On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:10:38 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


When babies start walking and investigating everything in the house, most
people put safety locks on cabinets containing anything that could hurt a
baby. Assuming the home did NOT have these safety locks in place before the
baby, would you agree that their appearance is related to the presence of
the new baby?

I have no children, didn't want them. However, when I was born in the
mid 20th century there was no such thing as baby proof, or locks on
cabinets. I sat and played with the pots for hours and hours. My
mother actually spent time with me, unlike the majority of moms of
this day and age.

This discussion comes up now and
then in rec.gardens. Nothing is ever resolved. Have you actually
asked this person not to allow their dog to pee on your plants? If
so, what did that person say?

One obeyed, and remained friendly. Two said that the first X feet of
property belongs to the public, which is not true (according to our town
justice), and continued to argue. All three were asked politely, in the
exact same way.

Wow, some people have huge ones. You see, I would spend all day with
the camera till I got it on film. People like that are miserable,
poor things.

When these little inconveniences prop up for me I think about the
thousand people who just died all over the world from either
starvation, not a drop of water, or HIV AIDS. I think of the child in
Africa who dies alone at the age of five and a huge vulture now has
some food. There are so many more important things in the world and
locally to put energy into.


You could use this logic to justify looking the other way for almost any
kind of crime. I've got a friend who could remove a picture window from your
house, intact and undamaged, in under 1/2 hour. Would that be OK with you?
After all, it's not assault or indecent exposure, and it's certainly not a
bad as a child starving in Africa. I just like your window and I feel like
having it, purely on a whim. You wouldn't call the police, right?

The likelihood of this happening is pretty much zero. It's not a good
analogy. There is no comparrison. I know of not one person in my
over fifty years of life who has had a window removed because someone
liked it! Give me a better example. Also, I am not trying to work
against you here. I simply said I have much higher priorities than a
dog peeing on my plants and I don't make it a huge deal. It'll either
happen or not.

I know you really hate when the dog pees, but either do the waiting
with the camera and report that person, or do something else to take
your mind off it. Nobody is in disagreement that you have rights.

This discussion has been peaceful. By now most of these type
discussions end in total idiocy. Get the camera out, OR put a video
camera up where it can see the dog doing this. You should be able to
get several hours out of the tape. Eventually you'll capture it.

That would only help if I wanted to waste time at our town court. I'm
considerate of my neighbors. I expect the same, without having to spend
money or take time off from work in order to make it happen. Some of us
understand that when you work hard to have a nice home, you have the right
to peace and harmony.


But you don't have peace and harmony. You are not happy about this.
You also don't have to go to court. Showing the photo to Animal
Control is all you need.

Well, I hope this other guy who is not very nice moves away, or you
can have the opportunity to move to a big property where people aren't
trampling on your life.

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:22:10 +0000 (UTC), FragileWarrior
wrote:


Hope you're feeling better now. Parrots are great. I used to have a
macaw that was one of the smartest creatures I've ever know. PLUS they
talk. That's pretty fun.

I'm still very weak and I have a lot of pain in my legs and arms from
atrophy of laying down for the year! I'll build back up as I slowly
garden. The first day weeding I had to lay down out there! What a
sight. I have hepatitis c and this lowered dose of daily chemo
injections can get rid of the virus. I do have cirrhosis, though.
It'll be fine.


Never own an Irish Wolfhound. They don't call them The Heartbreak Dogs
for nothing.

Every week we watch "The Dog Whisperer," and whenever we see a giant
Mastiff I always say I'd love to have one of those, but their lifespan
is only about 8 years. The parrot is a mini-macaw and yes, she is
very smart and we've had her since she was 12 weeks old. She says
things, but a lot of it is what she picks up from us.

They have miniature donkeys.

Yes, I've seen them. One day we'll do our dream and live where I can
have horses and mules and donkeys and nubians. I love to dream.

As for the rest, all Disney films for children are sadistic, IMO.

"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:10:38 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


When babies start walking and investigating everything in the house, most
people put safety locks on cabinets containing anything that could hurt a
baby. Assuming the home did NOT have these safety locks in place before
the
baby, would you agree that their appearance is related to the presence of
the new baby?

