It's peanut butter jelly time!!!

Actually killing them is not permissible and the 'common' ones are exempted... except... if you kill off one type the other can fill the gap

"without any traps that glue, snap, or crush anymore"

so just poisoning them is still allowed?

i can see why you'd ban a lot of the other methods cuz they are just plain cruel, in some cases leaving an animal stuck in a half alive/half dead position for hours on end.

That's not using a trap, that's sitting them inside a gas chamber.

The cost is extremely prohibitive to do that with rodents.

Part of the commentary of the origional link

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/capital-land/2012/01/md-delegate-moves-ban-rat-trafficking-defend-state-borders/2117506

Maryland is moving to ban transfer of rats

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=893&sid=2713468

Actually that link outlines thebgas chamber approach also.

Very expensive all told

Ok maybe its extreme. but sometimes extreme measures are necessary.  we let the rats find a nice restaurant for the meeting.  they pick the place so they feel safe. I go to it alone, unarmed.  after they trust me, I go to the john where you hid a tactical nuke beforehand.  then, I take them.

Think of the all the jobs that will be created for...er..exterminators?

euthanasia can be performed in many ways, the key factor being that it is a death that does not make the organism suffer. By saying that rats do not deserve euthenasia, can I conclude that you are in favor of animal cruelty? Or at least not opposed to it?

examples could be carbonmonoxide poisoning (in your beloved gaschambers) or just an opiate overdose, which in the rat's case (as they are small organisms which would require small amounts of these substances to result in death) would not have to be as expensive as you claim, given you choose the right chemical.

Then again, politicians are not chemists and are all too often completely clueless when it comes to anything regarding exact sciences...