|
Yes I mean some maybe not but I mean I would love to have a parie dog I mean what's wrong with this |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Cool. Way COOL. Okay, which wild animals would I have?
1.pack of wolves, so they could destroy all the rottweilers and pitbulls in my town so I could go
for long walks again safely.
2.pet American bald eagle, cuz I love them.
3.and a sexy man;-) |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No,Only zoo's! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Under strict regulations and only by professional handlers should wild animals be kept as pets,
until a time were they are all tame. Such as domestic dogs and cats are to day, after hundreds of
years of taming and human handling. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
What would one do with a sting ray? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Not fair to the animals. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
It has nothing to do with freedom and everything to do with the ability of a single private citizen
to be able to provide for the needs of a wild animal. Wild animals need a large area, the ability
to hunt (not be fed), the ability to breed (which often requires an entire group of animals), etc.
This is beyond the capability of most people, plus the fact that it's far too expensive for your
average individual to be able to handle. Someone like Tippi Hedren and her Shamballa Foundation
(which I support) is fine. Joe Blow idiot off the street who wants a tiger for a status pet, no
way. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree with the comments re ownership - I am a pet "owner" but that reference is purely for legal
reasons so if my dog bites someone a legal entity van be sued! Or if someone kidnaps it I can claim
it back. What we need to consider is licensing for all animal "owners" - the "owner" has to prove
that they are going to maintain a standard of living that respects the animals' rights. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree with Amber. Taking wild animals and taming them would take away the sense of majesty you get
from watching them. They are beautiful creatures in the wild taking them out of their would just
make them prisoners. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The animals that have allowed themselves to be domesticated initially did so to benefit themselves.
For example, when people began to store grain, wild cats found a more ready food source -- rodents
-- so the more-tame cats got more food. When dogs began to hang around people, who were leaving meat
scraps, those that aided the hunts naturally got more food.
Unless restrained and forced to perform for food (like elephants or monkeys), wild animals will
invariably choose to stay wild. Domestication take thousands of years for an entire species to
submit to humans; the rare individual that does so actually stays wild.
Attempts to create hybrids of domestic and wild animals -- like wolves and dogs -- often end up as
tragic for the resulting freakish animal. And it goes without saying that it can be very dangerous
to attempt to domesticate a wild animal: Ask Roy Horn. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Wild animals should be free. People can't really "own" what they are in their natural element.
People can only break their spirit. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No because animals deserve to be free like big cats and people shouldn't own them . |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Certainly not, wild animals are a danger to the public especially in built up areas. Wild animals,
if kept at all, should be kept under strict and regulated conditions by professional handlers. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No...those type of animals are wild for a reason and if we tame them we would be ruining their
natural element and what their all about |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
09 Mar 2008 00:04
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