I have no children, didn't want them. However, when I was born in the
mid 20th century there was no such thing as baby proof, or locks on
cabinets. I sat and played with the pots for hours and hours. My
mother actually spent time with me, unlike the majority of moms of
this day and age.

You just dodged the question. Would you mind answering the question about
the locks and the presence of the baby?




This discussion comes up now and
then in rec.gardens. Nothing is ever resolved. Have you actually
asked this person not to allow their dog to pee on your plants? If
so, what did that person say?

One obeyed, and remained friendly. Two said that the first X feet of
property belongs to the public, which is not true (according to our town
justice), and continued to argue. All three were asked politely, in the
exact same way.

Wow, some people have huge ones. You see, I would spend all day with
the camera till I got it on film. People like that are miserable,
poor things.

When these little inconveniences prop up for me I think about the
thousand people who just died all over the world from either
starvation, not a drop of water, or HIV AIDS. I think of the child in
Africa who dies alone at the age of five and a huge vulture now has
some food. There are so many more important things in the world and
locally to put energy into.


You could use this logic to justify looking the other way for almost any
kind of crime. I've got a friend who could remove a picture window from
your
house, intact and undamaged, in under 1/2 hour. Would that be OK with you?
After all, it's not assault or indecent exposure, and it's certainly not a
bad as a child starving in Africa. I just like your window and I feel like
having it, purely on a whim. You wouldn't call the police, right?

The likelihood of this happening is pretty much zero. It's not a good
analogy. There is no comparrison. I know of not one person in my
over fifty years of life who has had a window removed because someone
liked it! Give me a better example. Also, I am not trying to work
against you here. I simply said I have much higher priorities than a
dog peeing on my plants and I don't make it a huge deal. It'll either
happen or not.


Nah...let's stick with the vanishing window example. The likelihood of it
happening has no bearing on the analogy. It's something I could do to your
property, just because I felt like it. It's no different than what some dog
owners do 365 days a year, at least once a day.



Some of us
understand that when you work hard to have a nice home, you have the right
to peace and harmony.


But you don't have peace and harmony. You are not happy about this.
You also don't have to go to court. Showing the photo to Animal
Control is all you need.

Our animal control department is useless, as is our police department. Get
his: Last summer, I stepped out on the porch around 1:30 AM, after watching
a movie. I noticed two silver bikes parked in front of my neighbor's house
across the street. The people on the bikes split very quickly. I called the
cops, who showed up an hour later. Next day, my neighbor said his cars had
been broken into.

Two nights later, 2:00 AM, I stepped outside again and in the opposite
direction, two silver bikes again. Called the cops, and said "When the
officer's done handling this, could you please have him call me or stop by?
I like to know what's been done". Two minutes later, there's a cop at my
door, asking me questions about whether the people were white, black,
Hispanic, their shoe size, their haircuts, the brand names on their eyeglass
frames, any cavities in their teeth. I said "Look! Two days ago, there's a
burglary accompanied by two silver bikes at a time of night when we never
see bikes here. It's that time of night again - you don't need to know
ANYTHING about the riders - just go look for two silver bikes!"

Cop: "Oh....OK. I'll be back". Duh.

On Feb 27, 6:51 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Jangchub" wrote in message

...



On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:58:24 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

This example has nothing to do with dog ordinances. And, there's no reason
(or easy way) to photograph plants covered in ****. The issue is this: If
a
property owner asks you not to do something on their property, you do not
ask why. You obey. If you disagree with what I've just said, then I have
the
right to urinate on your dog, in your mail box, or anything on that
property, and there's nothing you can do about it.

With me so far?

I'm with you, but not with the level of anger you have about it. Then
again, I let rats live on my property and wouldn't think of killing
them.

