Yep this says it all: he didn't think the animal wanted to eat the little girl.

Agree. If T-Rex was still around, some morons would want one for pet, and then tell everyone how social, playful, and fluffy that thing is. That is, until they become one day pet food themselves.

What is interesting and ironic is that they are going on trial in the same courthouse as that beast, Casey Anthony. Let's hope the prosecutors can prove how the little girl died to the jury so that these parents wont walk.

If they had put the child in a plastic bag and dumped it in the woods they could walk free.

This is why in the Anthony case it was decided to make it look like a murder. A tragic death of a child by accident and people want to send you to jail. So your kid drowns in a pool and they could want to send you to jail because maybe the gate had a broken lock and you were meaning to get it fixed but didn't so your child wanders into the pool and you are on trial. But hey if you make it look like someone murdered your child then you would not be on trial.. oops... not if they think you are the one that killed your child.

This was not an accident, this was a person choosing to knowingly maintain a danger in their home and failing to properly protect their child from that danger. By their own statements they were both aware that the snake was able to escape and required a better enclosure (of course, they "were going to do that" - when they got around to it). And, yes, in your scenario, if you fail to repair a lock that you know is broken, you are culpable if a child enters via that broken lock and drowns. It is called negligence and a resulting death is a negligent homicide. You don't have to "mean" to kill someone to be held responsible for the death.

really? Then why wasn't Miss Anthony held responsible for the accidental death of Caylee?

No it's not an accident. It's called complacency.

Everyone here is guilty of it and have no business throwing stones at this family for their tragety. They are a perfect example for all of you to look around your homes for near misses because all of you have them and just because nothing bad has happened so far doesn't mean something isn't about to happen.

I think there's a huge difference between those of us who have some repair issues that we cannot foresee as an imminent danger (but could be), and keeping a known predator in your home that is twice the size of your child and allowing it to escape several times over two months.

Interesting that they treat the snake for wounds and relocate it.

They kill alligators that harm people or pets. Double reptile standard?

Was the snake named Zanny?

Rustyboy - There may not be a double standard. My understanding is that 'gators and crocs have a type of "homing" instinct and will try to return to their "home" whereas snakes don't. Also, most gators/crocs aren't kept in cages whereas snakes are kept in cages.

Rustyboy - There may not be a double standard. My understanding is that 'gators and crocs have a type of "homing" instinct and will try to return to their "home" whereas snakes don't. Also, most gators/crocs aren't kept in cages whereas snakes are kept in cages.

triple post

moronic yes, but manslaughter , i think it was neglegence and ignorance. cant really charge someone with being stupid, unfortunately.....

the anthony mom didnt even get charged with neglect. or did she? she should be bound and gaged and thrown into isolation in the bottom of a prison somewhere.

Becareful Lynseypug, some woman named Zanida is already filed lawsuit for defamation of character by Casey Anthony.

OMG: These idiots reproduce and probably even vote.

This couples defense ... lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,lie,lie ... & retain Baez ...

The child raped the snake .... and a meter reader moved the snake from cage to cage, and he has snake dreams!!!!!

And in fact ... we don't really know if it was this snake??? Is there a video for the jurors of the actual death ... too many questions!!!

With a last name like "Hare", one would think these idiots would have been a little more careful in securing a snake that can easily swallow a small dog or a child.

They will probably plead innocent by reason of insanity....being insanely stupid. I am surprised they are able to breathe and keep their eyes focused at the same time!

@Larry-2260635, forget about putting the child in a plastic bag and tossing it in the back woods , i am suprised the POS looser mom didn't let the snake conviently eat the kid and digest the remains while she sits on her fat ass eating and making new babies to collect welfare checks

Now, if the snake had covered the child's mouth in duct tape, not reported the child missing for 31 days and thrown the child into a swamp, this would be a non-issue.

At least 10 previous escape attempts by the snake before the killing and the parents are only charged with manslaughter, third-degree murder and child neglect? Sounds like assault with a deadly weapon coupled with the other charges. Are there any laws regarding stupid on the Florida books?

Don't worry, the jury plans on getting it right this time.

As horrible as this is and I certainly don't agree having a python in the house is a good thing, I don't see how they are charging the couple of murder. Negligent manslaughter I can understand but I seriously doubt the couple decided to feed their toddler to the snake for his monthly feeding. Florida needs to stop over extending when they choose to prosecute for a crime. Last I checked snakes have a mind of their own and I would highly doubt that they were talking to the snake and plotting the murder of their child where the snake would help them out.

Bob, I think the previous 10 escapes by the snake factored in the murder charge

Tam - how true. Sad but true.

The child died as a result of aggravated child neglect - circumstances being they knew the snake could escape (A quilt with safety pins - really? Did they not ever watch any educational TV?). BK was also charged with Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child. See MyOrangeClerk.com under "Look up cases..." for a full list of the charges BK faced. The statutes under which she was charged are also listed. Maybe some of the same statutes apply in this case as well.

BobB...

The couple told deputies they often took the snake out of the tank to play with it and would place it around the shoulders of the children in the home without incident.

We are talking about a snake a reptile that has no empathy. It's objective in life is to hunt and eat. The put they "often" put the snake around the shoulders of the child. The snake only knows food not fuzzy, feel good, stupidity.

These people were definitely too stupid to own an exotic animal too bad it was not discovered sooner that they were too stupid to have a child in the home. Not only are they poster children for why states require permits for exotic animals but why states should require permits to have a child.

This is why I am starting to believe you should have a license to reproduce. When I had my daughter I decided there were things that would need to change. I decided not to purchase a motorcycle because of the risks riding one. I decided there would be absolutely no guns in the house, not even a BB gun. Locks were applied to cabinets, things were moved out of my child's reach. You know, all the standard things that people who are serious about parenting do. Half these baby momma's have the kids unplanned or so they can have their live dress up doll.

I guess dogs and cats as pets just doesn't cut it anymore. Instead you get a snake that moves silently and can crush a child in minutes. I just hope they are prosecuting the correct charges so these morons get their stay in jail.

One thing I am concerned about, how the snake made it out of this alive. What did he stab him with, a needle?

txmom - see my posts 3.13 & 3.14. Amen to what you said.

People are SUPREMELY naive when it comes to their pets, whether they are pythons, German shephard, or whatever. 'Mr. Fuzzy would NEVER hurt my baby!' Until they do, and then it is too late. Remember the Chimpanzee that destroyed its owner's neighbors face? He was friendly too, until he did that.

If you have a child, seriously try to have a standard pet, like a cat or dog (and no, not a guard dog 'who never would hurt anybody!'). Better yet, try, like, a hamster, or goldfish. If you do already have some other kind of pet, be smart. Putting your 'python' in a bag does not count as properly securing your pet. Dur.

He thought he had secured the snake by placing it in a laundry bag, which had a small hole in it, and then covering the aquarium with a quilt held on by safety pins.

ARE YOU SERIOUS!!!

I have owned Burmese pythons. I know how big they get. I know how big a 50lb snake is. There is NO WAY a rational person would even begin to think safety pins would stop a snake that size.

Keeping a snake in these conditions is unconscionable. It's not even complacency, as has been suggested. They WILL get out. I've had 30lb Ball Pythons pop the Lock-Tite lids I used to use. Anything this size needs to be in an enclosure, not a tank.

The level of stupidity and ignorance that it takes to allow a snake that size to be kept in a tank that inadequate is staggering. I fully support willful negligence and manslaughter charges.

