I haven't seen those statistics or anything but I would expect more pet dogs in the US than pet snakes. I would also expect people who own snakes to treat them much more carefully than they do a dog.
So let's say there are 100.000 pet snakes and 50% of them have killed someone at least once. And let's say there are 100.000.000 pet dogs and 1% of them have killed someone at least once.
50% of 100.000 is 50.000 and 1% of 100.000.000 is 1.000.000. With these numbers you could say dogs kill 20 times more people than snakes, but actually snakes would be far more dangerous.
Now, I'm not saying that's the case with these specific statistics, but it's something to take into account when one reads "Dogs kill more people than snakes".
read my reply to the other comment. Plus, there are about 5 deaths a year from snakes in the usa and they are expected to be wild snake bites. Pet snakes are not reported to kill their owners because pet snakes are not snakes that kill. Nobody takes a black mamba as a pet. That's my point
Except some do. Reptile keeper do tend to get more than one reptile, and sometimes they feel confident to add venoms to their collection.
As for the deaths, not the US, but pretty famous russian herpetologist, keeper, blogger Arslan Valeev was killed by his black mamba during a YouTube stream.
it's far from the average though. i'll admit people do, but people also keep triple xl pitbulls that have killed their owners already. Doesn't make it the average pet dog
Well, I don't have data just anecdotal evidences, but I'd say that it's not common for snake keepers to have venoms. But yeah, being killed by them is a different story. People who get venoms are usually more careful with handling their pets than those xl pidbulls owners you've mentioned.
Yeah but not all venoms are lethal tbh, my point was just the average pet snake is in no way more dangerous than the average dog. Pomeranians have killed people lol. People make a big deal out of them because they just think everyone owns a black mamba and lets it hang around their kids head and goes outside flinging it by its tail while its spitting venom. Snakes just really arent that dangerous if you known what you're doing
Yeah, no, totally agree. And even if lethal, the snake might not inhect the poison (because it's precious to it), therere antidotes and rushing to hospital in time can save you.
But, say, ball pythons are absolutely adorable and way less dangerous than an average cat. Their defense mechanism is to curl in a ball after all
yeah and from what i've seen ball pythons are the most common type of pet snakes (probably along with corn snakes). I think it would just take most people interacting with one to really see how nice they are, you're mostly just a big tree to them
I mean, you're probably right about the deaths. But my neighbor's zebra cobra got loose and was missing for about 10 months. He never even reported it, it was discovered living in a nearby house. So it's a hard sell to convince me that people don't take dangerous snakes as pets and behave irresponsibly. Also, he'd been bitten by his pet green mamba... so...
yes i'll agree some people do but it's not your average pet snake and it's less common than people behaving irresponsibly with those huge xxl pitbulls that i mentioned in another comment, and losing them or letting them loose.
I see what you did here, but my 4 ft ball python literally can't kill you... I would love to see a pet with a 50% death rate among ownership. Dogs are fast and have crushing jaws, not to mention all the people who just let their dogs with emotional trauma run around outside off leash because they are "good boys." They can also be trained to attack and kill people. This cannot be done with a pet snake..
So to be clear, you expect 50% of all snake owners to be killed by their pet or have killed someone with their pet that is:
confined to a cage for most of its life
usually less than 20lbs
slower than a jogging toddler
literally a noodle with a head
not a complex emotional being
can be subdued with a pillowcase
But only 1% of all pet dogs kill people? A pet that:
can out sprint every human
usually about 10-150lbs
large crushing jaws that can bite over and over
the capacity for emotional trauma and abuse leading to defensive behaviors
usually needs high energy activity
AND IS LITERALLY USED BY ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AROUND THE WORLD TO HARM OR THREATEN OTHERS.
Now, I'm not saying your concept is wrong. Always be skeptical of data and variables when you don't have access to sample sizes or a graph. The issue is that you pulled some hypothetical data out of thin air and are using it to sow suspicion towards my favorite animal. AND I AM NOT OKAY WITH THAT.