It's not anger. Frankly, it's an interesting legal debate, but for some
people, that involves some heavy lifting. They don't realize that in Supreme
Court hearings, the justices use hypothetical ideas that seem outrageous,
but they're important for purposes of pushing peoples' legal thinking to
extremes. The same thing goes on with dog owners. Was it you who asked
earlier why someone didn't deserve an explanation about why I wanted no dogs
on the property? A judge might ask you this: If you're hiking, and see lots
of signs saying "No Trespassing", do you disobey the signs because they
don't contain a reason why?

I find the discussion very peaceful.


Ahhh Spring is in the air
And trolling is bursting forth
Dou--er--Joe take your hook and line
And do some icefishing instead
:? )

Emilie

"mleblanca" expounded:

Ahhh Spring is in the air
And trolling is bursting forth
Dou--er--Joe take your hook and line
And do some icefishing instead
:? )

How true!
--
Ann, gardening in Zone 6a
South of Boston, Massachusetts
e-mail address is not checked
******************************

Joe, I am truly saddened by your inability to stop your neighbor's
dogs from peeing on your plants. I have nothing more to add. I'm
fresh out.


On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 19:25:47 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Jangchub" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:10:38 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


When babies start walking and investigating everything in the house, most
people put safety locks on cabinets containing anything that could hurt a
baby. Assuming the home did NOT have these safety locks in place before
the
baby, would you agree that their appearance is related to the presence of
the new baby?

I have no children, didn't want them. However, when I was born in the
mid 20th century there was no such thing as baby proof, or locks on
cabinets. I sat and played with the pots for hours and hours. My
mother actually spent time with me, unlike the majority of moms of
this day and age.

You just dodged the question. Would you mind answering the question about
the locks and the presence of the baby?




This discussion comes up now and
then in rec.gardens. Nothing is ever resolved. Have you actually
asked this person not to allow their dog to pee on your plants? If
so, what did that person say?

One obeyed, and remained friendly. Two said that the first X feet of
property belongs to the public, which is not true (according to our town
justice), and continued to argue. All three were asked politely, in the
exact same way.

Wow, some people have huge ones. You see, I would spend all day with
the camera till I got it on film. People like that are miserable,
poor things.

When these little inconveniences prop up for me I think about the
thousand people who just died all over the world from either
starvation, not a drop of water, or HIV AIDS. I think of the child in
Africa who dies alone at the age of five and a huge vulture now has
some food. There are so many more important things in the world and
locally to put energy into.


You could use this logic to justify looking the other way for almost any
kind of crime. I've got a friend who could remove a picture window from
your
house, intact and undamaged, in under 1/2 hour. Would that be OK with you?
After all, it's not assault or indecent exposure, and it's certainly not a
bad as a child starving in Africa. I just like your window and I feel like
having it, purely on a whim. You wouldn't call the police, right?

The likelihood of this happening is pretty much zero. It's not a good
analogy. There is no comparrison. I know of not one person in my
over fifty years of life who has had a window removed because someone
liked it! Give me a better example. Also, I am not trying to work
against you here. I simply said I have much higher priorities than a
dog peeing on my plants and I don't make it a huge deal. It'll either
happen or not.


Nah...let's stick with the vanishing window example. The likelihood of it
happening has no bearing on the analogy. It's something I could do to your
property, just because I felt like it. It's no different than what some dog
owners do 365 days a year, at least once a day.



Some of us
understand that when you work hard to have a nice home, you have the right
to peace and harmony.


But you don't have peace and harmony. You are not happy about this.
You also don't have to go to court. Showing the photo to Animal
Control is all you need.

Our animal control department is useless, as is our police department. Get
his: Last summer, I stepped out on the porch around 1:30 AM, after watching
a movie. I noticed two silver bikes parked in front of my neighbor's house
across the street. The people on the bikes split very quickly. I called the
cops, who showed up an hour later. Next day, my neighbor said his cars had
been broken into.

Two nights later, 2:00 AM, I stepped outside again and in the opposite
direction, two silver bikes again. Called the cops, and said "When the
officer's done handling this, could you please have him call me or stop by?
I like to know what's been done". Two minutes later, there's a cop at my
door, asking me questions about whether the people were white, black,
Hispanic, their shoe size, their haircuts, the brand names on their eyeglass
frames, any cavities in their teeth. I said "Look! Two days ago, there's a
burglary accompanied by two silver bikes at a time of night when we never
see bikes here. It's that time of night again - you don't need to know
ANYTHING about the riders - just go look for two silver bikes!"