It's people like this that give snake owners a bad name.

1. For people saying the snake wanted to eat the child: No. Not at all. Not in history, not ever. This simply unequivocally does not happen. Humans do not emit the scent of rodents, and pythons eat rodents. This isn't even a valid topic of discussion.

2. This is America. Nobody should require a permit to have a pet. Regardless of your personal feelings, my rights inside my own home are just that... my rights. This mentality of making everything which makes you uncomfortable a crime is why we've lost so many freedoms and why our incarceration rate is so high.

3. "Knowingly maintaining a danger in your home..." Power outlets? Lamps on tables? Bathtubs? Stairs? A dog or cat? Small objects that are choking hazards? You'll have to be more specific about which danger they're knowingly maintaining, because it looks like there's a lot of them.

4. A known predator? This is about a python, not a dog. Dogs are known predators, pythons are known docile pets. Look at the statistics... the _percentage— of dog owners who are attacked by their pet is far higher than that of snake owners. My ball python and corn snake are both free to roam about my home office while I work. I take them outside to walk around the block. I let kids touch them. I've kept snakes for nearly a decade without incident, and I've never had a dog yet I've been bitten by three of them.

The fact is that snakes don't "swallow" people and never have, and snakes are more docile that dogs. Banning something else in an already oppressive, controlling country that claims to be "free" is not the answer.

Death by snake and death by mother. It would appear, this may represent negligence but not murder. This was an accident right. I mean, could they have gotten outta bed and wrapped the snake around the child on purpose?

As America has dramatically dumbed down in my lifetime, pay close attention. They will get murder while a murderess just walked. HOw many children and humans are killed by pythons every year and how many humans and children are killed by pet dogs. No contest, Einsteins.

Pet dogs kill more humans every year than pythons, grizzly bears and sharks combined. And the specie most endangering man's existence is man. How many humans murder humans and never get convicted?

And, do parents, whose children die in car accidents go on trial? Vastly many more children every year die in car wrecks than by all snakes in this nation.

LIke I said, in my lifetime, the vast majority of Americans just dumbed down. This was an accident. Would they go on trial if their child had died in a car wreck -- even if they were not drunk?

Yup, Einsteins, pet doggies kill more children every year than all animals, domestic or wild. Dumbing down, America!

Good post. It is time we hold people accountable for their actions and not making a new law in response to each new, yet preventable "accident" in an effort to protect people from rampant stupidity.

Alan Pugh - Your statement in #1 is completely wrong... Google "snakes eating humans" and you will find out how wrong you are!

Your statement in #2 is highly suspect... Your rights only extend as far as the next person's rights begin. If your pet comes on my property and attacks me, YOU are responsible - no question about it - you are guilty!

Alan...honestly...I think the point is clear that the snake didn't cognitively wish to eat a child the snake wished to eat or the snake wished for a heat source or the snake did something that snakes do. The snake has no point of reference to know that it is reprehensible to murder it was simply following it's own nature. But then someone made an effort to assure the snake survived the child did not. The snake did what that breed of snake does (constrict), the child did what children do (sleep), the parents did nothing to prevent this from happening....They did not bother to attend to the responsibilities of the snake or the child.

It is the stupidity of the owners who obviously did not know or care, that will be determined by the court, if the snake was being contained or cared for in a manner consistent with the law or common friggin sense. Yes the law because what they had was an animal that has no concept of training or domestication. Common sense because they knew the containment for the snake was not working.

Here is a shock....I have a beautiful, docile golden retriever...She is licensed through our city. This is a requirement so that if she happens to ever do harm to another I can be held accountable. Because of that license I take responsibility to treat and restrain my animal within the tenants of the law and because it is the right thing to do for her and all around. I vaccinate my animal, for her health and for the health of those she comes into contact with human and animal. We clean up after her when she defecates in public because it is a public health issue not to, we have trained her with love and care so that she remains a pleasure and never a concern. I bathe her because she has no thumbs to turn the faucet on herself or open the shampoo. She has a bit of a dry skin issue.

The rest of your supposition is just sort of silly so my guess is you have no children in your home to protect. As a mom....nothing in my home is more valuable than my children. If I cannot maintain the behavior of an animal it just isn't going to live with my children.

Before you say a word about the dog...my sweet big old dump-de-dump dog...I know for a fact that she will get in between danger and my children. She gets that my husband and I are her alpha dogs. Can you do that with a reptile?

Wow. A woman who admits she is a dog. Interesting.

delay the snake's monthly feeding then slip it into Casey Anthony's new home while she's sleeping.

2 Birds. 1 stone.

Regardless of what Alan says, snakes eat people if there isn't anything smaller around.

Wow. A woman who admits she is a dog. Interesting.

Wow someone who can type word and say nothing....boring.

Unless the snake is being held as some sort of evidence, it should have been killed right away, not "treated for stab wounds". Just more sickening liberal policy in action.

The vast majority of children killed by family pets and I mean the vast majority are killed by the family dog. In the vast majority of those cases it is an American bull terrier. Exotics kill with such infrequency that any incident makes headlines. The simple fact is that if they were to lead with each and every pit bull attack, we'd all be bored to tears. Anyone who agrees to take on responsibility for a reptile should do so realizing they are and always be a wild animal. I currently have a total of six, their enclosures are worthy of a theme park or zoo, it is a life long commitment. I do agree that reptile ownership should be allowed after an individual demonstrates the knowledge and facilities appropriate to the animal. I was in a Petco today buying crickets and was appalled upon seeing their current, "temporary" housing for their small reptiles. I am returning in the next several days to determine if I need to file a complaint. (would not be the first time). I have kept these animals for a total of 18 years or so, in excellent health and given them long happy lives. But that makes me the exception, I suppose. As to this case, the parents were clearly negligent. Any body knows the first job in having any pet is to control its comings and goings, otherwise, it's not a pet, it's just some Animal you're feeding until it decides to leave.

Alan,

Sorry, this country is awash in invasive species that have come into this country as pets. The Burmese python is one of them. South Florida is covered with them.

I think your rights and freedoms are NOT unlimited.

They should be locked up for being stupid. We really need a law that targets stupid people like this. I hope they get the full 35 years with no chance of parole.

That poor little girl died a horrible death due to these two stupid people that shouldn't be allowed to roam the planet ever again.

Robin Steel...I appreciate your position as a knowledgeable care taker. The point in fact that will probably be brought up in court is the willful ignorance of care these individuals showed in having the reptiles.

That same willful ignorance is certainly available for many dog owners. This is why the majority of shelters garner information on the owner to assure they are indeed fit to care for the animals they have fostered.

Common sense is necessary when dealing with any other living creature. These two didn't have enough sense between them to own snakes let alone parent a child under the same roof with an animal.

Steve W.-747922, you must be kidding right?

Txmom just by having an animal in your home you are taking the risk as the parents in this story. You too could be on the news if one night your sweet big old dump-de-dump dog has had enough of one of your children or was accidentally spooked and bites or attacks for what ever reason you want to give. All animals are unpredictable, stop acting like just because you have a golden retriever registered through the city you are better than these people. SORRY! You choose your pet and someone else will choose theirs but in the end the type of pet you own means jack diddly. Animals are just that ANIMALS and all animals have the potential to injure/kill. I am an animal lover and have owned MANY varieties of animals and it all boils down to the precautions you take but none will ever bee 100%. Try to have some compassion for these people! They may not be rich, hell they are clearly not the smartest colors in the box but that doesnt mean they loved that little girl any less! My prayers to the family! God Bless

I want to agree with the "morons" statement.  This story gets worse folks.  From my local paper...

