# data[].attributes.body
2. The first writer think that we should not have the wild animals as pets, the second writer thinks that we should because the titles say what they think

# data[].attributes.body
2. The writers think that exotic animals should be pets because in the title it states " wild animals aren't pets " even saying why you should not have exotic pets in the article.

# data[].attributes.body
3:the counterargument was that innocent people were killed by wild animals and 18 rare bengal tigers either auctioned off or sold

# data[].attributes.body
2:people who own exotic animals actually care sometimes and the

# data[].attributes.body
1:Both texts talk about the incident in zansvile,ohio

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think Zanesville, Ohio  where both trying to get the word out if people should have exotic animals as pets.
2. One person is against people with exotic animals as pets and the other person is not against having exotic animals  for pets.
3.The counterargument that the author address that people should not have exotic animals as pets.

# data[].attributes.body
The Zanesville incident refers to Terry Thompson springing dozen of lion, tigers ,bears and other wild creatures before killing himself.

# data[].attributes.body
1. a farmer let out wild exotic animals and killed himself. They both used this to help both sides of the argument. On the other side of the argument they used to say that "must people are responsible".
2. one writer is against people having animals I know this because he is stating all the bad things that could happen if you had a exotic animal. The other writer is with the people that think that they should own a exotic animal I know this because she is stating all the good things that could happen if you own an exotic animal

# data[].attributes.body
1. In both text they talk about Zanesville, Ohio because there was tragedy from wild exotic animals.

# data[].attributes.body
1. In the first article it talks about how its dangerous the second article it disagrees with the first article and says you should be allowed. both articals are against each other though.

# data[].attributes.headline
they both refer to zanesvillle,ohio to the incident

# data[].attributes.subject
they both refer to zanesvillle,ohio to the incident

# data[].attributes.body
In the first artical it states that how dangerous that wild animals in the seconed artical it disagrees  with the first artical that wild or exitec animals are not allowed. And i think they should not be allowed because you are basicly takeing the wild animals instics away and locking it dehind bars and that means they desreve like them hunting instics that means that they will reles it on the public. And both articals are agenst each other

# data[].attributes.body
1. Both texts talk about Thompson, and how he is not safe with the animals and how he left them home alone and that's how the Zanesville insidet was about.    2.The author that wrote about the first article did not agree about exotic animals and they said, "wild animals are not pets." In the second article the author says "the simple answer is yes".

# data[].attributes.body
1. In the first article it proves how dangerous exotic animals can be.  This  also shows that if something such as the Zanesville  incident was to happen again how dangerous it could be. The second article  has a counter argument about how rare it is for stuff such as the Zanesville incident happens very rarely and most animal owners are not like that and actually care.
2. While the editorial believes that that exotic animals are not okay the commentary believes it is okay .
I know that the editorial believes it is NOT okay. I can prove this because it shows the negatives and it says it in the title . The commentary says all of the good things in the text she states," The simple is yes."  y'all copycats

# data[].attributes.body
1. They both refer to zanesville, ohio to show different stories the first article shows the accident and how it was bad and the second article says if owning exotic animal should be legal.
2. Each writer feels different about people owning exotic animals the first writer in the editorial  thinks exotic animals should not be owned i know that because its states "But public safety, common sense and compassion for animals all dictate the same conclusion: wild animals are not pets.And the second aricle has a different opinion about exotic animals

# data[].attributes.body
1 I think both texts talk about the Zanesville nsidint becouse in the etitorial the author uses it as a reasons why people should not own exotic animals and in the commontary she uses it to say not everybodys that crazy.

2  The writer for the etitorial thinks people should not be aloud to have exodic animals and the writer for the comontary thinks exotic animals should be aloud if laws are enforced.

# data[].attributes.headline
               Both text say terry tompson was not a responsible owner to own exotic animals. The first article was about how people should not own exotic animals becase in zanesville terry tompson let out all of his animals the killed himself becae he new he was not responsible.In article 2 about how people should own exotic animals. the author the second article 2 he said that people should be able to take of exotic pets if welfare is taken care off.            

# data[].attributes.subject
               Both text say terry tompson was not a responsible owner to own exotic animals. The first article was about how people should not own exotic animals becase in zanesville terry tompson let out all of his animals the killed himself becae he new he was not responsible.In article 2 about how people should own exotic animals. the author the second article 2 he said that people should be able to take of exotic pets if welfare is taken care off.            

# data[].attributes.body
In article 1 the author says that people should not take of exotic pets becase in 2009 a 2 year old was stranglged to death by a python.In article 2 the author thinks people should be able to be taken care of exotic pets because only 3.25 are killed by capttive big cats,and about 125 people per day die from car accidents.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The reason they both talked about it is they both trying to get the word out on their side.

2. The way they feel about animals vary, the editorial didn't want exotic animals to be pets, but in the comintary they feel that exotic animals can be pets.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Both texts refer to the incident in Zanesville, Ohio to show their opinion about the incident, and to start counter arguments to state their opinion, and why they are right.
2. Each writer feels a different way about exotic animals. The editorial believes exotic animals should not be pets because it is dangerous and sometimes deadly, and the commentary believes that wild animals should be pets because "Responsible private ownership of exotic animals should be legal if animal welfare is taken care of."