend on the location?
I also find it interesting that this nation is awash in potentially dangerous illegal immigrants and we sort of 'get used to it.' Yet we know NOTHING of their background, health, criminal records, etc...and we have government officials chasing some guy's monkey.
We are all bozos on this bus.
Guns and Monkeys...lions and tigers and bear...no more?
