Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Microchips for Dangerous Animals?

ScuttleMonkey posted about 9 years ago | from the jobs-i-don't-want dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 185

lucabrasi999 writes "CNN is reporting that Japan is moving towards requiring all owners of potentially dangerous animals (such as crocodiles and pythons) to have microchips installed in case the animal gets loose. Apparently there has been a wave of 'wild' animals that have been escaping their captivity. Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Other electrical alternatives (-1, Offtopic)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 9 years ago | (#13800379)

Fun with dangerous animals!
http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/2473/Dog_Gets_ Tasered.html [spikedhumor.com]

A day's late and a dollar short (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800674)

Shitspot(News for Turds, Stuff that Splatters), is becoming outdated as of late.

While it may still be "News for Turds," it no longer "Splatters" so much to the turds it is supposed to be serving.

Fact is that and old turd can readily find the same news days before it ever appears on Shitspot.

Hey CmdrTacoBelch, You and your posse gettin' slack. Wassamatterdude? Getting tired of it all?

Did you know? (0, Troll)

GenKreton (884088) | about 9 years ago | (#13800380)

Did you know that some things are a complete waste of technology and money?

Not to mention I'm sure this all puts us one step closer to having them embedded into people by law. This is just the beta version.

And they called me paranoid!

PETA? (2, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | about 9 years ago | (#13800382)

Has a group such as PETA made any comment with regards to this practice?

Re:PETA? (3, Interesting)

bcat24 (914105) | about 9 years ago | (#13800406)

PETA seems to support microchipping. See, for example, this page [helpinganimals.com] and also this one [peta.org] .

Re:PETA? (4, Informative)

Ucklak (755284) | about 9 years ago | (#13800480)

Who cares what PeTA thinks anyway. They're not the de-facto animal rights saviours although the media might want you to think otherwise which is what they want - exposure. They're more like terrorists and an organized crime ring. The fact that they hire known felons and arsonists to destroy businesses should be a clue that they're not on the up and up.
The ASPCA is the organization that actually cares about the well being of animals.
http://www.aspca.org/site/PageServer [aspca.org]

Metamod the Moderator of this post (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800726)

Metamod it to -10 Head-Up-Your-Ass

Re:PETA? (1)

aussie_a (778472) | about 9 years ago | (#13800483)

I doubt very much there exists a PETA in Japan. When I went there in 2001 there was a "pet store" that lions in cages that were a little larger then the creature itself, and all sorts of other atrocities. When we asked our guide what we could do, the answer was nothing (the guide didn't take us to this place).

Your mission, should you decide to accept... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800782)

"...cages that were a little larger then the creature itself..."

Learn some grammar. Should it be:

"...cages that were a little larger then all of a sudden the creature itself..."

or

"...cages that were a little larger than the creature itself..."

You decide.

STFU CYRIC! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800660)

Eat shit and die!

--
This message sponsored by Slashdotters for the Unethical Treatment of CyricZ.

You Are Here (3, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 9 years ago | (#13800388)

People are the most dangerous animals.

Thank goodness! (2, Insightful)

EraserMouseMan (847479) | about 9 years ago | (#13800435)

That's why we are at the top of the food chain. It's nice not to have to worry about a snake eating your young while you're out foraging for food isn't it?

Personally, I like being at the top of the food chain.

Re:Thank goodness! (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 9 years ago | (#13800463)

I like it. I don't like the daily hunt by bacteria, or the worms' last laugh at the end of the road. But I like it when that cheeseburger toes the line, just like its peer, the milkshake.

Re:Thank goodness! (2, Funny)

chicago_bulls (895486) | about 9 years ago | (#13800484)

wouldn't it be more fun not to be at the top...
think about how exciting everyday would be if, the second you went outside, there was a chance that you could be eaten by a flying shark....
would anybody ever have another case of the mondays?

Re:Thank goodness! (3, Funny)

jrockway (229604) | about 9 years ago | (#13800627)

> there was a chance that you could be eaten by a flying shark....

Obviously lawyers don't live in your neighborhood.

HOW OUTRAGEOUS! (2, Insightful)

fireboy1919 (257783) | about 9 years ago | (#13800392)

Next thing you know, they'll be branding cattle, and tattooing ferrets!

