 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 3 months for $50.00 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by s_simpson on March 18, 2003 at 11:16:42:
In Reply to: Re: How's this for a solution.... posted by LAF on March 18, 2003 at 10:41:29:
I'm not so sure that registration would be so impossible. For instance, consider the number of cars that are registered in the U.S., or as FAF pointed out, the number of dogs/cats/horses/etc.
It would certainly be inconvenient, but not impossible. Moreover, maybe if the system was a little more complex there would be fewer instances of people getting venomous snakes to "show off".
As for the insurance, I respectfully disagree that you couldn't have a plethora of different risk classes. I used to work for an insurance company (health/life/prop-casualty) and they had a boggling number of classes for policy holders. The real question is whether or not so many classes would be necessary.
I think the bottom line is that you have snakes that are: harmless, dangerous but not venomous, mildly venomous, moderately venomous, and extremely venomous. All that the insurance companies would care about would be "what is the dollar-liability for medical expenses related to an attack and how likely is that attack".
For something like a ball python, the risk would be low and the dollar-risk would be low. For a mangrove snake, the risk would be moderate (semi-aggressive) and the liability would be moderate (venom not dangerous unless there's an allergy). For a mamba, clearly it would be high risk and high potential cost.
It's really an interesting notion, though.
Pet Insurance -- the next way for insurance companies to rake in premiums! lol
