Quite hypocritical on your part wouldn't you say since you "only buy animals from the best in the hobby that have the same "veiws"

With an IQ of 189 my guess is he has more important things to worry about than correct grammar about spelling and that I actually don't care as long as it's legible, I've wasted so much time going back and needlessly correcting spelling errors when I could be using that time better.

Do you know all the hot keepers in the US? Europe? And other countries? You know for fact that a very very small number free handle?

So only the best in the hobby have the same "veiws" as you? Do you know any of the best in the hobby that have bred Mangshan vipers???

Actually when I read comments like these below I start to wonder who's side Gregg is on? :shrug01:

When comments like this are made public it can only be used as ammunition to strengthen the argument to uphold any ban of keeping venomous snakes (which is technically unconstitutional especially when venomous snakes are being kept in locked cages in the privacy of your own home) because city governments will say look at Gregg an expert in ALL "poisonous snakes" and he acknowledges that poisonous snakes shouldn't EVER be free handled because of how too unpredictable and incredibly dangerous poisonous snakes are to let citizens keep them as pets. His comments testify that people who keep poisonous snakes are unstable because such extreme measures need to be taken to keep and handle these vicious creatures not any sane person would keep such a deadly creature that could go berserk at any moment inside their home. :shootfoot

Anyone really think city governments haven't thought of how they can create a tactical advantage to give credibility by posing as a "poisonous snake expert" to push and perpetuate the ban of venomous snakes?

Now Gregg may not be a wolf in sheepskin clothing but how he has formulated his comments of his opinion reveals to me that his expertise level of handling venomous snakes is limited and based off of assumptions and opinions :yesnod::thumbsup:

Haha please riddle me how Irwin was not positive? Sound a little jealous :yesnod:

Besides you're stating your opinion as fact.

You are entitled to your own opinion,
You are not entitled to your own facts,
Base your opinions off of facts,
You'll never be wrong.

Ignorance begets confidence more frequently than does knowledge, is it those that know little and not those that know much that so positively assert that this or that problem can never be solved by science.

Why is it that I can tell by the way you wrote this comment thinking it was so clever you have one of those really obnoxious laughs. Yeesh.

Is there a reason that you just made 11 consecutive posts to a thread that had been dormant for 10 yrs?
I have no objection to people dragging up old threads to renew a discussion with constructive comments, new information, or even seeking information from participants...but making antagonistic posts to people that haven't even logged onto this site in over 5 yrs seems unnecessary. Worse, this seems typical of your recent posting style (yes, you'd already been noticed)

Still safer than riding horses. Riding horses is asking to get a spinal cord injury, head or various types of other unpleasant injuries. So horse accidents aren't really accidents because the person is asking to get hurt so it is THEIR fault.

Sorry I didn't notice the date. Yes there was a purpose. Also I try to respond to each unfounded comment that caught my attention individually. Given how some of the comments were made how is a legitimate response not antagonistic? I'll PM you. Give me a little credit I switched over to the forum like you had asked to carry on a debate. But yes there is a definite purpose Mr. Moore to this argument and I'll finish it up.

Thank the Travel Channel for airing whichever outdoors camping show that the host was like if you see a rattlesnake like this while your camping, grab a large stick, pin it, cut the head off and bury it all while showing how he did it on camera. Made it look like as easy as a walk in the park. Telling people to mess with a wild venomous snake and try to kill it is definitely a remedy for disaster.

What you should do if you see a wild venomous snake. LEAVE IT ALONE.

.

You don't own venomous snakes yet you think because you watched a friend who has venomous snakes how he cares for them that you're going to speak as if you're an expert on the subject on how to handle a hot correctly?

You post a story with stating that no venomous snakes are safe to handle yet you don't own any, have no facts to back up your argument and you have one friend who does a good job at preventing himself from getting bit with some nice cages and you're going to state your opinion as fact when you have no credible grounds to do so?

You do more harm than good for the venomous culture when you pose as an expert because you THINK you know what you're talking about. Legislators uses comments like yours to perpetuate the false validity to why bans are needed because you're disillusioned with what is called the Dunning Krueger effect. I wouldn't want someone handling venomous snakes either with that mentality if I feared snakes. Do the real experts a favor as with most of you who aren't truly experts, keep your do good but actual harmful comments to yourself and leave the venomous snakes handling to people who want to become real experts. Not just keep a venomous snake or two because they feel like a rebel bad ass.