And the regulations will only get worse!

Its only a matter of time before you have to have a license to keep exotic predators!

Oh wait...that's the way it is now. I guess society wants to keep track of its animals.

Carry on then.

Re:HOW OUTRAGEOUS! (1)

Alien Being (18488) | about 9 years ago | (#13800446)

Why does clueless sarcasm get modded insightful? The article doesn't say that this is outrageous. It just says what they're doing and why they're doing it. fireboy is trolling.

RTFT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800589)

Perhaps I have the insight to read between the lines as well as stating my opinion. Read the title. It doesn't say "Microchips for Dangerous Animals."
It says "Microchips for Dangerous Animals?".

Why would they put a question mark at the end of a statement? I'll tell you: this is Slashdotspeak for "Look at this title. Is this morally right? We should have arguments about this. Post your opinion."

My opinion is that it doesn't matter. Its just more of the same, and unlike what I would consider a troll post, I gave a reason for it, that I consider valid.

I'm open to the possibility that I'm trolling, though. You'll have a bit of a hard time convincing me, though. I know the motives of the guy who was posting, and he wasn't trying to get people angry and incensed.

Re:HOW OUTRAGEOUS! (1)

fm6 (162816) | about 9 years ago | (#13800634)

Be reasonable. If you find a stray python, don't you want to know who to return it to?

as opposed to... (1)

zogger (617870) | about 9 years ago | (#13800822)

...having fun and taking it to the local pawn shop to see what you can get for it?

rough call there....

Old news (2, Insightful)

Celsius 233 (913263) | about 9 years ago | (#13800393)

The article has been up for three and a half days.

Anyways, why don't they just not let people take these animals into public? Is it really a good idea to take your croc for a wlk? Or better yet, why not ban the possession of them outright?

Re:Old news (2, Funny)

FudgeRusket (868766) | about 9 years ago | (#13800441)

You're right, this is old news. So much has happened in the field of animal microchip implants in the last 3 and 1/2 days.

Re:Old news (4, Insightful)

aussie_a (778472) | about 9 years ago | (#13800504)

The article has been up for three and a half days.

That's what happens when you visit a news aggregation site. Either stop complaining or leave. Having news be "old" is a problem inherent with slashdot, get over it already.

Re:Old news (1)

MDMurphy (208495) | about 9 years ago | (#13800758)

I've seen a bunch of people doing the same whining today. They complain that it's old news, but interesting enough for them to comment on. If they thought it was interesting enough to comment, they could have submitted the story three days ago.

In case they hadn't noticed, it's kind of hard for a Slashdot article to link to future stories.

What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (4, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | about 9 years ago | (#13800397)

What exactly is a "potentially dangerous" animal? Most animals are potentially dangerous. Many dogs can easily harm humans. Will all dogs need to be embedded with such a device? Even cats can bite and scratch. Will they require tracking devices? Even timid bunny rabbits can give a good bite if provoked enough. Again, will they need such devices?

Holy Grail Killer Rabbit! (3, Funny)

42Penguins (861511) | about 9 years ago | (#13800416)

"Even timid bunny rabbits can give a good bite if provoked enough."

oblig monty python killer rabbit:
"I'm warning you!"
"What's he do? Nibble your bum?"
"He's got huge, sharp... er... He can leap about. Look at the bones!"

Re:Holy Grail Killer Rabbit! (1)

$exyNerdie (683214) | about 9 years ago | (#13800580)

Check this out:
bunny.jpg [llnwd.net]

Re:Holy Grail Killer Rabbit! (1)

FooAtWFU (699187) | about 9 years ago | (#13800753)

My picture [deviantart.com] is cooler, I think, and not even Photoshopped. And what's up with those artifacts in the picture? You're killing me.

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (0, Offtopic)

kfg (145172) | about 9 years ago | (#13800554)

What exactly is a "potentially dangerous" animal?

You. Especially if you've got a pointy stick.

Don't come at me with a banana though. I've been trained how to deal with that.

KFG

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (2)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 9 years ago | (#13800598)

Most animals are potentially dangerous.

True. IIRC many pets in Australia now get an implanted chip. Vets use a handheld reader to get an ID number. It is mainly for identification and to track treatment over time.

