View previous topic | View next topic

Seagulls

Page 1 of 1

katherine.lavender
1154416.  Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:08 am Reply with quote

Legally, you cannot "tame" a seagull.

A legal case found that a seagull could not be classified as tame, so the "owner" wasn't legally responsible for it. So even if you think it's a tamed pet at your beck and call that you've reared from a chick, you're wrong.

Last thing I ever learned on my Cambridge law degree. Useless, but Quite Interesting. Like the law degree.

 
AlmondFacialBar
1154417.  Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:09 am Reply with quote

Biologically, a seagull doesn't exist, so you could argue that this is a moot point in the first place.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
katherine.lavender
1154425.  Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:26 am Reply with quote

Good point. But I'm afraid the law has never paid any attention to biology!

Maurice v Judd for example - whales are legally fish (not mammals) in New York, for tax reasons.

 
AlmondFacialBar
1154433.  Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:04 am Reply with quote

But then of course biologically speaking fish don't exist either, so why not legally include whales while you're at it anyway? ;-)

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
katherine.lavender
1154476.  Tue Oct 20, 2015 1:14 pm Reply with quote

Wait, wait... are you saying there's no such thing as a fish? Surely not!

 
AlmondFacialBar
1154487.  Tue Oct 20, 2015 3:26 pm Reply with quote

Taxonomically speaking there isn't, no. But the formulation you used there tells me you probably knew that anyway. ;-)

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
'yorz
1154509.  Tue Oct 20, 2015 5:52 pm Reply with quote

The above exchange had me googling and got me...

this

 

Page 1 of 1

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group