A Department of Children & Families investigation found that Jaren Hare's mother, Sheryl, was concerned about her daughter's ability to take care of the snakes.

She even offered to buy food for the snakes because neither her daughter nor Darnell had jobs or money. She was also willing to buy sealed containers and keep the snakes at her house. But the couple refused.

http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2011/jul/10/5/case-of-sumter-county-toddler-strangled-by-python--ar-243070/

That's the link to the article I quoted.

They are going to lose this case: Their attorney said "EKSPECIALLY" in the interview.

Not a good sign for the defense.
Gotta find a better, free-er lawyer.

Damu Dame...Sorry my compassion is reserved for the child and those who sought to find a remedy. Not with the parents who showed no regard for the safety of their child.

As for my darling Ruby doo....I trust her to protect my children in our home. The cat is more of a threat to my kids than this dog cause the cat is pissy but certainly not lethal.

I can assure you in the eyes of the law and court of common sense I am better than these people. My children come first always have always will. Post 1.48 actually illustrates that these two people had a voice of reason around them and they still didn't react in a responsible manner. So yes much of the population of the United States are better than these people.

As for them having pets....people who have pets should be able to care for the needs of their specific pet. They should be able to provide a proper habitat or surrounding for their pet. They should have some understanding of the temperament and natural instinct of their pet.

As for my dog hurting my children....not likely unless she were drugged or had a severe illness that affected her mentality.

As I said the snake did what snakes do... The people who didn't adequately contain the snake are at fault. They did not heed to any desire but their own selfish desire to have an exotic and unusual thing in their home.

Children are not inactive or helpless, and benefit more from the companionship of a good dog or cat instead of a hamster or a fish. If it is intended to teach the child how to take care of things, then in that respect, any of these are acceptable.

I just watched the video of the Mother (subjective term) and Darnell walking into the court house. At lest he seems remorseful. Her on the other hand...I really hope they put her on the stand and let her talk.

Apparently they didn't take the plea deal because she didn't want to go to jail for 10 years and he didn't think he was guilty of the specific charges.

My mistake...It wasn't the mother of the dead child it was Darnell's attorney, that said he (Darnell) didn't want to go to prison for 10 years and didn't think he was guilty of the charges.

To the people that continue to insist that your stupid e-mail chain forwards and photoshopped pictures on websites do indeed point to a snake eating a human, there is not one single reliably documented case of this EVER happening. Snakes can accidentally (or, if provoked, intentionally) kill you... but they don't eat people. Ever. As I said before, it's not even worthy of discussion, so please quit with the stupid myths.

To the dog lovers: I don't think you should get rid of your dogs. I think dogs are great. I was simply illustrating a point that snakes aren't the threat they're made out to be. Dogs are natural predators, snakes naturally flee. It is stastically much more likely for your dog (cute, old Golden Retriever or not) to turn on you than it is for my snake to turn on me if we're both treating them right, but both are statistically extremely rare and only one gets blown up by the media (unless it's a pit bull, they pounce on those stories too).

To the person that said "if your snake comes in my yard, you're legally liable," you're talking about a civil case, not a criminal case. Of course you could sue if my snake injured you. I never contested that. I contested the theory that America should take away YET ANOTHER freedom because of overzealous, undereducated worriers that don't have a tight grip on reality. Don't make it a criminal offense, you can sue me if my snakes harm you (though they won't). Much like children and dogs, snakes may turn out with behavioral issues if they're raised by bad people. My snakes weren't.

only one gets blown up by the media (unless it's a pit bull, they pounce on those stories too).

So true - just last week, for example, the media ran with a story about a "pit bull" that killed a child and injured three adults in Oregon -- only problem was, the dog was NOT a pit bull at all. The sensationalism came to an abrupt halt once the breed was clarified, it became a non-story.

As to regulating, legalizing/outlawing, etc -- since the owner of this snake had already failed to obey existing law, what makes creating further legislation seem like a good preventative measure?

The facts indicate this was obviously not 100 per cent preventable.

Yes it WAS 100 % preventable...take the snakes out of the house. If you know it has escaped its housing before, and you have a toddler running around, that means either restrain the snake with a lock and key (or let a friend keep it until you are able to secure it properly) or give it to a pet store. It was completely preventable.

Purnell Meagre Jr.
The facts indicate this was obviously not 100 per cent preventable.

Ignorant comment. It was 100% preventable (i.e. locking the lid). I think you're confusing 'preventable' with 'impossible'.

What facts do you speak of that shows this wasn't preventable?

ellicottcity - The idea that something can be 100 per cent safe is a peculiarly American concept. I can think of a thousand different scenarios in which a snake might make itsr way out of a locked cage - if you can't imagine that then you are without imagination.

So you take the snake outside and it comes in thru the foundation and eats you kid. did you prevent it by taking it outside. What it can't happen? ya it can't right up until it does. I don't disagree it was dumb to have a snake in the house. But if stupidity is going to be the law, then every single person should be in jail, including the prosecutor and judge because there is no person who has never done something stupid. and yes this means you!

Purnell - while you can't assure "100% safety", you are held responsible to make all reasonable efforts to provide the utmost safety - and by their own admission, these two people failed to do so.

I was raised on a dairy farm. When i first started milking cows I asked dad which ones kicked. His reply was "they all do!"

These people are playing with fire with their big snakes especially if there's children and pets.

Meagre - please provide me with one plausible scenario where a snake can get out of a fully enclosed locked cage. And, I'll will tell you how it could've been prevented. What does imagination have to do with any of this? Reality trumps imagination. Are you going to tell me that the snake could teleport out of a fully enclosed aquarium with a locked lid or that the locked lid could have a big gaping hole in it. Or the aquarium wall could be so thin that the snake could punch through it. Puhlease. 100% preventable by responsible owners. Obviously, these were not responsible owners.

Just for all you morons out there thinking of getting one of these eating machines, in their NATURAL habitat, adults are well known to eat things as big as a small deer, and attack and occasionally eat small (say under 5 feet) adult humans.

And I so wanted to believe Purnell was just being sarcastic...my bad!

The words "python" and "pet" shouldn't be in the same sentence - regardless of the presence of a toddler.

@ellicotcity - natural disaster (flood, hurricane, tornado) some kids might have broken into the house and either purposely or accidentally released it, the latch cold have been closed but not clicked - the guy might have water boiling on the stove and got distracted while he was putting it away, Enough?

Purnell Meagre Jr.

The facts indicate this was obviously not 100 per cent preventable

Are you an idiot??

@itgranny - great comment. I'd posty more but I've got to go to Church and handle a boomslang or two.

I really never have got the concept of wanting to own a snake as a pet. How in the hell can you play catch with it?

Just don't understand what it is with people wanting to keep wild animals as pets. Snakes, alligators, chimpanzees, sharks, big cats, pirhannas (sp?) are not domesticated animals. Leave them where they belong - in the jungle or water. Pretty stupid having something like this with a young child in the house.

Just one comment about the first sentence in the article - "are accused of allowing their pet python to strangle a 2-year old girl". The first image I got when reading this was the parents standing over the girl's crib, putting the snake in and watching what happened. Apparently not what actually happened. Sensationalism.

The sick irony is they saved the snake but the child died.