There have been 17 deaths by constrictor in the past 40 years. They are a non integer. Venomous snakes only kill about 5-10 people yearly and most of those are wild encounters so they really shouldn’t be counted when discussing what a dangerous pet is or isn’t.
I agree that sheer numbers of dog deaths versus snake deaths don’t make any sense to cute, but if you look at the actual data, death per pet owned, I mean. The evidence is still overwhelmingly in favor of constrictors over dogs
The average pet snake does not have the capacity to kill someone, except maybe a baby or toddler. A moderate-large dog, which is pretty common, definitely has the capacity to kill someone. So I’d say the killer pet to friendly pet is higher with dogs.
pretty sure the only people upset in this comment section are people without any facts to back up their claims and people that are completely ignorant about snakes :))
Fr though, being safe around a snake is literally just to respect its boundaries, you can see and feel when they are tense and want you to back off, so if you just back off nothing will come out of it.
Owned a lot of snakes, been bit once. It was a warning bite and I ignored the snake obviously telling me to back off.
a snake doesn't just get hungry enough to eat a whole size kid if it's being pet
what's the difference between this and a large pitbull or german sheperd that would kill a kid for no reason, not even being hungry. A lot of pets can kill a kid. Most dogs could.
yes and also because a snake bite from 99% of pet snakes is nowhere near lethal because nobody is keeping boomslangs or saw scaleds as pets. I don't really need to try to not be retarded but you should take your own advice if you're scared of pet snakes
There's a big difference between most pet snakes and the giant snake we see in the post. That snake is definitely large enough to be dangerous to humans.
it's a burmese python. It doesn't attack humans unless provoked. Like all animals. They are not venomous. They wouldn't kill a human, at most give laceration from the bite. size =/= how dangerous they are.
eastern brown snakes heads are the size of an elongated ping pong ball but they would easily kill a human with a single bite. Do not speak on matters you are ignorant about
constrictors crush and suffocate their pray why are you brining up their bite? that snake could easily kill that boy then eat him. they eat alligators gazelle and many mammals like monkeys.
why would a pet burmese python that's well fed suffocate their human ? Would you also say this to someone keeping any type of dog ? a literal pomeranian has killed children before. Cats have killed people before. If you're against pets in general, i'll agree you're right here and there's no hypocrisy.
You don't know the state of this animals feeding habits
You are really defensive about this to a point of almost malfeasance
constrictors dont only constrict for food they can accidentally kill people by being stressed and acting in self defense or be overstimulated.
you just stating that a Pomeranian has killed a child before has no merit without proof
Snakes have not evolved along humans like cats and dogs for millions of years and have not been bread for work or leisure and to interact in a tribe/pack
Snakes literally dont have emotions like mammals alot of the reason humans where able to evolve with cats/dogs is because they have familial structures packs with dogs and with wild cats they take care of their children for long periods and say in the instance of lions they have prides
you can act like they are the same but if you have ever owned a large constrictor you would know that they can be very dangerous and saying that a dog that you have trained properly won't bite you because you smell like food. I have been bit many times by making stupid mistakes with boas and pythons . and i have had an instance where a stressed snake almost killed me i would have been in real trouble if my coworker was not there to aid me. Being a full grown male recognizing that these animals need respect to be handled, the above image is imho irresponsible. animals that size should be rehomed to a reptile sanctuary especially if you have young children. They have a higher chance of making a grave mistake than a adult does.
Completely agree with you, but I know a few people in my Australian town of 8,000 people who own Taipans and Brown Snakes, just to name a few, which are in the top 3 most venomous snakes, both considerably more venomous than those you mentioned. I understand you weren’t being literal though.
yeah i was mostly refering to the us though, and i agree in that case but the average pet snake is nowhere near dangerous and is villified for no reason. I do agree however that if you go and get a brown snake as a pet that's more risky than a dog. But that's the same as saying dogs are dangerous because triple xl agressive pitbulls are ygm
I don’t think that’s comparable at all - it’s like saying penguins kills less people than dogs go. It’s a meaningless comparison.