Cop: "Oh....OK. I'll be back". Duh.

You're in contempt of court, sort of. :-) I thought you had courage.

"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
Joe, I am truly saddened by your inability to stop your neighbor's
dogs from peeing on your plants. I have nothing more to add. I'm
fresh out.


On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 19:25:47 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Jangchub" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:10:38 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


When babies start walking and investigating everything in the house,
most
people put safety locks on cabinets containing anything that could hurt
a
baby. Assuming the home did NOT have these safety locks in place before
the
baby, would you agree that their appearance is related to the presence
of
the new baby?

I have no children, didn't want them. However, when I was born in the
mid 20th century there was no such thing as baby proof, or locks on
cabinets. I sat and played with the pots for hours and hours. My
mother actually spent time with me, unlike the majority of moms of
this day and age.

You just dodged the question. Would you mind answering the question about
the locks and the presence of the baby?




This discussion comes up now and
then in rec.gardens. Nothing is ever resolved. Have you actually
asked this person not to allow their dog to pee on your plants? If
so, what did that person say?

One obeyed, and remained friendly. Two said that the first X feet of
property belongs to the public, which is not true (according to our town
justice), and continued to argue. All three were asked politely, in the
exact same way.

Wow, some people have huge ones. You see, I would spend all day with
the camera till I got it on film. People like that are miserable,
poor things.

When these little inconveniences prop up for me I think about the
thousand people who just died all over the world from either
starvation, not a drop of water, or HIV AIDS. I think of the child in
Africa who dies alone at the age of five and a huge vulture now has
some food. There are so many more important things in the world and
locally to put energy into.


You could use this logic to justify looking the other way for almost any
kind of crime. I've got a friend who could remove a picture window from
your
house, intact and undamaged, in under 1/2 hour. Would that be OK with
you?
After all, it's not assault or indecent exposure, and it's certainly not
a
bad as a child starving in Africa. I just like your window and I feel
like
having it, purely on a whim. You wouldn't call the police, right?

The likelihood of this happening is pretty much zero. It's not a good
analogy. There is no comparrison. I know of not one person in my
over fifty years of life who has had a window removed because someone
liked it! Give me a better example. Also, I am not trying to work
against you here. I simply said I have much higher priorities than a
dog peeing on my plants and I don't make it a huge deal. It'll either
happen or not.


Nah...let's stick with the vanishing window example. The likelihood of it
happening has no bearing on the analogy. It's something I could do to your
property, just because I felt like it. It's no different than what some
dog
owners do 365 days a year, at least once a day.



Some of us
understand that when you work hard to have a nice home, you have the
right
to peace and harmony.


But you don't have peace and harmony. You are not happy about this.
You also don't have to go to court. Showing the photo to Animal
Control is all you need.

Our animal control department is useless, as is our police department. Get
his: Last summer, I stepped out on the porch around 1:30 AM, after
watching
a movie. I noticed two silver bikes parked in front of my neighbor's house
across the street. The people on the bikes split very quickly. I called
the
cops, who showed up an hour later. Next day, my neighbor said his cars had
been broken into.

Two nights later, 2:00 AM, I stepped outside again and in the opposite
direction, two silver bikes again. Called the cops, and said "When the
officer's done handling this, could you please have him call me or stop
by?
I like to know what's been done". Two minutes later, there's a cop at my
door, asking me questions about whether the people were white, black,
Hispanic, their shoe size, their haircuts, the brand names on their
eyeglass
frames, any cavities in their teeth. I said "Look! Two days ago, there's a
burglary accompanied by two silver bikes at a time of night when we never
see bikes here. It's that time of night again - you don't need to know
ANYTHING about the riders - just go look for two silver bikes!"

Cop: "Oh....OK. I'll be back". Duh.

