Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/26/2006 5:20:12 PM EDT
NORTH CAROLINA SENATE BILL 1032

Judiciary II Committee Substitute Adopted 5/18/05

House Committee Substitute Favorable 7/26/05







Short Title: Study Inherently Dangerous Animals.
(Public)

Sponsors:


Referred to:




March 24, 2005

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT directing the department of environment and natural resources to determine the best means of Protecting the public against the health and safety risks posed by Inherently Dangerous Animals.

The General Assembly of North Carolina enacts:

SECTION 1. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources, in consultation with the North Carolina Zoological Park and the Wildlife Resources Commission, shall study the need to protect the public against the health and safety risks posed by inherently dangerous animals and propose a means of best providing that protection to the public while protecting the welfare of inherently dangerous animals as well. In developing recommendations, the Department shall consult with the following entities or groups, or appropriate representatives of those entities or groups:

(1) The Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.

(2) The Division of Public Health of the Department of Health and Human Services.

(3) The North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine.

(4) The State Animal Response Team.

(5) Local law enforcement officials.

(6) Local animal control officials.

(7) Wild animal breeders.

(8) Exotic pet hobbyists.

(9) Commercial pet retailers.

(10) Small zoo owners.

(11) Humane organizations.

(12) Any other entities or groups whose interests may be affected by proposed regulations.

SECTION 2. The Department shall report its findings to the General Assembly no later than the convening of the 2006 Regular Session of the 2005 General Assembly. Any legislation recommended in the report may be considered during the 2006 Regular Session of the 2005 General Assembly.

SECTION 3. The report made by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources pursuant to this act shall include:

(1) A list of the types of animals that possess such inherently dangerous characteristics that they should not be owned or possessed by persons who do not have special expertise or training, and a determination as to whether these animals should be grouped into classes for differential treatment based upon the nature and extent of the threat they pose to the public. This list should also include information about the nature of the dangers posed by each type of animal.

(2) A suggested means for regulating ownership of certain animals, including a means of enforcing any proposed restrictions on the ownership or possession of those animals. This portion of the report may include an evaluation of regulations in place in other jurisdictions that have proven to be effective in protecting the public from inherently dangerous animals.

(3) A plan for addressing inherently dangerous animals that are indigenous species within the jurisdiction of the Wildlife Resources Commission under Article 22 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes and a consideration as to whether any potential legislation should broadly address the keeping of any wildlife as pets, whether indigenous or not and whether inherently dangerous or not. This portion of the report should result from extensive consultation with the Wildlife Resources Commission.

(4) A recommendation as to whether persons owning or possessing animals covered by any proposed restrictions should be grandfathered in under a regulatory scheme and the appropriate means of grandfathering those persons in, including consideration of whether certain animals are so threatening to the public safety that the grandfathering of untrained owners or possessors should not be allowed under any circumstances.

(5) A recommended list, as comprehensive as possible, of persons and entities that should be exempted from the proposed restrictions on ownership or possession of the animals covered by any proposed restrictions, such as zoos, veterinary hospitals, wildlife sanctuaries, research institutions, and the like.

SECTION 4. This act is effective when it becomes law.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 5:21:28 PM EDT
NO.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 5:22:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By azhammer:
NO.


+1
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 5:22:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/26/2006 5:22:39 PM EDT by Chokey]
no, but your double taps should be.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:19:11 PM EDT
The goverment should not regulate anything.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:26:14 PM EDT
they ain't taking my snakes and geckos
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:31:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RuskEnt:
The goverment should not regulate anything.

Nothing? No laws, just anarchy?
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:32:11 PM EDT
Cats and others need to follow the same requirements as dogs for licenses, shots and other requirements.

There needs to be open season (anywhere, anytime) for any pet not under their owners actual control or on their owners property. The owner would be responsible for any burial costs.

Your pet runs free on others property it can legally be killed with no reprisals and you must pay for the burial.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:35:01 PM EDT
Dance is 100% correct.

Free roaming domestic animals should be disposed on on sight. Ditto on any invasive species.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:35:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Schwoogie:

Originally Posted By RuskEnt:
The goverment should not regulate anything.

Nothing? No laws, just anarchy?