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (2)

node 3 (115640) | about 9 years ago | (#13800655)

What exactly is a "potentially dangerous" animal? ... Even timid bunny rabbits can give a good bite if provoked enough. Again, will they need such devices?

Um, no, they aren't going to require chips in bunnies. Do you really think it likely they would classify a rabbit as a "potentially dangerous" animal?

Yes, eventually some law will be interpreted in some such stupid way, but your question is absurd. Just because something cannot be (or at least, hasn't been) objectively defined does not mean it does not exist, or is not useful.

Dangerous animals pose a public risk, and is within the legitimate realm of things to be controlled by law. If the application of the law requires the interpretation of a subjective term, if it relies on someone's opinion, then that's just the way it is. Many laws are like that, disturbing the peace, reckless driving, and so on. It might be preferable to have all laws be strictly and objectively defined, but sometimes you just can't realistically do so.

What's better, a law with clear intentions, and which a sense of "reasonable" can be used to interpret it, or letting people keep potentially dangerous animals, unchecked, in an urban environment?

I mean, seriously, if your neighbors bobcat killed your child, or you were attacked by someone's alligator that got loose, would you accept the excuse, "well, all animals are 'potentially dangerous', so we couldn't really treat a wild predator any different than a domestic herbivorous bunny"?

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800725)


Folks, witness the last rational /.'r!

Exactly (1)

Mark_MF-WN (678030) | about 9 years ago | (#13800795)

Exactly. I mean, consider the fact that guns have to be registered and tracked. Now consider the fact that dogs many more people than guns do in any given year. This is despite the fact that there far, far more guns in the US than there are dogs (feel free to repeat this argument for cars). And it takes serious effort to make a dog dangerous -- years of systematic abuse. The idea of not tracking animals that are substantially MORE dangerous and are naturally aggressive is insane.

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (1)

rollingcalf (605357) | about 9 years ago | (#13800657)

'What exactly is a "potentially dangerous" animal? Most animals are potentially dangerous.'

I don't know about Japan, but in the US the towns that implement pet restrictions explicitly spell out the species and breeds and sizes that are considered dangerous enough to warrant restrictive measures. It's not just left at "potentially dangerous". Incidents of people getting mauled can cause previously unrestricted animals to get added to the restricted list.

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800711)

In Belgium, it is the other way around... instead of explicitly listing the animals you're NOT supposed to have, it lists the animals you are allowed to have. What is wrong with having to register your animal (say an elephant) with your local government?

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (2, Informative)

MBCook (132727) | about 9 years ago | (#13800664)

Another poster pointed out that this is required for all animals (or at least dogs and cats) in Australia. That'd be fine with me. My dog has one. I would fully support requiring it for all licensed animals (and, of course, all animals require a license). To be able to easily identify the owner of a dog that has been abused (ostensibly by its owner) would be a great thing. It would then also be possible to identify the facilitators of other crimes (like the owners of vicious pit-bulls who either don't socialize or train them to attack then let them run free). Dog gets eaten by an alligator in the neighborhood pond? Now we could find out who owned it and fine them (or whatever) for "improper disposal".

As for any cost of the chips (I don't know what it costs, and my dog was chipped about 6 years ago so I'd imagine it has changed since anyway), by requiring all pets (except, perhaps, rodents like mice, hamsters, and ferrets; as well as small birds and small fish) to be chipped would drive the price down (economies of scale and what not).

It could also be used to track down puppy mills. If breeders are required to chip their animals, it would be pretty trivial to find the puppy mills (or at least many of them) and shut them down if they deserve it. I suppose it would also make tracking of pedigree bloodlines easier.

I'm all for it. Let's do it in the US.

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (1)

petermgreen (876956) | about 9 years ago | (#13800733)

Even timid bunny rabbits can give a good bite if provoked enough
i wouldn't say they need to be explicitly provoked

i know i've had a friends bunny try to bite me (i was moving at the time and it didn't actually manage to bite but i certainly felt some part of its mouth on the tendon behind my ankle) when i was just standing in the garden with me. (it seemed to smell my feet and think they were another male competing with it or something it was always far more aggressive arround males than arround females)

after that i always made sure i wore wellies when it was arround so it couldn't smell my feet.