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 21:41:36 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You're in contempt of court, sort of. :-) I thought you had courage.

I like a good debate. You are very rigid on this subject and I can't
say I blame you because when the neighbor cat stalks the wild birds I
get annoyed. Or one time we accidentally trapped it in our garage for
a very long day in extremely high heat. I was not angry or annoyed at
the cat, but at the a-hole owners who let the cat roam without care.

So, I'm going to return to my other subjects of interest and I truly
hope it gets resolved for you.

Victoria

"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 21:41:36 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

You're in contempt of court, sort of. :-) I thought you had courage.

I like a good debate. You are very rigid on this subject and I can't
say I blame you because when the neighbor cat stalks the wild birds I
get annoyed. Or one time we accidentally trapped it in our garage for
a very long day in extremely high heat. I was not angry or annoyed at
the cat, but at the a-hole owners who let the cat roam without care.

So, I'm going to return to my other subjects of interest and I truly
hope it gets resolved for you.

Victoria


I'm thinking of hiring a witch with some bad mojo to take care of this. I'm
envisioning dogs being pecked to death by birds, like in the Alfred
Hitchcock movie. :-)

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:32:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:47:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Admittedly, my negative experiences are with people who walk dogs in my
neighborhood. Even the so-called "good dog owners" who clean up after
their
dogs are idiots. Why do I say that? Look at the brief conversation
below
and
tell me what's wrong with it. Scenario: Dog, on leash, taking a leak at
the
perimeter of a flower bed that is two feet from the street.

Me: Excuse me, would you please NOT let your dog use my property as a
toilet
in the future?
Dog criminal: Why?


That's it. What's wrong with the conversation?


Maybe you should move where there is nothing but you. That way, you
can determine every situation with great vigor.


Need help figuring out what's wrong with the conversation? He

You hear an odd noise outside your front door. You look out the window
and
see someone spray painting the door. You ask him to stop. He asks "Why?"

What's wrong with the conversation?


I didn't question the conversation. I said if you don't want people
walking dogs where you live you can do one of two things;

Move to the country on huge property where people don't walk dogs.
Let it go.


You are illustrating the multifaceted problem for me. Thank you.

Facet 1: Some dog owners think everyone is supposed to love their dog.
That is incorrect.
Facet 2: Some dog owners don't understand the concept of private property.
If I tell you not to do something on my land, you have no legal leg to
stand on by refusing to obey.


That's just an inconsiderate and rude person. Not the dogs fault. Just
because a person has a dog doesn't mean they become inconsiderate and rude.

Je

"Jen" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:32:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Jangchub" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:47:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Admittedly, my negative experiences are with people who walk dogs in
my
neighborhood. Even the so-called "good dog owners" who clean up after
their
dogs are idiots. Why do I say that? Look at the brief conversation
below
and
tell me what's wrong with it. Scenario: Dog, on leash, taking a leak
at
the
perimeter of a flower bed that is two feet from the street.

Me: Excuse me, would you please NOT let your dog use my property as a
toilet
in the future?
Dog criminal: Why?


That's it. What's wrong with the conversation?


Maybe you should move where there is nothing but you. That way, you
can determine every situation with great vigor.


Need help figuring out what's wrong with the conversation? He

You hear an odd noise outside your front door. You look out the window
and
see someone spray painting the door. You ask him to stop. He asks "Why?"

What's wrong with the conversation?


I didn't question the conversation. I said if you don't want people
walking dogs where you live you can do one of two things;

Move to the country on huge property where people don't walk dogs.
Let it go.


You are illustrating the multifaceted problem for me. Thank you.

Facet 1: Some dog owners think everyone is supposed to love their dog.
That is incorrect.
Facet 2: Some dog owners don't understand the concept of private
property. If I tell you not to do something on my land, you have no legal
leg to stand on by refusing to obey.


That's just an inconsiderate and rude person. Not the dogs fault. Just
because a person has a dog doesn't mean they become inconsiderate and
rude.