It's much easer to write new laws than it is to actually get something done, like say fix potholes.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:37:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dance:
Cats and others need to follow the same requirements as dogs for licenses, shots and other requirements.

There needs to be open season (anywhere, anytime) for any pet not under their owners actual control or on their owners property. The owner would be responsible for any burial costs.

Your pet runs free on others property it can legally be killed with no reprisals and you must pay for the burial.




+1000000
that's why I keep mine in glass cases, and the dog contained within the perimeter
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:37:47 PM EDT
As long as they ban rottwielers, dobermans, and pit bulls from private ownership, I am all for it.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:46:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/26/2006 6:46:54 PM EDT by Stealth]
Just keep all your pets in jars. Shake out the poop once in awhile and you're set.





Link Posted: 1/26/2006 6:46:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Stealth:
Just keep all your pets in jars. Just shake out the poop once in awhile and you're set.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v480/RealUgly/kitty1.jpg

img.photobucket.com/albums/v480/RealUgly/kitty2.jpg




Link Posted: 1/26/2006 7:00:06 PM EDT
Hell no.

Dobies are not inherently dangerous animals by the way, you've got to teach them to attack. Rotts and pits aren't as bad as their reputation either, but lumping dobies in with either of those breeds is silly.

If your pet is on anothers property you can't bitch about it getting shot.

In my jurisdiction they'll charge you for the ammunition I use to shoot it if it's harassing my stock.

That's not to say I think anyone is justified in shooting any dog they see off a leash, we've got several dogs in the neighborhood that stop by every so often to visit and aren't a problem.

I trust my dogs judgement about people far more than peoples judgement concerning dogs, lots of crazy baseless fear driving this subject.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:14:46 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dance:
Cats and others need to follow the same requirements as dogs for licenses, shots and other requirements.

There needs to be open season (anywhere, anytime) for any pet not under their owners actual control or on their owners property. The owner would be responsible for any burial costs.

Your pet runs free on others property it can legally be killed with no reprisals and you must pay for the burial.



Any reasonably sane arguments to the thought that "any" roaming pets or animals should simply be killed, much less killed anywhere?
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:20:39 PM EDT
1,500 people die in car accidents each year in NC alone, and this is how NC is spending it's money?
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 9:28:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dance:
Cats and others need to follow the same requirements as dogs for licenses, shots and other requirements.

There needs to be open season (anywhere, anytime) for any pet not under their owners actual control or on their owners property. The owner would be responsible for any burial costs.

Your pet runs free on others property it can legally be killed with no reprisals and you must pay for the burial.



+1
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 10:29:00 PM EDT
There is no list of exactly what animals they are considering, just a general description at this point. Maybe some of you guys recall the guy who was keeping a tiger in a NYC apartment about a year ago. There are clearly SOME animals that are not suitable as pets and need to be regulated in some form. For instance, the village I work part time for regulates ownership of very large exotic snakes because, lets be honest, having a 15 foot boa constrictor loose in your neighborhood would not be a "fun" thing to have to deal with. And yes, we have had several residents in the village who own snakes that large.

I am sure that some of you are going to take the viewpoint that this will be tilted towards banning a breed or two of canines. Sounds like the law is still being formulated, and thats where residents of that state need to speak up and have their opinions heard about what animals should be covered under this law if it is passed.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 10:43:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:
There is no list of exactly what animals they are considering, just a general description at this point. Maybe some of you guys recall the guy who was keeping a tiger in a NYC apartment about a year ago. There are clearly SOME animals that are not suitable as pets and need to be regulated in some form. For instance, the village I work part time for regulates ownership of very large exotic snakes because, lets be honest, having a 15 foot boa constrictor loose in your neighborhood would not be a "fun" thing to have to deal with. And yes, we have had several residents in the village who own snakes that large.