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (1)

NanoGator (522640) | about 9 years ago | (#13800742)

"What exactly is a "potentially dangerous" animal?"

The 'potentially dangerous' sentence wasn't clearly phrased. They're talking about exotic animals that are potentially dangerous, not exotic animals that are being chipped because they are potentially dangerous.

I imagine the point behind this is that if your pet python goes away and scares the hit out of a bunch of people, they know who's responsible and can fine him. In any event, I'm not sure why you'd even ask this question. There's a big difference between having a cat as a pet and having a snake. Heck, I have a friend with a pet skunk. It's clear to me why there's a difference. My cat, and before that, my dogs were and are my friends. The skunk thought I was a tree or something. It climbed over me not really caring that it's claws f'in hurt. Even bit my ear, thought it might be food. There was no 'love' there. It was incapable of seeing that. It wanted to eat. It doesn't have the sort of mental power to identify me as a 'friend', therefore it could very well one day decide to attack me. Worse, if that skunk got out, everybody would see the stripe on its back and take off. (even though the skunk has been de-scented, how would they know that?)

Bunnies! (2, Funny)

bohemian72 (898284) | about 9 years ago | (#13800750)

I've got a theory! It might be Bunnies!

Bunnies are just cute like everyone supposes!
They've got those hoppy legs and twitchy little noses.
And what's with all the carrots?
What do bunnies need such good eyesight for anyway?
Bunnies! Bunnies!
It's must be Bunnies!

Re:What's a "potentially dangerous" animal? (1)

Bottlemaster (449635) | about 9 years ago | (#13800785)

Will all dogs need to be embedded with such a device?


Many pounds are already requiring this. I had to get my cat chipped before I could take him home.

Mini-proof of evolution? (1)

EraserMouseMan (847479) | about 9 years ago | (#13800408)

wave of 'wild' animals that have been escaping their captivity

Proof of evolution? Or the pet owners de-evolving . . .

Re:Mini-proof of evolution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800518)

Proof of evolution? Or the pet owners de-evolving . . .

More like a slow news day.

Re:Mini-proof of evolution? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800699)

Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?

Hmmmm, snakes walking...do they have some kind of temporary legs attached? Or are these pet snakes evolving?

Did you know, trying to take a snake for a walk is a really REALLY stupid thing to do? Pet owners de-evolving would be my answer!

What a good idea... oh, wait... (4, Funny)

failrate (583914) | about 9 years ago | (#13800413)

I read that as MOD chips for pets. I was so excited, but now...

Re:What a good idea... oh, wait... (1)

bladesjester (774793) | about 9 years ago | (#13800704)

I would be afraid to have a mod chip for my cat because, with my luck it would bring out his more feral qualities. This could be a problem, considering that he's part bobcat...

He's my evil fuzzy ball of claws and teeth as it is. I don't need him actually breaking out of the house to try and take down my neighbor's (rather large) dog. He already tries to charge at her through the deck door as it is.

not practical (1)

zoogies (879569) | about 9 years ago | (#13800415)

Ha! Is the Japanese government willing to install, oversee, and monitor all of this? And track down offenders and illegally un-micro-chipped animals? Make an official classification of "that which is dangerous" and "that which isn't?" I guess this is for public safety, but it reeks of bureaucracy. I'm not so sure they can just force owners of snakes and crocodiles to buy microchips with their own money, especially when they're probably unwilling in the first place.

Re:not practical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800701)

I don't own any snakes or crocodiles so can't say for sure, but I would supsect that caring for these animals would require some amount of specialist equipment. All they'd have to do is make it illegal to sell said equipment to somebody who doesn't present their "Yes, my snake is chipped" card. The same goes for vets. If they aren't going to treat snakes and crocs which aren't chipped, then a lot of pet owners are going to get their pets chipped. Hmm. Perhaps it would be more humane, rather than not treating them, to treat them and chip them and charge the pet owner for the chipping.

More to the point, if they require that all newly sold snakes and crocs are chipped at the store, then we only have to wait until all the existing unchipped snakes and crocs die before all of them are chipped. Assuming, of course, that people aren't breeding snakes and crocs in their backyards. I have no idea if that sort of thing happens or not.

Jesus, how do snakes mate, anyway? That'd look weird.

