All Wild Animals SHOULD NOT Be Banned Pets

Thank you for your response. Without further ado, I will get on with the debate. :)"It is the concept of "the right hands," the idea that the responsible owners will be found... What are the right hands? Certainly a wild animal could be safe locked up in a cage and put behind giant steel bars. Then I would agree that safety is not an issue. But that doesn't help the wild animals."There are a handful of people that would be good exotic pet owners. Of course, domestic pets are abused everyday, and certainly if exotics were allowed to just anyone, the abuse problem would boom. This is not what I'm saying, however. Why don't we keep our current regulations, but lift all bans? In Wisconsin, they have no bans and require no permit on any exotic pet. [1] Does that mean there are more abuse cases and attacks there than in other states? No, there is not. Why should anyone believe it would happen if all 50 states were placed under strict regulations without bans? There are a couple states that do not have any bans on any animal (most of those require permits), yet attack statistics and the abuse problems do not increase. A wild animal locked up in a cage should not be considered "the right hands." That is abuse. Most exotic pet owners do not abuse their animals. They love them and treat them with great respect and care, just as most would treat the family dog or cat. The animals are not allowed to squander out a sad living in a cage. "...considering at least two families wish to relinquish their pet primates every day (as I pointed out before), considering there have been 1610 incidents, considering people are killed, and that people abandon their wild animals."Yes, but this is the case with domestic pets as well. Are you saying that because wild animals are relinquished to shelters they should all be banned, but when the same thing happens to domestics, we should still keep them? Why is this? And I have already given you statistics showing that exotic pets are just as safe as domestics. Those that are killed are freak accidents. "As of the moment, it seems that the laws in states which permit them are not working all that well. There may be people who are passionate about the creatures at first, but often times, that passion is lost over time.How can one determine if you're testing a passionate animal lover or a greedy animal trafficker?"Again, you can ask the same of domestic pet owners. "Throughout the rounds, you've mentioned the dangers of cars and motorcycles which I'd like to quickly answer.The reason why we don't ban them is because they're necessary for transport. Some people prefer motorcycles to cars, especially if they live alone. Wild animals are unnecessary."Yes, but people are not shaking with fear everytime they get in a car or ride their motorcycles. So why should we be so afraid of exotic pets? Those things are far more dangerous than these exotic animals. I stated that many exotic pet owners are very responsible, responding to Con's statement that people should not own exotics because they cannot take care of them. Con responded that that was not enough evidence to prove responsibility. Please elaborate on how it is not. The owners have enclosures, their animals are healthy and shows no signs of stress. Does this not speak of happiness and responsibility to you? What other proof would you need? "Captive exotic animals are abused and exploited in a variety of settings, including research and product testing, the entertainment industry, fur farms, and the exotic “pet” trade."Most exotic pets are not abused in any of these ways. How could they be? As I have already stated, most come from breeders who sell to individuals who meet their own standards. Most exotic pet breeders are responsible, educated people who are renowned in the exotic pet industry. Responsible owners do not participate in black market affairs. Keeping wild animals in captivity is inherently cruel, as it deprives them of the ability to freely engage in instinctual behaviors in their natural environment.My response: "This selfish desire to possess animals and receive love from them causes immeasurable suffering, which results from manipulating their breeding, selling or giving them away casually, and depriving them of the opportunity to engage in their natural behavior. They are restricted to human homes, where they must obey commands and can only eat, drink, and even urinate when humans allow them to. Because domesticated animals retain many of their basic instincts and drives but are not able to survive on their own in the wild, dogs, cats, or birds, whose strongest desire is to be free, must be confined to houses, yards, or cages for their own safety." [2] "The right hands won't necessarily be found, the tests won't necessarily work, and the animals can react violently outside of their natural environment."When it comes to "the right hands," this goes for nearly everything else we do. Guns? Domestics? Cars? Alcohol? But why ban just exotics? Con states that if exotic pets were allowed in the US, illegal trade can quickly become a problem. But why would it be? If someone would risk trouble with the law for something illegal, wouldn't they already be doing so right now as I type? Why would they wait for exotic pet bans to be lifted? So no, I don't think illegal activities would escalate. The ones that want to do bad would be at it already. I think it would actually help the situation. A lot of animals that are smuggled in would then be legal in the US. That would inspire more captive breedings and less poaching (why get something illegally when you can get it legally and at a much lower cost?) I look forward to Con's response!Sources:[1] http://www.bornfreeusa.org...[2] http://www.peta.org...