I am sure that some of you are going to take the viewpoint that this will be tilted towards banning a breed or two of canines. Sounds like the law is still being formulated, and thats where residents of that state need to speak up and have their opinions heard about what animals should be covered under this law if it is passed.




those types of snakes would never be able to survive the winter in NY, therefore no problem if one did happen to get loose

or just make them into wallets, belts, boots, or whatever else
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 10:50:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jmzd4:
those types of snakes would never be able to survive the winter in NY, therefore no problem if one did happen to get loose
or just make them into wallets, belts, boots, or whatever else



If one gets loose in , say, April, that gives it a lot of time to be foraging the neighborhood pet supply before winter does it in.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 11:08:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By tc556guy:

Originally Posted By jmzd4:
those types of snakes would never be able to survive the winter in NY, therefore no problem if one did happen to get loose
or just make them into wallets, belts, boots, or whatever else



If one gets loose in , say, April, that gives it a lot of time to be foraging the neighborhood pet supply before winter does it in.



Cold blooded animals do not eat much, they can go months or over a year in between meals.

Not like the snake would eat everything in sight.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 11:11:31 PM EDT
New local law in my area, all dogs and cats MUST be chipped so if they get loose and picked up, the owners can be identified through the implanted chip. Cost is $25 and all pet owners are required to do it.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 11:13:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By iamblades:
Cold blooded animals do not eat much, they can go months or over a year in between meals.

Not like the snake would eat everything in sight.


The guys who own these snakes feed them more often than every few months or even a year. A year? You expect me to believe that a snake only eats once a year. Please
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 11:24:16 PM EDT
the government regulates what the people have failed to regulate for themselves...
if my kid trespassed on your yard, crapped in your lawn, left regurgatated stomach contents on your door mat, dug up your garden, pissed on your car tires and left a stong obnoxious scent all over your yard, you would call it criminal and an infringement upon your tranquility and personal property rights...

Why should animal lovers be exempt from being responsible for their own dirt?

If you keep your dog (or cat) from crapping on my yard, I will keep my cow from crapping on yours...only fair
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 11:31:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/26/2006 11:33:39 PM EDT by iamblades]

Originally Posted By tc556guy:

Originally Posted By iamblades:
Cold blooded animals do not eat much, they can go months or over a year in between meals.

Not like the snake would eat everything in sight.


The guys who own these snakes feed them more often than every few months or even a year. A year? You expect me to believe that a snake only eats once a year. Please



Yes, snakes can go months or longer without eating.

http://www.acreptiles.com/ball_python_care.htm


2. How often should I feed my Ball Python?
Once every 5-10 days is perfectly adequate, although a healthy specimen can go for months on end with no ill effects. Some adult Ball Pythons will not feed during the winter months, even if nothing is wrong...so don't panic.



http://www.kingsnake.com/ballpythonguide/#FEEDING


So how often should you offer food to your snake? Well that depends on a few factors, notably the age of the snake. Younger snakes (16-30 inches) that are still growing fast will need more food. Older snakes (30-48 inches) won't need to feed as often. I feed my young snakes once every 7-10 days. They are capable of eating small to average size mice as hatchlings. Adults can pretty easily eat a rat that measures five or six inches from nose to butt. I feed my adult males about every three weeks, and the adult (breeding) females eat about once every two weeks. Snakes eat whole animals and do not need vitamin supplements, although you may want to add a little calcium to a gravid (pregnant) female's diet to help in egg production. This feeding schedule assumes that the adults will be off feed for a few months during the winter/breeding season. You may find other information on Ball Pythons that suggest feeding more often, but I believe that most people over feed their snakes. Snakes in the wild never have the opportunity to become obese due to less food availability, and more activity hunting for it.


Generally speaking the larger and older the snake, the longer they can go between meals.

Remember, that mos t of the energy from food goes to regulating body temperature. Cold blooded animals do not regulate their body temperatures, so they need much much less food.
Link Posted: 1/26/2006 11:40:01 PM EDT
I think thet should regulate childbirth before they mess with my pets.
Link Posted: 1/27/2006 3:32:36 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/27/2006 3:51:44 AM EDT
When dogs are outlawed, only outlaws will have dogs.

Apparently, Urbana IL doesn't have an ban on farm birds, so now, all the hippie's have started keeping chickens and turkeys in their yards.
I will be driving down some busy street and see a half dozen turkey's in some fools yard.

I would just love to have a dozen chickens waking me up at dawn every day because some dope head thinks they are cool.
Top Top