Re:not practical (1)

identity0 (77976) | about 9 years ago | (#13800759)

You've never been to Japan, have you? They're so overburdened with bueracracy that the ruling party and the opposition party were competing during the last election on which one would make the most reforms to the government.

They also have much stricter laws about just about anything. It would not suprise me if, in fact, they did everything you mention.

bureaucracy is slightly different (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800790)

They could make it illegal in a way that you have no defense when something goes awry and you fail to produce a liscense, but that never happens. Somebody will exploit the revenue potential and have their own cute little department with head honchos and hot receptionists, cool gear and rapid response animal control helicopters.... subsidised by the government, under pressure to actively pursue violations to justify their existence. Like the DEA.

walk the dog... (1)

Maavin (598439) | about 9 years ago | (#13800423)

Sometimes I have to walk the dog reeeeally bad....

Good idea! (1)

isny (681711) | about 9 years ago | (#13800465)

I'm sure this would have stopped the chaos that happened in Jurassic Park. All right then -- I'm off to write an e-mail to those British scientists who want to introduce lions and elephants into North America and buy stock in RFID chip makers!

Snake-walk! (1)

Sly Mongoose (15286) | about 9 years ago | (#13800466)

Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?
I always have difficulty fastening the collar on my pet fer-de-lance.....

Re:Snake-walk! (2, Insightful)

gibbdog (551209) | about 9 years ago | (#13800662)

As odd is it may sound, I've actually worked with some snakes that I would consider border-line "socialized." I work with venomous snakes for a living and many people assume that venomous = vicious. While most Bothrops species (since you mentioned the fer-de-lance) are more than a handful to work with, I have a few specimens that aren't all that bad (comparatively speaking). I even have a few venomous snakes in my collection that don't have a feeding response, and actually have "learned" cage cleaning routine (although I still don't let my guard down with them). I've seen snakes on the venom lines that get habituated to the routine of getting milked and then know it is time to eat and don't get defensive towards their keeper. I've even seen some larger elapids that will follow curiously, and some that will mimic what they see.

I really don't see this whole chipping thing working... I keep a large collection of venomous snakes, some of which are too small to microchip. I don't consider my animals "dangerous" to the general public, as the general public has no access to them. I put myself and only myself at risk by keeping these animals, and as long as I do it responsibly I see no reason for a government that knows so little about what they're trying to regulate to tell me what to do with my animals.

Argh, snake (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 9 years ago | (#13800469)

Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?
Argh, snake! [badgerbadgerbadger.com]

Re:Argh, snake (1)

Bob54321 (911744) | about 9 years ago | (#13800530)

Check out the link in the parent post. Kept me amused for minutes... don't they say something about simple things?

Re:Argh, snake (2, Funny)

Solder Fumes (797270) | about 9 years ago | (#13800628)

That flashloop is older than prostitution.

ambulation (0, Flamebait)

lawpoop (604919) | about 9 years ago | (#13800476)

"Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?"

And did you know that you can also go for a 'stroll'?

Already in Australia for Cats and Dogs... (1)

Bigthecat (678093) | about 9 years ago | (#13800502)

What's the fuss? This practice has been required [shoal.net.au] by law for anyone obtaining pets such as cats and dogs in Australia for years now. Both of my cats have them, and it's just a tiny implant with owner information, and the only trouble with them so far that I've heard of is that some have been known to slip out of place in the body of the animal and make it difficult to get the information out of them.

Re:Already in Australia for Cats and Dogs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800573)

New South Wales != Australia

As far as I know, microchips are still optional in Queensland, and probably in other states as well.

Re:Already in Australia for Cats and Dogs... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800590)

Haha, NSW is the best state though.

Brilliant Idea (1)

kerashi (917149) | about 9 years ago | (#13800506)

Yes, we should put microchips in dangerous animals in order to keep track of them. But how about those remarkably stupid beasts, or people? Shouldn't we also put a microchip in George W. Bush in case he gets loose?

Re:Brilliant Idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800533)

That's a good one! I bet it came to you in one of those flashes of inspiration that I read about all the time. I hope one of those comes to me soon!

Re:Brilliant Idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800592)

Corporate profits! SUVs! Haliburton!! Global Warming!! GOD HELP US!!!

