|
I do know exactly what you mean, truly. The negative aspects of venomoid animals so outweight anything that people can offer as a counter argument as to make it pretty cut and dry and I am continually amazed that there are people who somehow manage to ignore the ethical issues the entire mess presents.
Rich has made his position on the matter clear though, he isn;t going to regulate ads based on what is potentially questionable legal grounds. He'll remove ads for obviously illegal things offered for sale (I don't thionk anyone has tried it, but ads for narcotics or kiddie porn or something would be gone FAST) but right now since venomoid producers who aren't vets aren't being prosecuted for unlicensed surgery and animal abuse he's staying out of the entire thing. If a few people get nailed for the illegal production, he might feel comfortable enough about the issue to prevent them from being advertised in his classifieds but right now, he can't be faulted for not wanting to get involved in another fight.
What he has done is allowed replies to classified ads. What you can do is ask the person posting the animals for sale who did the surgery, what it entailed, what kind of rehabilitation time has occured, what the credentials of the person performing the surgery are and what kind of guarantee the seller offers about the animal's health. Some people will buy these hacked up snakes anyway but forcing a seller to admit that the "operation" was performed in a garage with an x-acto knife and a sautering gun and dental floss was used in the stitches might prevent a sale or two. If the seller can actually prove that the animals were modified by a vet, then it opens up a huge area for concrete and verifiable information to be gathered which can be put towards stopping this practice entirely.
|
Linear Mode