People should have the freedom to own exotic animals provided they take adequate care of it and take appropriate steps to minimize the harm it could do. These people didn't really seem to take good precautions to make sure the snake couldn't get out. Also, if it had been fed on time, there probably would never have been a problem. The parents were negligent for not securing the snake and for failing to feed it on time. I wonder how they will feel for the rest of their life, knowing that they could have prevented their child from dying.

tdm...perhaps if they had not teased the hungry snake by draping it around the toddler as if the baby were lunch it would not have happened. These idiots did not get the appropriate permits to own these exotic reptiles. My guess is they never bothered to even read the laws involved in having such reptiles.

From what I read in this story these people were absolutely clueless and had a toy not a pet or a child.

As for people having the right to own certain exotic animals...They can in many places with the proper permits. These permits are issued so that those who attain them are aware of the laws and precautions to take when housing a dangerous exotic animal. These permits assure at least a legal attempt to assure the safety of the people around and the creature.

Not all people should own exotic animals. Just those who are actually committed to taking care of them and taking appropriate steps to "prevent" the harm it can do.

Just so all of you know it is quite possible for a snake to get out of a locked cage. If you don't believe me go look up NYC zoo and cobra escape on google.

@Purnell..you have changed your statement from '100% preventable' to '100% safe'. Those are not the same thing. PREVENTING the snake from being in the house does not assume that the child is 100% SAFE from other dangers.

Folks, pet dogs kill more children every year than both wild and pet snakes combined, and cars and humans kill more children every year than all snakes and all dogs combined.

@skor154: an your point being?

No animal can escape from a proper enclosure. Here's a hint. The pet stores do not offer a proper enclosure. Period. Among my many talents I build them, and mine are designed with the strength and security needed. Have you ever wrestled an excited reptile back into her cage? Snakes and large lizards are all muscle. Pet store enclosures are often made of fabric, and plastic. These will barely restrain a frog. If you are going to get a boa or python (I have neither, I'm a lizard/ amphibian kind of guy) then you have to have a custom made enclosure, with proper bar spacing and latching. Otherwise, your snake has run of the house. And if you have a toddler, that's unacceptable.

@ellicotcity - natural disaster (flood, hurricane, tornado) some kids might have broken into the house and either purposely or accidentally released it, the latch cold have been closed but not clicked - the guy might have water boiling on the stove and got distracted while he was putting it away, Enough?

So, you really think you proved your point with these scenarios?
1) "natural disaster". Please. But, I'll bite. If a natural disaster freed a snake from its confinement, I'm assuming the parents would be awoken by the same natural disaster in which case the child would be safe from the snake. Or, everyone is killed by the natural disaster.
2) "some kids might have broken into the house and either purposely or accidentally released it". Seriously? Since you're letting your imagination run wild, so will I. This can be prevented by an alarm system for the house or use a combo lock instead of a latch.
3) "The latch could have been closed but not clicked." The way to prevent this from happening is making sure it clicked when putting away a snake that can kill your baby if you knew this was how it locked .
4) "the guy might have water boiling on the stove and got distracted while he was putting it away". The way to prevent this is to not get distracted while putting away a snake that can kill your baby.

Now back to reality. The mother of all preventable measures - don't friggin own a python that can kill a small child when you have a small child. Or, simply put the snake in a separate closed room (e.g. a closet). Still not sure why you don't think this child's death was 100% preventable.

Here comes skor154 again with his anti-dog crusade. I'm sorry did one too many dogs hump you when you were a child or perhaps someone's pet doggie pi@#ed in your cornflakes.

Dogs also help blind people see, disabled people live normal lives, they sniff out bombs-thereby saving numerous lives, they sniff out drugs. They SAVE far more lives than they take. You truly are ridiculous.

Purnell Meagre Jr. this was, in fact, 100% preventable. Want to know how I know? I've prevented it already! I've owned Burmese pythons, Ball Pythons, and Red-tailed Boas and I can tell you, beyond doubt, using safety pins to peg a quilt down over the tank is NOT the way to prevent it. It starts by having a secure enclosure. Snakes this large should not be kept in tanks. Burmese Pythons can grow to over 13 feet long and weigh over 200 lbs. You don't keep an animal that big in a glass tank.

I am not a professional herpetologist but I have kept and raised snakes for over ten years at one point and not once did the snake "escape". Snakes don't "escape". They don't have the mental capacity to "escape". Snakes are let out, either accidentally or on purpose. As a snake owner you don't allow yourself to be distracted while putting the animal away. You don't allow yourself to not finish clicking the latch. It's a known issue and if you have any respect for the animal you are keeping, you pay attention to what you are doing and don't play around.

The implication that this is anything but the sole fault and responsibility of the pet owners is laughable. As has been mentioned above, there is no ability to form intent in a snake. As an owner it is your responsibility to care for the animal correctly.

Demar - I'm not anti-dog, having owned many over the course of my life, but I am anti-vicious breeds.

Statistics don't lie. There are breeds that are far-and-away leaders in attacks / killings of humans. Don't ban all breeds, just the ones that ALWAYS come to the surface when speaking of attacks.

Pit's are not used by blind people. You know what would happen if a blind lady stumbled over a dog she couldn't see, hurting the dog accidentally... This makes a supposition that the dog would attack - perhaps he would - perhaps he wouldn't... But isn't this how most attacks are initiated? Unintentional, perceived acts of aggression by certain breeds of dogs that trigger a negative response?

Guide dogs must be from breeds that are predictable. Breeds with a 'normally' temperate disposition. Breeds that are not prone to attack because kids want to pet the 'cute doggie' and a blind person might not be able to spot an aggressive posture by a protective or unpredictable animal.

What is 'adequate' care for an animal? Any animal deserves not only food, water and shelter, but exercise space, bathing/grooming, and sunlight. Depending upon the species, social interaction or companionship may be important. The details change for different types of animals.
I have met a lot of people who are giving their animal adequate care. If they can not always able to do each, but are gracious enough to be giving an animal a home on limited funds, then so be it.
But I have often met people who keep an animal around, seem to find something about it to be an inconvenience, and just do not want to do one or more of these things for it at all.

Henry - thanks for the post - I doubt that your snakes will escape - wasn't there a cobra that escaped from the Bronx Zoo about three months ago? I imagine that they also followed all reasonable procedures. 100 per cent just doesn't exist in matters like this - in most things 99.9 is OK - when there's a baby involved 99 per cent doesn't work. My German Shepard went from being an inside dog to an outside dog after the birth of my daughter. He'd never bitten anyone but I was extremely concerned that he might look at her as competition and do something bad. He probably wouldn't have but I couidn't take the chance.

So, wait. By placing your dog outside, are you saying there still is a .01% that it can bite your daughter? Or, 100% chance that it won't bite your daughter.

By your definition, there is still a .01% chance your baby will get bitten by your dog and, according to you 'when there's a baby involved 99% doesn't work'. So, why do you still have the dog if you're concerned? Getting rid of it ensures there is a 100% chance that your baby does not get bitten by that same dog. In other words, 100% preventable.

Concerned one - since you want to use the guide/assistance example, it is important to note two things - 1) pits are actually used as assistance dogs, 2) GSDs are often grouped with pits in the "vicious dog" category and yet they are used as guide animals. Using your logic, GSDs (at one time THE breed used for guide purposes) would have been excluded.

@ellicottcity - I'd like to introduce you to a latin friend of mine - reductio ad absurdum - you guys would get along great..

@ellicot - my daughter's now 19 and the dog has been dead for about fifteen years - so there is truly a 100 per cent chance my daughter is safe. Peace.

