Humans have an ambivalent relationship to rabbits: they are popular pets but are also widely used in the fur industry and as laboratory animals. As urban wildlife they are commonly considered to be pests. In any case, humans are preoccupied with their proliferation: they either breed them or inhibit their thriving through culling or other kinds of interventions. This essay draws on news articles, scholarly work, and examples from the authors’ study of municipal hunting and wildlife management, to discuss the biopolitics of killing, culling, and caring for rabbits. By thinking with rabbits, the essay interrogates the blind spots of Michel Foucault’s and Giorgio Agamben’s conceptualizations of biopolitics and furthers a theoretical understanding of the management of non-human life. Biopolitics aims to optimise human lives—a governing where violence is the exception. For non-human animals, in contrast, violence is the rule and an elevated political status is the exception, attributed selectively to some animals in ‘zones of distinction’ like homes, animal shelters, and sanctuaries. By bringing focus to such zones, the essay sheds light on the wider workings of the biopolitical and anthropological machines and points towards a way out of the biopolitical rabbit hole.