Previous entry: 
Next entry:
The chimpanzee and the law
Local governments issuing permits so that people can keep wild animals on their property is a little bit like imposing federal limits for carcinogens: in reality, there is no maximum allowable. The mere presence of the danger is either a threat, or it isn't.
Issuing an animal's owner a permit to keep a tiger, a boa constrictor, or a chimpanzee does not automatically render the animal safe. They cannot really be domesticated, or they wouldn't be considered "exotic pets."
Surely people who enjoy the thrill of keeping savage beasts penned up in settled communities could take up a hobby less injurious to their neighbors, like chainsaw juggling.
CHAN LOWE
Comments
the thrill of keeping savage beasts penned up
Don't you think that's being a little melodramatic? We're not talking about a rabid hell spawn.
Posted by: Pet Snakes | February 20, 2009 6:48 PM
We're not talking about a rabid hell spawn.
That would be applicable in the school system.
Posted by: Rory | February 20, 2009 7:48 PM
....you like owning dogs or horses that kill a number of people every year? Compared to what, the rare keeper of exotics that is irresponsible? On avg. the exotic keeper is extraordinary responsible....perhaps you should research the topic before spouting off????
Posted by: William | February 21, 2009 10:07 AM
Thank you William
Posted by: C. Dan Dutton | February 23, 2009 9:53 AM
All of Chan Lowe's cartoons are piquant -- this is especially good.
Posted by: Sally | February 23, 2009 10:11 AM