Re:Brilliant Idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800778)

There are two things that come to mind when I read that comment. First, who's you're intended audience with that message? Liberals already agree/don't need convincing, and conservatives stop reading at the word George. He isn't going to be up for reelection, so what's the point? If you insist on Bush bashing, at least make it funny so there's a reason to read it. Second, IIRC, the president DOES have an implant that tells the secret service/his staff where he is (at least in the White House, maybe other places as well).

Hang on a minute (1)

longword (2293) | about 9 years ago | (#13800519)

If the animal gets loose, how much good will it really do to be able to track down the owner based the tag embedded in him?

Re:Hang on a minute (1)

isny (681711) | about 9 years ago | (#13800560)

You can track down the animal like in "Alien". 5 meters...4....3....get out of there!!

No, bug the real killers (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800522)

Here in America, illegal aliens kill way more folks every year than alligators and pythons.

Why don't we implant microchips in them instead?

Assassin dolphins (3, Funny)

gustgr (695173) | about 9 years ago | (#13800528)

Does "Dangerous Animals" include US Navy dolphins with toxic dart guns?

Re:Assassin dolphins (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13801019)

No, just the ones with frikin' laser beams on their heads.

Sounds like a good idea (1)

Don_Casper (923158) | about 9 years ago | (#13800541)

Many people are given the option of putting rfid tags in pets nowadays when they have the pets first vet visit. Our cats and dogs all have them and you wouldnt even know they were there, and none of them seems to be having problems with it. Personally i think its a good idea. If you can figure out how to enforce it then you have a great system to keep owners of large animals in control.

Modchips for Dangerous Animals? (1)

kakashiryo (866772) | about 9 years ago | (#13800548)

Err... *rubs eyes again*. Sorry. Been a long day. :)

only in hollywood (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800557)

I wonder how technologies like this are going to play out in places like Hollywood, where declawing a cat is currently forbidden by law, except in cases where the "animal guardian" (yes that's on the books too) may be injured by the cat. Also up for consideration are laws concerning other things such as tail docking and wing clipping.

Dangerous animals???? (2, Insightful)

hellfire (86129) | about 9 years ago | (#13800558)

Yanno, I've always had a problem with people saying animals like pythons are dangerous. Well let's see, considering more people die annually from dog attacks than pythons [anapsid.org] , we should be microchipping all pets. Okay, those figures are for the United States, but pythons are no more common as pets in Japan in the US. Hey, mice can carry diseases, despite the fact that most white mice owners don't let their mice near trash piles, but let's microchip them just in case! This is a non-problem.

I also have a problem with opening the door to using the tracking of pets to track people. This smacks of over-reaction and the singling out of one class of pet owner either as a weird form of discrimination, or simply fear of what most people don't understand.

Go out and start tagging mosquitos since they carry west nile and malaria, they are far more dangerous world wide to humans than pythons.

Re:Dangerous animals???? (1)

Helpadingoatemybaby (629248) | about 9 years ago | (#13800607)

As a mosquito owner, I find that suggestion absurd.

My Mosquito, Spanky, never escaped from our backyard until the tragic day that he was hit by a car. (Sobbing) Oh god, Spanky! Oh god!

Re:Dangerous animals???? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800644)

Now that's good. Mod +5 Funny.

Re:Dangerous animals???? (1)

The Shrewd Dude (880136) | about 9 years ago | (#13800686)

The main reason for this is probably more for the peace of mind of the citizens rather than the prevention of all bad things caused by animals. People will feel safer about the next-door neighbor's python if it has a chip in it.

Walk (2)

Elitist_Phoenix (808424) | about 9 years ago | (#13800564)

Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?
I like to walk my boa constrictor up and down a golden valley everyday.

Re:Walk (1)

Ravear (923203) | about 9 years ago | (#13800807)

Mine's called Vlad the Impaler and yes, he's been to jail.

Criky! (0, Flamebait)

scriptdaemon (923033) | about 9 years ago | (#13800566)

I thought only white people messed with alligators?

Everglades (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800569)

If this law was implemented in the U.S. we wouldn't have pythons exploding in the everglades:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051005/ap_on_fe_st/ga tor_python [yahoo.com]

Pythons & Alligators (1)

netgecko78 (517810) | about 9 years ago | (#13800581)

Apparently the poster of this topic is fascinated by the fight between python & alligator as seen in a previous slashdot posting. [slashdot.org] :)

ah hhhh (1)

icepick72 (834363) | about 9 years ago | (#13800611)

Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?"