@ Meagre

Good one. I'm so hurt. You got me there.

Just admit it. You're wrong and you know it. I don't care how old your daughter is and how long your dog has been dead, that wasn't the point but whatever. You have yet to prove how this tragedy was not preventable. We're talking about a snake. Not some intelligent life form that can work it's way out of confinement. It's a snake. Easy to prevent it from escaping and killing your child for responsible people. And you keep saying 'safe' when you started off with 'preventable'. Two different things. Which is it?

Exotic species should all be illegal.

I'm not sure snakes make great pets. I understand dogs because people can play with dogs and love them until they defecate on the rug. I could understand having a cat and maybe an aquarium but snakes seem like they belong in zoos and the wild.

If you must own a snake for a pet, get a native species. Corn snakes are popular in the pet trade. They are native all over the US, easy to raise, docile, and don't get large enough to be a threat to anything bigger than a rat. Additionally, they come in a variety of beautiful colors. I have 5 of them. If they escape, no problem, since they are a native species.

Usually it's the bravado types that get big snakes, exotics, etc....

We have cats and dogs that are dying, being put down everyday in the US yet someone needs the bragging rights to have something deadly and/or associated with scary, macho whatever.

I prefer animal companions that can love me back, but since this isn't about preference, I second that these types of snakes should be outlawed since stewardship of them appears to be abominal and risky for the rest of the population.

At the least, tag the snakes and make anyone that wants to own one go through extensive course training and updating CEC's to maintain licensure. Both they and the snakes need to be registered. Everyones safety is at risk, and if my neighbor is some macho DA, he's infringing on MY rights by having one of these.

I think they get these big snakes to compensate for their own "little snake" if you know what I mean.

I don't think people realize the black market aspect...who says that he was able to keep it legally?

Personally, I think the snakes are fine. It's the parents who should be taken out of the house.

I agree with Tina-293371 - it is a compensation issue.

By that logic, more people are killed annually by dogs than pythons, so why is ownership and importation of them allowed?

Fr8bil, when you’re getting your information from Animal Planet, you have to consider the source. I saw their expose on the Afrock/Burm SUPER PYTHON and it was a joke. It’s alarmist drivel to drum up viewership and ratings. Do you also believe that all reality shows are 100% real? Same thing with stories like this, the media eats this up. It’s "exciting news" and gets people talking and fuels their “Weird News” sections. The “hundreds of thousands” of Burms in the Everglades is a fallacy, and they are dying off nicely due to the winters. Do a little research.

I’ve been in the reptile industry for 15 years. Whether you love or hate snakes, casting broad strokes on something that you know nothing about is dangerous. Legislation under ignorance even worse.

Snakes make great pets, just like dogs, IF you are a responsible human being. It’s fairly evident that this couple did not fall into what any of us would call a “responsible pet owner”, nor would they be considered a “responsible human owner”. The fact of the matter is that life is calculated risk, they chose poorly, and they will pay the price. It’s already illegal to kill your child, so why take it out on the rest of the hundreds of thousands of people who enjoy having a snake for a pet, and do it responsibly?

You can’t legislate poor judgment, and this was no “accident”. It was irresponsible parenting from the get-go. Plain and simple. The people who should be punished are the parents, not me. Not my business. Not my freedoms.

Can you really argue that invasive species are good for this country?? You are speaking out from your own financially driven self interest.

You mean in the wild? No. I'm hopeful that all of the Burms in this country in the wild are killed off. I'd do it myself if I were closer.

In the pet trade? Yes, they're good for this country. Remember, most dog species we have are "Imported".

Sadly Aaron, you know that the pet trade is the main cause of animal invasive species in the wild....they dont get a passport and fly here on their own.

And yet, Babykiller Anthony walked.... Go figure.

I saw a show about "pet" snakes a couple of years ago. They were discussing how so many pet snakes end up being dumped because people get tired of them or they get too big to handle or whatever, and how much trouble they can cause, especially if they are not native to the area in question. The experts interviewed about the topic said that snakes do not constitute a "pet" in the true sense of the word. They do not bond with you, they never develop "feelings" for you - as long as they are fed, they really don't care. They could slither off tomorrow and be perfectly happy without their owner. They are strictly for show. And people keep them in enclosures that are not big enough to accommodate their needs, and that is cruel. How would you like to spend your entire life curled up in what amounts to a closet?

Snakes are very good for their NATIVE environments - let's keep them there, not in ours and not outside of their natural realm.

As far as comparing dogs to snakes, dogs have been domesticated for the purpose of spending their lives with humans. Snakes will never be domesticated.

As for Aaron's post that "Snakes make great pets, just like dogs" - I have this word of advice for you: If you let your pet python sleep on the bed with you at night you better make damn sure you say your prayers.

"Domestication" and "pet" are two separate things.

If I were to anthropomorphize, my snakes likely "enjoy" their lives. They have no natural predators, are free from wild-borne disease, and get to eat, sleep, and breed. Having been bred in captivity anyway, they don't know of a "wild", they have cages plenty large enough, and are capable of doing all the things they do naturally. They've never escaped into the "wild". As an owner, I take all of this very seriously, we must do well by the animals we keep. For the most part, the majority of keepers do.

Obviously these two idiots are a far cry from the typical owners. And they'll pay for it. And in this country, the responsible people end up paying for the idiots mistakes. For whatever reason, this country likes to legislate to the least common denominator, and eschew our freedoms one at a time. That way, we're less likely to notice.

JHoward, the only time they come out is for inspection, cleaning, or to move them to a different cage for breeding. The rest of the time they are secure in their environments. Although I do have one inquisitive little scamp that seems to like hanging out while I watch TV.

You completely missed my point about the difference between pythons and dogs as pets.

Sorry, Aaron, I respectfully disagree. Exotic animals of any kind should not be kept as pets. Non-domesticated animals are dangerous; for that matter, domesticated ones can be dangerous, and they're bred to be with humans. And why have have a "pet" that does not bond with you and couldn't care less about your existence? (Perhaps you can help me with that one?) Even "warm, fuzzy" exotics are dangerous - large cats that maul their owners , chimps that rip people's faces off, etc. You can have no reasonable expectations about their behavior. Even ones that can be and are "trained" have seriously injured or killed their handlers.

FR and Aaron, quick, quick. How many children are killed in this nation each year by pet pythons and pet snakes, and how many children do pet dogs kill every year? Surprise, pet dogs kill vastly more children every year than all snakes combined, both pet and wild.

Do you place a child in a vehicle. Surprise, vastly many more children die in car wrecks than all snakes and dogs combined. And humans kill more children and other humans each year than all else.

Should parents go to trial if their child dies in a car collison where no drinking is involved? If you are a child advocate, keep your children away from dogs and cars, first! Einsteins, snakes are way down the list!

Why do you think they won't let you bring exotic plants/seeds through customs? ANYTHING that is potentially harmful to the native environment should be illegal, whether or not it's in a cage. You can't control how individuals take care of these things, and since it's not a constitutional right, why allow it at all?

Pigs for example, became feral when they were brought over by early Spanish explorers and caused a great disruption of the existing farming culture. Just one of the many things the white man #&*@ed up for the Native Americans. You think we are immune to something like that happening now? Think again! Environments change, they don't build up strength over the years.

Ever see that episode of the Simpsons where the frogs overtook Australia? You can't just trust that people will prevent them from escaping, thriving and taking over.

Sure these parents are dumb as rocks and are ultimately responsible, but a python's dangerous instict is just one of the reasons we should not be trying to keep it as a pet.

