It would not be illegal. Your objection in this instance is not even relevant. First of all, it isn't a big cat. Secondly, it belongs to you and since it's your personal possession you are the one personally responsible for whatever damage it does to you and for your disposition of the bird.

Beautiful bird. :thumb:

This is not directed toward any individual or reply but I just wanted to bring this up.
If a person owns a dangerous animal,they are responsible for maintaining a certain level of security for that animal.Good strong cages to insure it does not escape and get in public where it becomes a danger to others and or their property(animales etc).Measured in that responsibility,is the implied responsibility of keeping the animal secure from the general public.If persons from the general public through what ever means makes contact with the animal,it is a breach of the animals owner.Whether the animal is at home in a cage or out in public on a leash the responsibility of keeping the animal and the public safe lies on the owner.(The law in general states that you must keep your property in a safe manner,EVEN FOR TRESPASSERS!) Any time there is a breach in this it is the fault of the owner.
Although I do not totally agree,this is how the law is written.That being said,the owner should have recourse through the law to prosecute intentional breaches to this level of security in the criminal court system.No new laws are required.Per usual,instead of charging the guilty,be it the owner or the trespasser,the lawmakers just took a broad brush and banned everyone from this contact instead of those who are actually guilty.They have public access to the pictures to identify the violators for God sake,punish the guilty,not the general population!

Wade

As I said it's a case of removing frivolous law suits from the system, not stopping stupid people from being stupid (impossible).

And no, not following the traffic laws, in any direction causes 'accidents' and is unsafe. You are wrong.

Wasn't it Einstein who said "there are limits to being a genius but not to being stupid" or something like that?

.

Your wrong speed limits are just that, the fastest you can drive not the speed at which you must travel.

I regularly drive 55-62 for fuel savings and have 3million safe miles under my belt.

With 3 million miles under your belt it's a wonder you haven't come across those minimum speed signs or the rules of the road stating you must pull over and let cars pass if you insist upon traveling under the speed limit. Also, yes, you can be cited for driving too slowly.

The rules for driving are there to make sure things run smoothly with least incident. You are simply relieving yourself in the public pool when you break them in your arrogance.

ETA: Not all vehicles are tuned to get their best gas mileage between 55-62

Actually the minimum speed on the interstate used to be 40 mph and yes you can be ticketed for impeding the flow of traffic!


Wade

I drive a tad faster but not by much. I set the cruise on 67 And I don't care if the speed limit is 65 or 75,, I go 67 Period End of story. And miles driven, I got around half that at around 1.5 million under my belt of safe driving.
And I get between 30 and 31 MPG on that '94 Buick Century. doing just that 67 period.~
Course when I had my horse in the back seat I drove a little slower and a WHOLE lot more defensively. LOL
Even driving on I-10 in AZ. 60 was IT~! With the horse in the back seat of my '67 Impala. LOL

Yup interstates usually 45 well below what I run, 2 lane rural typically don't have minimums because of ag equipment. And how do you explain split speed limits!

Your right not all are tuned (whatever that means) mines a class 8 truck and that speed gives me the best wind resistance to efficiency getting load to receiver on time.