Ah, yes ... Yes I did.

What about eating... (0, Offtopic)

HockeyPuck (141947) | about 9 years ago | (#13800656)

Will it keep them from eating ENDANGERED animals?

Re:What about eating... (1)

bohemian72 (898284) | about 9 years ago | (#13800792)

Heh, yeah, they're going to work like The Initiative's chip that got put in Spike's head. One bad thought about eating that Spotted Owl . . . Zap! Terrible pain in the head.

Will they require chips in lawyers next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800697)

Why stop at dangerous animals? What about dangerous humans? What if you take your personal attorney for a walk and he/she escapes?

I smell government contracts... (1)

confield (892132) | about 9 years ago | (#13800708)

Forget that whole un-manned military vehicle idea. All you gotta do is implant some geese with some modified radio controlled microchips and you got your own mother-flocking air force.

Pet Pythpns? (1)

rossdee (243626) | about 9 years ago | (#13800710)

So do they have a detector van from the 'Ministry of Housinge' going around looking for unchipped (and oresumably inlicenced) pets (named Eric)?

Scary (1)

Kohath (38547) | about 9 years ago | (#13800715)

You think they're dangerous now? Wait until they're augmented with microchips. Fangs and computing power. Shudder.

I think I know what will happen next (1)

ee2go (917739) | about 9 years ago | (#13800727)

'They cut the power.'
'What do you mean "THEY cut the power"? How could they cut the power, man? They're animals!?'

Turn them off (1)

JonathanR (852748) | about 9 years ago | (#13800788)

Now you can turn them off at will with your TV-B-Gone. You can turn of 90% of dangerous animals within 17 seconds

They'll never be able to chip MY pet (2, Interesting)

WormholeFiend (674934) | about 9 years ago | (#13800813)

My bird-eating tarantula [wikipedia.org] sheds her skin regularly.

Different function (1)

connah0047 (850585) | about 9 years ago | (#13800817)

I think the chip should perform a different function than tracking for dangerous animals. If one gets out, the zoo ought to have an "Abort and Destroy" button.

Thank God! End this madness! (2, Funny)

RexRhino (769423) | about 9 years ago | (#13800818)

Every day I walk the streets, I have to be on my guard, not knowing when a komono dragon is going to bite off my leg, or an enraged ape is going to storm out of an alley and attack me, or an electric eel is going to zap me the next time I step in a puddle. I live in fear! FEAR I TELL YOU!! What is that buzzing sound? I hear it is too cold in Canada for Africanized honey bees, but YOU CAN NEVER BE TOO CAREFUL, DAMN IT!

It restores my faith in government that there is no threat too obscure, too irrelevant, or too laughable not to legislate and spend gobs of money on!

Seeing as the number of people killed by non-indigenous species every year has got to be, what, like 8 people?

Already required for some pets in Japan (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800829)

I'm currently serving in the military in Japan, and microchips are actually required for pets that servicemembers import into the country when they PCS here. There's also a pretty extensive list of which animals are allowed and not allowed (some of the animals that are prohibited from being imported are easily bought right off base, though).

From what some of the NCOs in my unit tell me, one part of the whole quarantine process involves making sure that the animal has a chip, that the chip is working, and that the animal is not suffering from health problems due to the chip.

Huh?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800841)

Did you know that it is actually possible to take your pet snake for a 'walk'?"
What else would you call walking with a Microsoft patent attorney other than "taking your pet snake for a walk?" Like. Duh.

Good luck trying (1)

Nailer (69468) | about 9 years ago | (#13800851)

"Steve Ballmer would never go for it. Approach him with a microchip gun and he'd throw a chair at you. And then bury you. In chairs. He's done it before and he'll do it again."

Oscar Wilde

Chips Ahoy! (1)

umbrellasd (876984) | about 9 years ago | (#13800863)

The natural conclusion to draw here is that every person will have a chip, since by far, human beings are the most dangerous animals on earth.

FAILZORS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 years ago | (#13800971)

and some o7 the
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?