Skor -

Quick, quick. How many car accidents or injuries caused by animals don't prompt an investigation by the police? Answer: NONE!!!!

How the heck do you think they found out about the parents' using safety pins and a quilt for a lock?

If a parent in a car wreck caused said car wreck you can bet your a$$ they are going in front of a judge.

If a parent had an aggressive breed of dog, like a pitbull that has a history of being unruly...same result.

No statistics that you come up will be a logical defense for irresponsible pet owners!!

@CSH: Intelligent discussion, I'm all for that.

I'm deathly allergic to cats. And I don't have the day to day time for a dog. When I was young, my friend caught a snake and gave it to me. I was fascinated that an animal could be such an efficient predator and survive without any limbs. The snake he gave me was a gravid female garter snake that dropped 29 babies a month after I had her. Ever since then, I have been captivated with reptiles. So that's how it started. And I'm kind of a science/bio nerd anyway, so here we are. :)

"Exotic animals of any kind should not be kept as pets" is the statement that drives me up a wall. Who defines "exotic"? Where does it end? Just because you can't understand it, or don't care for it, doesn't mean that the government should legislate against people who enjoy it. Because you have that opinion, really, should you be able to tell me that I can't? Quite frankly I hate cats of any sort anyway, but I'm not going to infringe on your right to own one. Think prohibition. Think of the United States as a "Free" country.

I don't expect warm and fuzzy from my snakes, but they are still my pets and I love them just the same. They don't need to care about me, that's not what I'm getting out of the relationship. It's not the same relationship as a dog or cat, or even a rat or bird. But that's not why I have them. Think of it more like a beautiful aquarium: you can't take them out and hold them, but you can become attached to them. With the snakes, it's enjoyable to have them, feed them, try to create conditions for them to breed and produce eggs, try to incubate them properly to get babies, and then maybe at the end of the day sell a few to pay for your expenses (there are a lot, and I'm well in the hole, but it's a hobby I love).

By the way, the ones I keep are not Burms or Retics or anything that gets that large. I don't want that responsibility, and I'm not equipped to keep one of them at this point in time. Those would just be way too much work for me.

Remember, adult "pythons" can range anywhere from a couple of feet to 25+ feet, there are all shapes and sizes. Well, mostly just one shape.

Skor - Per capita, there are considerably fewer snake owners than dog owners. You can't make an apples-to-apples comparison on dog vs. snake killings unless you level the playing field in data relationship.

I do agree with one of your points (although I think you were leaning toward sarcasm). I wouldn't mind seeing vicious breeds of dogs banned. I amso tired of seeing pit bulls and rottweilers killing people. I understand there are other breeds that kill, but lets play the numbers and get rid of the known problems. If you want to argue how it is your "RIGHT" to own a killing breed, it will fall on deaf ears. I will not be swayed.

We choose to own animals. We can have them, or we can choose to NOT have them. An automobile is another story. It is essential in today's world to be mobile. How many of us can walk to the grocery, the doctor's, to work, to mom and dad's house??? Even public transportation falls into your argument. You can't compare essentials with options.

Alan Pugh: Yes, snakes ARE predators, especially pythons. I never said they are generally predatory on humans, although very large ones have been known to eat very large animals as well as humans. Even snake owners put LIVE food in for their snakes because that's the way they like it.

I never said that I think people should not be allowed to have snakes as pets, but I think the stupidity in having an ill-contained predator in the house that is possibly going to harm your child is pretty obvious at this point. The snake DID kill the child.

As to dogs and car accidents killing more children than snakes, well, I think that one should be obvious as well. There are a heck of a lot more pet dogs and cars than pet snakes. If dog owners were responsible about how they handle their dogs (i.e., not get/breed/raise their dogs to be attack dogs), and car owners were as responsible as they could be when driving (i.e., not driving drunk, or while texting, sexting, etc.), there would be less, but the sheer numbers are still going to be higher since there are more of them. In general, dogs do not prey on people, or even expect to routinely catch and kill their own food.

J howard, your point is taken. The fact is that pit bulls kill infinitely more children than do snakes in the home. The most dangerous snakes to humans are generally venomous domestic species in the wild, eg rattlesnakes, etc. This notion that snakes are somehow evil seems to emanate from the same folks who think dinosaurs and man lived side by side.

To Robin Steele-

I really do believe that there are infinitely more pit bulls in homes as compared to pythons. Poisonous snakes have nothing to do with this subject - it is about having a python, relatively un-restrained, live in a house with a small child. A pit bull has to be taught how to be a killer - a snake is a predator and this comes naturally for it's surviva.l

I have no idea why you mention dinosaurs and men ever livied side by side. I do, however, believe in the Tooth Fairy.

JH, it was meant to be a cut at the bible thumpers who think that Jesus predates humanity, among other silly things. Numerous dogs, not just pit bulls are specifically bred to kill, you like them because they are cute. I think snakes are cute, but then I fell the same way about most theropods as well. Wild animal pet attacks happen very rarely, pit bull attacks happen routinely. Even when you crunch the numbers, I feel safer with the herps any day. And lets get real, my dog ate my baby seems like a lame excuse for anyone.

"The dingo's ate the baby"

Sorry. I had to.

You can't expect that to just pass unanswered, do you?

Oh, and to add to the conversation: I think any animal can attack. Precautions should be taken under any circumstance and children should be taught caution and respect.

Robin Steele --
We obviously think along different lines and, to be perfectly honest about it, I don't understamd your reasoning. You have gone from keeping pythons in the house to dinosaurs walking beside humans, to Bible Thumpers, to Jesus predating humanity and finally saying that you think snakes are cute.
Like I said: We think along different lines.
Adios

They bloody well should be.

Snakes as pets in the hands of someone who is unable or unwilling to provide proper care (using proper handling and containment to prevent consumption of non-food items is part of that) are never a good idea - that does not, however, mean that they cannot be maintained as pets in a manner equally as safe as any other common pet animal.

That's for certain, especially after admitting the snake had gotten out of it's cage several times. Anyone who has handled snakes of this size know how powerful, and consequently, dangerous they are. Criminal negligence at the absolute minimum.

Absolutely right. Plain and simple. These two are idiots who were complacent when it came to the proper care and housing of this snake and now a little girl is dead because of it. Got out several times before, large snake and you use blanket with clothes pins to keep it in? Give me a break. I know where one of those clothes pins needs to be put and left. In my opinion they deserve everything they get thrown at them. Clear example of a lack of personal responsibility and common sense - both being cancers that continue to eat away at our country. Two more people to add to the not allowed to reproduce group. I understand accidents happen and we all have done stupid things but this was easily prevented under any normal circumstances. Does this mean people shouldn't be allowed to own these pets, no, but clearly there need to be tighter rules and regulations regarding who can own them, buyer providing evidence he has proper means and understanding to care for the snake, and the number and species that can be sold; that relating to the invasive nature and issues they are having with them in Florida and like areas. Also, it appears fines need to be increase for those selling and buying these snakes illegally. It is time for some common sense and personal responsibility here people. This didn't have to happen and I hope we all can learn from it.

I think the python weighs 50lbs and the 2 year old weighed 22.

How is it that you cannot read. It was the snake that weighed 50 pounds.

Actually, other reports have the snake weight much less and reported to be in a "malnourished" state. Seems they weren't capapble of caring for children or pets.

There's a link above to a report stating that they didn't have jobs and couldn't afford to feed it or lock it up properly.

