wanna be drummer Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Think about that statement next time you buckle up The problem with "potential" is that its in the eye of the beholder and too easy to manipulate. As far as seatbelts go, it shouldn't be a law that you have to wear one. It's stupid not too, but refusing not to make sure you're as safe as can be should not be a crime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dzldoc Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 The problem with "potential" is that its in the eye of the beholder and too easy to manipulate. As far as seatbelts go, it shouldn't be a law that you have to wear one. It's stupid not too, but refusing not to make sure you're as safe as can be should not be a crime You sound so much like me when I was younger. Your views will change over time Life is full of potentials, one reason we purchase insurance I do understand your point though, it just doesn't fit reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 You sound so much like me when I was younger. Your views will change over time Life is full of potentials, one reason we purchase insurance I do understand your point though, it just doesn't fit reality. Reality or not, the point is, it's not the government's job to punish us for denying responsibility. Want to survive a car crash? Put your seatbelt on. Common sense. But the government shouldn't be allowed to just use that as an excuse to take more money from the people which it does. Government's don't solve problems, they create them. ~Reality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dzldoc Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Reality or not, the point is, it's not the government's job to punish us for denying responsibility. Want to survive a car crash? Put your seatbelt on. Common sense. But the government shouldn't be allowed to just use that as an excuse to take more money from the people which it does. Government's don't solve problems, they create them. ~Reality Too many stupid people! That's reality! Including politicians! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 In summary, I think that it's alright to argue the point about whether it is constitutional to apply the law after the fact, except that seven years have gone by since the notice of the change in 2002. And you could make an issue over invasion of privacy because the law states that it governs transport. What does invading someone's home have to do with transport across state lines? The fish was kept in a tank in a private home. You could also argue on that point the law should be considered to be void for vagueness if it fails to address the issue of possession or safe disposal in reasonably practical terms that are understandable to the average reasonable person. It's doubtful that a young person buying a pet would have been able to foresee this issue articulated by adult scientists with advanced knowledge of the species. A young person who selects a fish as a pet in a store may not have scientific complexities on his mind when he makes the purchase. It would not be fair to place the same burden on him as someone who had previous knowledge of the law going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouncing~ship Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 So you can't have one as a pet? ehhh...i ve heard stories of guys releasing Parana's into lakes and that ain't funny. im not saying this guy would go do that but, there are people who would. espesialy when you have a country of 350 million people in tough economic times. It is a beautiful looking fish...don't get me wrong. I say if you want one so bad...you have to register and chip it. Just like my dog. (the reason why i say chip it is because it can crawl on land and probably cause some havoc)... i say let the guy keep it(pictures display a thousand words)...but for further cases...lay down the hand of the law baby what i wanna know is how in the hell did this guy obtain a fish like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 ehhh...i ve heard stories of guys releasing Parana's into lakes and that ain't funny. im not saying this guy would go do that but, there are people who would. espesialy when you have a country of 350 million people in tough economic times. It is a beautiful looking fish...don't get me wrong. I say if you want one so bad...you have to register and chip it. Just like my dog. (the reason why i say chip it is because it can crawl on land and probably cause some havoc)... i say let the guy keep it(pictures display a thousand words)...but for further cases...lay down the hand of the law baby what i wanna know is how in the hell did this guy obtain a fish like that? If you let the guy keep the fish, then you must let everyone who possesses such a fish do the same. Sooner or later one of those fish will reproduce in a waterway, thus setting the scene for ecological chaos. Even with a chip it could reproduce before you could ever intervene. The guy probably bought the fish from a tropical fish store that sold them as pets for home aquariums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouncing~ship Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 If you let the guy keep the fish, then you must let everyone who possesses such a fish do the same. Sooner or later one of those fish will reproduce in a waterway, thus setting the scene for ecological chaos. Even with a chip it could reproduce before you could ever intervene. The guy probably bought the fish from a tropical fish store that sold them as pets for home aquariums. your right...but it's nice to let things slide once and a while. especially if this guys