Under 16, no fish. - Page 2

sirdarksol

That isn't my opinion at all. My opinion is that it is not the governments role to protect them. The core purpose of government is to to protect the rights if its citizens and unfortunately most governments have diverged from that purpose.

That is one opinion of a government's purpose. It's not the only one, and it's not necessarily the right one (nor is it necessarily the wrong one).

For the purpose of this discussion, however, we are talking about the governments that exist today, as they were created by their citizens. In this case, the British government. In said government, animals have certain rights, as do people (though the rights that animals have are not anywhere near as thorough as those enjoyed by people... witness that they still sell shepherd's pie on the British Isles ;D).
 

maestro159

Fair enough.

Shepherd's pie isn't so bad although we did have a severe disagreement once

sry probably
 

sirdarksol

I actually love shepherd's pie. And the entire purpose of it is to avoid such instances (it started as a method of heavily cooking old meat to reduce chances of illness ).

Also, I meant to say that I agree with the statement that education is a key point of changing the way that aquarium fish are treated. That's why I'm here, and at my local aquarium society, and why I offer my friends help with setting up new aquaria, if they want.
 

steed1172

new petco employee wanted an ID... for aquatic PLANTS!!.... like...bwahahaha I'm going to realease them into the lakes and rivers and have them take over native species!!!

..... and that's just a sad story... I mean people give out goldfish are fairs and such.... or wait did they stop that too?(that would actually be good though)

EDIT:... I am 16...they wanted to know if I was what? 18!
 

Asialyn

Punishment- way over board. I can see handing her out a fine, but that's about it, especially with a first offense.

I do agree with the law, not because I think all people under the age of 16 are irresponsable (although some may be), but because if you are still living at home with your parents, I think parental consent is very important. Parents should know that their kids are buying fish (or any pet), and if they are okay with it then I'm sure they would have no problem accompanying them to the store.

At my local petsmart, you have to be 18 apparently to buy fish. I think this is a bit extensive because even at 17 years old, you can be living on your own away at college so I'm not sure how they justify that. I think 16 is reasonable because the majority of people under that age are still living with parents/guardians.
 

FiremouthGuy

My brother, 12, is one of the most responsible fish-keeper I have ever met. He read internet pages (including here) about the keeping of each fish he owns for around a month each before he ever got any fish. I would have died if I was under 16 and this law was applied in the US.
 

Algae Eater

What bothers me the most about this is the fact that law enforcement sent a boy into a shop to try and do something against the law. They themselves should be charged for corrupting a minor and attempting to commit a crime, but it's deemed OK because they're trying to catch "the bad guys." Two wrongs don't make a right.
 

FiremouthGuy

'Let this conviction send out a message that we will not tolerate those who cause unnecessary suffering to animals. The council will always try to support pet and business owners so that they are able to care for their animals properly, but where they continually ignore the advice they are given, we will not hesitate to use our statutory powers.'

OH COME ON!!! Yeah the goldfish is important, but does an old woman need to go through all this because she um... Wait, what did she do??? Oh, right, she um... sold a goldfish. To a fourteen year old. I think it should only be illegal to not ensure that the buyer has proper housing for the animal. Age has no effect in the matter. Adults think of animals as more disposable then a child would, because a child will think of the animal as more of a friend then a decoration. And adults have years of their thought trains solidifying into solid beliefs, while a child is much more malleable to train into understanding that animals need to be cared for. Yes, children do forget things and are not always as responsible as adults, but take platy ben, elodea, and my brother for example. I would not EVER have guessed that you guys were teenagers. You are much more mature then most middle-age people I know. I think that asking what type of housing they have for the fish, what they know about the species, and what they will feed is where it should stop.

'Let this conviction send out a message that we will not tolerate those who cause unnecessary suffering to animals. The council will always try to support pet and business owners so that they are able to care for their animals properly, but where they continually ignore the advice they are given, we will not hesitate to use our statutory powers.'

Noble, yes, but why must you go through so much villainy as to outweigh the noble cause? A woman should never be subjected to such, let alone a great grandmother that is near 70?
 

DJMonty

This is rediculous. Sure, under 16 and no pet, as the person selling it o you has to know you have the equipment to care for it. This law came into effect in the UK a couple years ago, because some teenagers won a goldfish at the fair, tied a helium balloon to it, and launched it into the sky. The law is sensible, the punishment was WAY too severe.
 

bettawaters

Punishment- way over board. I can see handing her out a fine, but that's about it, especially with a first offense.

I do agree with the law, not because I think all people under the age of 16 are irresponsable (although some may be), but because if you are still living at home with your parents, I think parental consent is very important. Parents should know that their kids are buying fish (or any pet), and if they are okay with it then I'm sure they would have no problem accompanying them to the store.

At my local petsmart, you have to be 18 apparently to buy fish. I think this is a bit extensive because even at 17 years old, you can be living on your own away at college so I'm not sure how they justify that. I think 16 is reasonable because the majority of people under that age are still living with parents/guardians.
I agree.You said some under 16s aren 't responsible but some adults aren't.There is always somebody irresponsible in every age group.I mean, there isn't any age group where everyone is completely responsible
 

CQSwordtails

I agree with the law - if a kid brings home a fish without asking, the fish could end up flushed - but the punishment is too severe.
 

bettawaters

I agree with the law - if a kid brings home a fish without asking, the fish could end up flushed - but the punishment is too severe.

Are you saying child fishkeepers are basically gonna kill a fish?
Everybody has to start fishkeeping sometime
 

Jaysee

Are you saying child fishkeepers are basically gonna kill a fish?
Everybody has to start fishkeeping sometime

I would agree with that, conditionally. I don't believe children have the resources to care for pets all on their own. I mean, they can't even take care of themselves. Without approval/support from mom and dad, the fish would be in serious jeopardy.
 

Similar Aquarium Threads

Replies
11
Views
838
BornThisWayBettas
Replies
7
Views
538
DuaneV
Replies
2
Views
297
Sofiafish17
Replies
4
Views
2K
Demeter
Replies
3
Views
141
RubysMama

Random Great Thread!

Top Bottom