I have been reading all the comments about Ben Stiller's comments about
ferrets.  After he apologized, I wrote to Matt Lauer and Ben's agent and
thanked him / them for the apology (thanks to whoever posted their e-mail
addresses).
 
I wouldn't blame Stiller if he were still apprehensive about ferrets and
being bitten (again).  He probably will be for years to come, especially
if he doesn't have any further close contact with them.  Heck, I'm still
apprehensive of my Bart, and he hasn't drawn blood in a long time.  He
now licks my cheek, but I still don't quite trust him near my nose or
mouth.  (He tries to be good, and I can see him resist the urge when he
licks his lips instead of biting; he's a good boy now).
 
The comments about the positive effect legalized ferrets would have
on the CA economy are worth pursuing further.  Even if Arnold isn't
necessarily for legalizing ferrets, he and his state is in a financial
bind, and it could be a way to get his attention and interest.
 
If making ferrets illegal in only one state were a logical decision, all
the states would follow suit.  What's wrong with CA that makes them
different?  What twisted politician or organization did that?  How many
ferret owners have moved away from CA because of that, and what negative
effect has that had on their economy?
 
Just a few thoughts.
 
Gary
[Posted in FML issue 4397]