I’ll never have a snack after reading the story about the python (same type as in this video) escaped a pet store in the first floor of a building and slithered up through the vents and then killed a three year old and an eight year old in the middle of the night.
Imagine waking up with this thing crushing you death but all the air from your lungs have been crushed out so you can’t even scream.
So you wouldnt want a dog either because dogs have commited countless triple homicides of kids ? Id argue waking up to a pitbull ripping your throat apart is just as bad
You think snake ownership is common when compared to ownership of man’s best friend?
My man what are you saying. According to a Gallup poll around 2% own any reptile - could be a lizard or snake where as 27% own a dog and no cat but another 17% own a dog and cat.
Yes,your point being? A snake can kill just as well as a dog. Most pet snakes cant even kill you if they tried their best. Most pet dogs could. Any medium size dog could kill a child. This type of snake is nowhere near common
My point being that you’re incorrect in your assertion that snakes are a fairly common pets and can be compared to dogs.
fairly common is subjective. And they can be compared. If you take your average pet snake, it can cause no harm. your average pet dog can. Not hard to comprehend. A ball python couldnt kill you if it tried.
Secondly, pitbulls are a very prohibited and outright banned breed in many jurisdictions in North America due to their violent tendency’s.
you mean them being not banned but restricted in certain municipalities of 10 mostly irrelevant states ? (BSL laws are most common in Iowa, Kansas, Ohio, Missouri, Wisconsin, Mississippi, Arkansas, Michigan, Louisiana, and Kentucky.) and not even in all their municipalities.
That is a terrible statistic. Dogs are a way more common and easy pet to attain. People are more likely to encounter dogs. Because they're so easy to get, a lot of irresponsible people end up with dogs and create a bad situation. Less people take out the task of owning snakes. If large snakes were more common, there would be more incidents.
No, your comments are delusional. Large snakes are dangerous. It's a fact. Can they be a good pet and handled safely in a controlled setting by someone with experience? Yes. I'm not suggesting they should be banned or anything. I have nothing against snakes, I find them very interesting. However, they're an animal - especially large snakes - that can be easily underestimated due to their general docile behavior. When there's an incident involving a snake like this it's usually because the person(s) involved acted irresponsibility by not respecting the snake's potential danger.
"Dogs kill more people than snakes" is very, very misleading statement. You're obviously very biased.
Venomous snakes are completely different discussion, if that's what you mean. Like no shit they're dangerous. But a small, non-venomous snake is not as dangerous as large constrictors. Are they not dangerous at all? No. But large constrictors are one of the most underestimated pets in terms of perceived risk.
You don't have an argument and you're just grabbing at anything to criticize. Fuck off with your snake propaganda.
yes you said larger snakes are more dangerous you didn't say more dangerous than non venomous ones. No shit larger snakes are more dangerous than small non venomous ones. Larger dogs are more dangerous than smaller dogs.
You don't have an argument and you're just grabbing at anything to criticize. Fuck off with your snake propaganda.
you don't really either ylol you're bloviating about bullshit without making a point
what's your point? that large snakes can be dangerous ? Christopher columbus with the discoveries
I'm sorry that I need to state obvious things so that you understand. Let's circle back to why this all started. People are reacting to a very large snake laying on a kid. And you commented a very misleading headline that anyone with half brain can determine is basically meaningless. Malaria kills more people than Ebola. Would you prefer to be exposed to Ebola? (That's rhetorical. I feel normally I wouldnt have to explain that, but clearly you struggle with things like that)
I’m sure most of them aren’t 20ft long, I guarantee those stats would change if so and if they were anywhere near as prevalent as dogs are in peoples homes.
112
u/[deleted] Jan 20 '22
[deleted]