emotionally attached to the fish. The guy did go out of his way for its survival. It's sad to say though that this fish is already multiplying in U.S waters...the law states that if you catch one you must destroy it. it is illegal to release it back in the water. I wouldn't complain if this fish migrated naturally but i got this gut feeling that guys are bring'n em in. ohh well...im done with this one...giving me a headache Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted March 3, 2009 Share Posted March 3, 2009 your right...but it's nice to let things slide once and a while. especially if this guys emotionally attached to the fish. The guy did go out of his way for its survival. It is possible that he could donate the fish to a university or to a zoo as long as they have a permit, and it could still survive. Also, I did not notice any language in the law that talked about mere possession of the fish for someone who owned one previous to the law's change to include the fish as a banned species. It's interesting. I was just remembering a few years ago when I was in either a sushi or a Chinese restaurant. I saw an aquarium with only one fish that looked like those shown in the snakehead photos. Snakeheads are so voracious that they would devour all the other fish in the tank. That might explain why the fish I saw was alone in the tank. It probably was a snakehead. I remember gazing at it while I was waiting either to be seated or for my take-out order. Live snakehead fishes or viable eggs can be imported only by permit for scientific, medical, educational, or zoological purposes, or without a permit by Federal agencies solely for their own use; permits will also be required for the interstate transportation of live snakeheads or viable eggs currently held in the United States, for scientific, medical, educational, or zoological purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wanna be drummer Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 He's tried to give it to a zoo and everything, no one wants it. He should be allowed to keep it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 He's tried to give it to a zoo and everything, no one wants it. He should be allowed to keep it. Maybe he could find someone who has a permit to do scientific research on snakeheads and they could work together on the project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouncing~ship Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Maybe he could find someone who has a permit to do scientific research on snakeheads and they could work together on the project. True stories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bouncing~ship Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 It is possible that he could donate the fish to a university or to a zoo as long as they have a permit, and it could still survive. Also, I did not notice any language in the law that talked about mere possession of the fish for someone who owned one previous to the law's change to include the fish as a banned species. It's interesting. I was just remembering a few years ago when I was in either a sushi or a Chinese restaurant. I saw an aquarium with only one fish that looked like those shown in the snakehead photos. Snakeheads are so voracious that they would devour all the other fish in the tank. That might explain why the fish I saw was alone in the tank. It probably was a snakehead. I remember gazing at it while I was waiting either to be seated or for my take-out order. Thank God i know what fresh cut salmon looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternal light Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Thank God i know what fresh cut salmon looks like. Snakehead is considered to be edible. I've suspected this since the beginning of the Crofton saga, but I wasn't able to confirm it until last Thursday. The Yin Yankee Café, a fine restaurant in Annapolis that specializes in Asian and quasi-Asian food, had acquired some snakeheads from a supplier in New York's Chinatown. (Yin Yankee owner Kim Klopcic had jokingly requested some while putting in another order, and was surprised to be asked, "How many?") The chef, Jerry Trice, didn't know the traditional Chinese recipe for snakehead soup, so he adapted a rockfish dish, serving the carnivorous sea creature in banana leaves with a tasty Indonesian curry. Naturally, I had to try this. I wasn't disappointed. The meat was sweet and had a pleasant texture, and it absorbed the sauce's spicy flavor very well. It was a bit on the bony side — OK, it was way over on the bony side — but that's just a matter of trial and error: Trice said he planned to fillet the next batch of snakeheads, thus eliminating the problem, and he is composing several other bone-free recipes as well, including various snakehead-based sushi rolls and a crouton made from the fish's skin. I don't usually hold up Singapore as a model for the United States to follow, but that Asian city-state imports about 1,200 tons of snakeheads a year; according to an Associated Press report, three local fish farms raise it as well. Nor is such appreciation for the fish restricted to Singapore: Across eastern Asia, the snakehead is eaten not just for its flavor but also for its reputed curative properties. I don't know if the latter will stand up in the court of medical science, but I do know that when I went to the Yin Yankee Café, I had a sore throat, and that not long after I left, I didn't. Of course, the soreness was dying down anyway, and I kept sneezing and coughing all weekend, but none of that matters to me. I credit the fish. reason.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.