It's a recipe for disaster. If you can't afford to feed a pet, especially such a large one, sell it or give it away. Most animals become more aggressive the hungrier they are.

What a horrific way to go.

In other words, Republicans.

Exactly...and Rush Lardbaugh lives there as well.

Thanks beerjoust and the rest of you for making this child's death political fodder.

No problem

Can someone please take this snake (if it's still living) over to Rush's house and turn it loose.

Beerjoust, You need to grow up. I don't eat corn dogs, I don't live in Florida, and I don't live in a trailer! I live in Michigan, owner of my own house, and work in an auto factory building parts for GM cars. My husband is a Robotics Welding Engineer. We are middle class making good money paying our own bills being responsible citizens just like you. We are full blown NASCAR fans! We see many people at the track that make way more money than us just by looking at their RV! So YOU need to educate yourself about what kind of people are NASCAR fans. I guess ignorance is bliss!

This is why a lot of us are turned off of politics. The hatred spewed by the "true believers" across the political spectrum seems to overshadow any human empathy they might have once had.

Yes, just what I look for in an engineer, somebody who is entertained by watching things go round and round and round and round.

Can ANYBODY explain the entertainment value of that, at least if you're older than a 6 month old.

You obviously don't watch NASCAR. The engineering behind all those cars is massive!

They go round and round really, really fast.

The worst thing about Florida is the state's licence plates. What were they thinking?

Days of Thunder is a good movie. That is the extent of my love for NASCAR.

NO I don't watch nascar, I have better things to do, like pick my nose.

And as for the "engineering", well, don't feel too bad if I'm not impressed by all the improvements made on a piece of technology that's about 160 years old (first working internal combustion gas engines were built in the mid 1850's and ran off methane from swamps and waste gasses from coal oil and coke production - see, I know my technology AND it's history too)

And like I said, if watching big noisy things running in circles using mid 19th century technology is what entertains you, well, I weep for for the future of the US.

That's fine, you have your entertainment, we have ours. I was offended by beerjoust's comment all NASCAR fans are low life trailer trash sitting around eating corn dogs. In truth all fans I've ever been around make very good money, a majority of NASCAR fans are not trailer trash.

Corndogs are good, Nascar is boring (in my opinion)...:)

NascarNut

You should turn off the Nascar channel when you're posting. Beerjoust said FLORIDA was full of corndog-eating blah blah blah, not ALL Nascar fans are corndog-eating blah blah blah. Seems you have an image problem in your own mind. On the other hand, your reading comprehension combined with your job explains why we are so far behind in American auto tech.

LOL Madness! I used to eat them on occasion but found out about the cancer causing preservative in them and all processed meats, Sodium Nitrate. So I avoid them as much as I can.

They are evil...no doubt. But I am a little ashamed to admit that if they are available, I will eat them....cover up the nitrate with lots of mustard!!

I like looking at the sponsers' logos on the cars. The one I like best, so far, was the one w/ Little Debby on the hood. Big ad---took up the entire hood--- they must have paid a lot of $$$ for it. Can't remember the car or driver, but I remember the Little Debby car.

Yeah, the cars are pretty cool with the colors and logos and the whole thing is quite a scene....but the racing itself just doesnt grab my attention.

This is no place for a political "discussion." A child is dead, for crying out loud. Show some restraint and respect here.

Actually, if you can get things to go round and round consistently, that is a sign of good engineering!

This thread faded fast, didn't it? LOL.

Is Florida going to be the new state of Southern California? Just asking.

Florida didn't allow it to be their pet, it wasn't registered. Perhaps if you had a brain you would know why Anthony wasn't convicted since that is your real problem at the moment. You are lowering the IQ level of whatever state, province or country you inhabit.

"Is Florida going to be the new state of Southern California? Just asking."

No, it is currently Southern New York.

F Walsh It sound like "if you had a brain" and/or just some common sense (I.Q.) you would know why Anthony should have been easily convicted ! Prideful & arrogant "smart" persons, who outsmart themselves, are ruining this country.

Florida is full of rednecks ... California keeps all the rednecks in the central valley, but Southern California not so much.

Trial in FloriDUH in the same courthouse as the Anthony trial. Let's hope this jury gets it right.

Florida is full of rednecks...

Not the Keys. I love the Keys.

Old Sarge speaks the truth!

I see John up there knocking the people that grow the vegetables and produce he buys grocery store.

It's funny how you liberals, John, are like hogs eating acorns and never looking up to see where they've come from.

Amen Bezoar and Narollah.

I disagree. Pythons do not need to be imported. They are now an invader in the everglades, and an environmental disaster. People are idiots, and you can't limit ownership to responsible people. Even with a licence, they will still get out. Just because someone enjoys something doesn't mean it should be permitted. Public safety comes first.

Colleen. I disagree with you. I think wild animals should be left wild. For an animal to be caged and its movements limited to a small cage just isn't what nature intended. Granted, there are many responsible pet owners who do everything right and their pets never become a menace, but is it fair to an animal, who has previously had freedom of movement, to be stuck in a small space? Even if a home were inspected as a condition of purchasing the animal, when people get tired of pets or fail to care for them, the pet suffers and accidents happen.

Colleen- These people were actually REQUIRED to have a license for this pet. They DID NOT get one and refused to care for the animal properly. Exotic pet licenses are only for people who actually get their pet LEGALLY! Which these two obviously did not do. Which as a very tragic result a helpless and innocent child was lost.

JohnKnows

If you think a license would have prevented this, you obviously DON'T know.

Almost all Burmese pythons, as well as other large constrictors around these days are captive bred. No albinos make it in the wild, they stick out like a sore thumb.

Old Sarge is right all on points.

If you like the snake so much, leave it in it's own habitat; with protections.

Old sarge is wrong on all points. The fundamental excuse used by the progressives who want to eliminate all freedoms in this country is the notion that something has to benefit everybody to be permitted by the ruling party. They should outlaw sweetarts, cheeseburgers, first and foremost though, we have to ban baseball. Baseball accidents take around 40 lives per year. Let's do away with football, too many spinal cord injuries. So on and so on. If you, old sarge one served and fought so hard for our freedoms, what has happened to make you fight so hard against them now?

Mike- Where in my post did I say it would have prevented it?!?! I simply replied to colleen in regards to her saying these pets should be licensed, also I compounded that most people who LEGALLY get these pets are more responsible to these two. I Implied that a combination of these problems resulted in the death of a child. Never once did I state that a license would have stopped this from happening. Take a reading comprehension class before posting again please. BTW I stand by my name!LOL!!

Yeah, go figure! I have a corn snake that's a fraction of the size of that Burmese and she could've easily gotten out of that enclosure! What a bunch of idiots. It's too bad a child had to pay for their stupidity.

No, and you can't stop them from re-producing, but you can keep their children from living long enough to do so.

They weren't married. He was the mother's "boyfriend." Too many children die young as the result of the mother having a brainless boyfriend. It happens in our area too frequently. Like one poster said, "you can't fix stupidity."

So I guess that makes the mother just as brainless by default for choosing the boyfriend in the first place.

Its a tragedy, but the baby was probably saved from a life of abuse from her "handlers".

I can fix stupid, put them behind bars for the rest of their natural born lives, they we don't have deal with stupid at least.

Alternatively, to save tax payer money, they could simple be allowed to enjoy their favorite pets at the local zoo. Just put them in the cage with Burmese python or Anaconda...at feeding time.

