Not every tragedy gets a quick and sweeping response from Congress, but eight days after a pet chimpanzee attacked and injured a woman, the House of Representatives passed a practical ban on chimps as house pets. The bill would ban transporting pets across state lines to be sold as pets.
Last week, Travis the chimp severely attack his owner's friend in Connecticut. The victim is still hospitalized and Travis is dead. Travis had been brought from Missouri to Connecticut.
The president of the Humane Society said:
There is no reason for any private citizen to keep a primate as a pet, and this trade is driven by unscrupulous dealers who sell primates across state lines for thousands of dollars. Congressional action on this animal welfare and public safety issue will complement our efforts at the state level to dry up the trade and the practice of private ownership of chimps and other primates.
Do you think this bill will help keep humans and animals safe, or is it a slippery slope toward banning dogs? They can attack, too!
Source
Boots
Michael Jackson is going to be pissed
1I don't think this is a slippery slope toward banning dogs. Dogs and chimps are obviously different because chimps are not and cannot be fully domesticated. It is better for both humans and chimps to keep them out of the homes of private citizens.
2I don't think it's a slippery slope either. Dogs are domesticated animals, and have been for many, many years. Chimps, Lions, Tigers, and Bears (oh my! ) should not be kept as pets, it's not safe for the humans and I honestly don't believe that the animals are as happy in an enclosure as they would be in the wild.
3Agreed about it not being a slippery slope, Michelann. Dogs have been bred to be domesticated for centuries. Primates have not.
Note that from my understanding of the bill, it just bans transport of primates across state lines. It does not bad them as pets. They're just trying to stop the trade to dry up the ownership.
4Dogs? That's right out of left field, Citizen.
5There's a reason that you don't see dogs in a zoo but you DO see Chimps.
It's not a slippery slope at all. Primates aren't meant to live in harmony with humans.
6That story was really weird. They bathed together and slept together. Ick! I agree with everyone that there is no slipper slope here.
7No slippery slope. Legally the two are very different. Chimpanzees are considered to be wild animals, like a bear or a lion, no matter how trained and docile. Owning one of these as pet comes with strict (absolute) liability if that animal ever attacks, meaning that the owner is liable no matter how careful s/he was and no matter how irresponsible the victim was.
8Dogs and cats (and other traditionally domesticated animals) will be strictly liable only if the owner previously knew of the animal's dangerous nature or if there is statute imposing strict liability
No slope here. I also think it's a good idea to prevent the "average joe" from keeping primates as pets. Very few people are equipped to deal with an angry primate, and as we've seen, they can be deadly.
9No. Not even close. Although the guy who lives down the road from me has a mountain lion and some wolves. Wonder what the Humane Society and Congress thinks about that.
10As a proud member of the Humane Society I would like to add the president's name is Wayne Pacelle.
11(Trivial, I know)
"Do you think this bill will help keep humans and animals safe, or is it a slippery slope toward banning dogs? They can attack, too!"
That's idiotic.
Anyways, I had to LOL my ass right off when news reporters kept declaring "As of right now, we aren't sure why the chimp attacked."
Uh.... because it's a wild *#$()#$()$ animal that shouldn't BE a pet??
But because this woman was an idiot and decided to take in the chimp, not only was an innocent lady mauled, but the chimp was stabbed, hit, and shot before it crawled back to it's cage to die.
People are stupid.
12She was drugging that poor animal and was slipping him depression drugs in his tea.
13The bill will help but I think the attack it self will help more. Chimps are wild animals and should be kept on reserves or in zoos not in homes. From what I know about chimps it is my opinion that he believed he was confronting an unknown intruder that was perceived as a threat.
14They are cute but not made to be a pet.
15I think what Citizen may mean about the slippery slope regarding dogs would be more along the lines of trying to ban "dangerous" dogs (ie. breed specific legislation). There are certain counties/cities where pitbulls are already banned and more are trying to pass a ban of what they consider "dangerous" dogs (but nothing is ever said about dangerous humans who create these dogs). To be sure, the "dangerous" dog breed list includes breeds like pits, rotties, malamutes, akitas and more.
I agree that its silly for people to be surprised that the chimp attacked. He is wild, will always be wild no matter how many sweaters you give him or glasses of wine and lobster tails you feed him.
16That makes sense about the dangerous dogs smacks. I do wish there was more positive information out there about pitbulls. They are very sweet dogs and only the ones who are abused or trained to attack are vicious.
17In regards to dogs the simple difference is one is domesticated and one is wild. I don't care how familiar a wild animal becomes with it's human gaurdian they're still wild. Dogs are not nearly as psychologicaly dynamic as an ape much less a monkey and are much easier to control if you know what you're doing.
18All primates, and all large carnivores should be banned.
19Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.