On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 05:36:39 -0700 (PDT), Bobo Bonobo® wrote:

> On Apr 18, 3:39*am, Rhonda Anderson > wrote:
>> Bobo Bonobo® > wrote :
>>
>> *Dogs
>>
>>> that have potential for harming humans are dangerous weapons, just
>>> like guns, and when the owner fails to exercise due diligence they
>>> should have their right to own dogs taken away, just as habitual drunk
>>> drivers are banned from driving, or child molesters are banned from
>>> unsupervised contact with children, or violent felons are disallowed
>>> the right to own firearms.
>>
>> _Every_ dog has the potential to harm humans. _Every_ dog. _Every_ breed.
>>
>> The only dog with no potential to harm anyone is one that has had its teeth
>> and claws removed.
>
> Then perhaps no one should bring them into public, ever. What type of
> dog do you own, or have you owned?
>
> The dog in this tale is a MFing rottweiler.
>>
>> Even those "gentle" dogs you mentioned who would never harm anyone may bite
>> if they were threatened or injured.
>
> Did the little girl in the original post go up and pull the dog's
> tail? No, she attempted to be affectionate.
>>
>> Owners of all dogs should act responsibly. And anyone who may be in the
>> vicinity of a dog should also act responsibly. Parents should not let their
>> children approach or pat strange dogs.
>
> I agree, but the dog's owner had just assured them that it was a
> friendly dog. What if we were in a checkout line and you accidentally
> hit me with an item that you were putting up on conveyor belt, and I
> reacted by punching you?

i would have no trouble believing that.

blake