And frequent random drug tests for those on welfare...........

Funny you should say that - both adults had failed a drug test w/in two months of the child's death.

Bohica, it was on the news. They were high in the back room trying to make another welfare baby...............

Why should people on welfare have pets of any kind? And why do they walk around with tattoos? These things are luxuries. Welfare is supposed to be for people that need it. I've seen too many with tattoos, couch purses, exotic pets, you name it but can't feed themselves, their children, pay rent.

Fixtheproblem - you are my hero today.

I am all for helping people who need it - my husband and I donate to causes all the time - but few things tick me off more than watching someone in the grocery store pay for items with their food stamps, then whip out a wad of $20. bills to pay for cigarettes, soda, chips, etc. I wish I had a $20. bill for every time I've seen that. I would be a rich woman by now.

These two people have no business with a child or a "pet." How about spending some of that money on some birth control??

10 clicks each for each of the last 2 comments!. I particularly don't keep snakes because of the food costs. Personally I like snakes. I enjoy handling them ect. And I operate a business. So once again there is a "family", where everyone gets their own surname and lives on the dole, makes you think about the hierarchy of the human race.

Probably a lot more so long as our society continues to enable women to leave the father of that child while giving the woman custody by default. For far too long has our law held that a woman is just inherently a good mother despite many, many, MANY cases where women prove they are exactly not what the law purports them to be.

Honestly though I do take exception to the way you phrased your question. You make it sound as though the mother's boyfriend is the one responsible when quite clearly the mother is the most responsible. Without her say so the boyfriend wouldn't have been there. In that case she proved herself a narcissist and took her own happiness and well being over that of her child.

A lion inherently eats people. If a mother puts her child around a lion and it gets eaten it is hardly the lion's fault. It is time our society stars holding the MOTHER accountable because it is entirely through her action that things like this happen.

I totally agree. These animals don't belong in private homes.

On the subject of abusive boyfriends, I blame the mother for putting her children in harms way.

If she wants to live with an abusive jerk, fine. But to subject a child to said jerk is criminal.

Yes, Dan, everything is the woman's fault. Do you feel better now?

Indigo it wasn't about condemning women and the fact that you twisted what I said into that shows you have ulterior motives. I find it pretty shocking that people here are throwing more guilt at the boyfriend than the mother.

It's as if people here are saying that by accepting a woman with a child as your girlfriend you suddenly have obligations to that child whereas the woman is allowed to accept any old POS as her boyfriend without regard to how that might hurt their children.

Dan- I totally agree! I have seen where the mother is living with a drug dealer/pimp boyfriend with her kids but the court won't let the dad have custody because there isn't a record of harm to the child?!?!? So according to our system in order to take a child from a mother the child has to be hurt first!?!?!? Does anyone else think this is a bad idea? I believe whoever holds the BEST INTEREST for the child should have the child. If the mother is going to have POS boyfriends that are begging for trouble and the dad has a steady job than the child should go to the dad, and of course vice versa depending on the situation. The courts side with the mother 99.9% of the time without ACTUALLY investigating the situations.

We let anyone own a gun in this country. I would say that a gun is more dangerous in the wrong hands than a python. I don't think we should over legislate gun ownership or what sort of pets people can buy. If they are willing to live with the risks associated with it, then let them do what they want, its just sad that a little kid had to die due to the parents stupidity, but if not a python, it probably would have been something else.

Matt thats not practical , first off we dont let "anyone" own guns. Also you act like the only people hurt by this is the parents? what about the Grandparents and cousins etc etc. Dont they get any legal recourse for the death of a relative?

Dan...twisted absolutely nothing. You stated:

1) society enables the woman to 'leave' the man and they keep the child as default. There is absolutely nothing saying how or why the woman was a single parent.

2) Clearly (in your mind) the mother is more responsible for this tragedy than the boyfriend because according to you she put her needs above her child. Again, your 'coloring' of the situation is evident as there is no proof of that. He may have been a positive influence on a child who did not have a father figure. Do I know that? Nope, but neither do you.

3) Your assertion that it is CLEARLY the mother's fault even though the snake was not hers. Would most have demanded not to have the snake there? Probably, but your bias shows when you abdicate the boyfriend of any fault at all. They are both at fault, and both charged which is how it should be. Just as she understood there was a child present, so did he.

bluebird lady 828

I totally agree. These animals don't belong in private homes.

No, they should live in section 8????

@ Cole, I would argue that yes, we let just about anyone over a certain age buy a gun. If a raving schizophrenic (sp?) can buy a gun and go Rambo at a public event, then yes, I think gun laws are pretty lax in this country. My point was that we let people that probably shouldn't own them, have guns, which I say are more dangerous to people than a python is. If you want to make the argument that pythons are more dangerous to people than guns, please, be my guest.

Well stated Happster.

Inbreeding should be banned too, it creates a breed of rednecks that keep getting stupid in every successive generations. You cant fix stupid, but you fix the inbreeding issue...

Sad and awful what that baby must have gone through while these morons were busy sleeping...it hurts folks, just thinking about it.

Nothing in this world is worse than cruelty to children especially that young...if you think cruelty to animals is bad, wait till you come across an abused child....it will break your soul like nothing else ever will!!!

Some of the worst abuses we have come across are the ones where a divorced woman with children moves in with some new guy...not to generalize but this STEPFATHER thing...especially an abusive one............

It's like a fishing expedition...

Thank you for providing a voice of reason. Many are unaware of the unintended results of broad stroke legislation and labels.

@marineSgt: Very well put. Parakeets were on that list too.

You can't legislate stupidity. We don't need bans levied against the responsible exotics keepers. It's already against the law to kill your child, accidentally or otherwise.

Hey sargie, you DO realize where your safe tropical fish come from? From reefs that are being damaged in part because selfish t--ts like YOU need to have something shiny to look at.

Here's a thought, get a DVD of a fish tank and run it on your boobtube, and leave the damn tropical fish exactly where the hell they belong, IN THE TROPICS!

ryoushi --
"Tropical" fish are not coming from reefs, "tropical" fish in the pet trade are freshwater fish. They are also bred in captive situations for the most part. Yes, saltwater fish are often wild caught, but your comment just serves to highlight, yet again, the problem with making sweeping generalizations.

You mean guppies and goldfish? Conceded. But, most tropical fish enthusiasts want the REAL thing, and that trade IS damage reefs and fish populations all over the tropics, as well as introducing potentially runaway invasive species into places like south Florida.

So I state it again, get a DVD and leave the damn fish alone.

Reefs are being wrecked, but I assure you it has more to do with rising gloabal sea water temps, the acidification of the water, and harmful trawling practices than with people getting exotic fish from them.

The main point is that in actuality, only dogs and cats occupy the same ecological niche as human beings. They are comfortable in any type of human habitat. Dogs, and sometimes some cats, enjoy riding in cars. They sleep in beds with 'their' humans. Some people have taught them to sit at tables and eat with them; though I myself would not do this last 'pasttime'.

Cats are technically not domestic. They are classified as predators. While dogs are domesticated, many breeds are not domestic.

Ryoushi, fresh water tropicals are typically wild caught, there is a huge number of breeders and hatcheries which supply the marine pet fish trade. Facts are nice things. Keep it in mind for later.

They won't have ANY trouble seating a jury though. Apparently NOBODY in Florida is smart enough to figure out how to get out of jury duty.

Bush used to talk about the enemies of freedom. Are you an enemy of freedom, or do you just think everyone is dumber than you?