Je


Actually, many of them suffer from coprophilia. They walk around with little
bags of dog poop, pretending they're going to throw it away when they get
home. Coprophilia is treatable with psychiatric help, but first, they have
face the fact that they have a real problem.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 02:51:57 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


It's not anger. Frankly, it's an interesting legal debate, but for some
people, that involves some heavy lifting. They don't realize that in
Supreme
Court hearings, the justices use hypothetical ideas that seem outrageous,
but they're important for purposes of pushing peoples' legal thinking to
extremes. The same thing goes on with dog owners. Was it you who asked
earlier why someone didn't deserve an explanation about why I wanted no
dogs
on the property? A judge might ask you this: If you're hiking, and see
lots
of signs saying "No Trespassing", do you disobey the signs because they
don't contain a reason why?

I find the discussion very peaceful.


I don't believe I said someone didn't deserve and explanation...

I do know if I was really annoyed by something and I needed to sit
with a camera around the usual time this person walks their dog, I'd
do it.

There are laws which protect you as well as me, but the downside of
making reports on people is that their animals usually wind up in the
pound and euthanized.

It's never the fault of the animal.

When babies start walking and investigating everything in the house, most
people put safety locks on cabinets containing anything that could hurt a
baby. Assuming the home did NOT have these safety locks in place before
the baby, would you agree that their appearance is related to the presence
of the new baby?


Not the babies fault if there isn't.


This discussion comes up now and
then in rec.gardens. Nothing is ever resolved. Have you actually
asked this person not to allow their dog to pee on your plants? If
so, what did that person say?

One obeyed, and remained friendly. Two said that the first X feet of
property belongs to the public, which is not true (according to our town
justice), and continued to argue. All three were asked politely, in the
exact same way.


So why are you blaming dog owners. Why not just blame this "person"?



When these little inconveniences prop up for me I think about the
thousand people who just died all over the world from either
starvation, not a drop of water, or HIV AIDS. I think of the child in
Africa who dies alone at the age of five and a huge vulture now has
some food. There are so many more important things in the world and
locally to put energy into.


You could use this logic to justify looking the other way for almost any
kind of crime. I've got a friend who could remove a picture window from
your house, intact and undamaged, in under 1/2 hour. Would that be OK with
you? After all, it's not assault or indecent exposure, and it's certainly
not a bad as a child starving in Africa. I just like your window and I
feel like having it, purely on a whim. You wouldn't call the police,
right?

A dog doesn't purposely pee on your garden because it annoys you. It
doesn't even consciously think about it.

Jen

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Jen" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Jangchub" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:32:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Jangchub" wrote in message
om...
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:47:20 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Admittedly, my negative experiences are with people who walk dogs in
my
neighborhood. Even the so-called "good dog owners" who clean up
after
their
dogs are idiots. Why do I say that? Look at the brief conversation
below
and
tell me what's wrong with it. Scenario: Dog, on leash, taking a leak
at
the
perimeter of a flower bed that is two feet from the street.

Me: Excuse me, would you please NOT let your dog use my property as a
toilet
in the future?
Dog criminal: Why?


That's it. What's wrong with the conversation?


Maybe you should move where there is nothing but you. That way, you
can determine every situation with great vigor.


Need help figuring out what's wrong with the conversation? He

You hear an odd noise outside your front door. You look out the window
and
see someone spray painting the door. You ask him to stop. He asks
"Why?"

What's wrong with the conversation?


I didn't question the conversation. I said if you don't want people
walking dogs where you live you can do one of two things;

Move to the country on huge property where people don't walk dogs.
Let it go.


You are illustrating the multifaceted problem for me. Thank you.

Facet 1: Some dog owners think everyone is supposed to love their dog.
That is incorrect.
Facet 2: Some dog owners don't understand the concept of private
property. If I tell you not to do something on my land, you have no
legal leg to stand on by refusing to obey.


That's just an inconsiderate and rude person. Not the dogs fault. Just
because a person has a dog doesn't mean they become inconsiderate and
rude.

Je


Actually, many of them suffer from coprophilia. They walk around with
little bags of dog poop, pretending they're going to throw it away when
they get home. Coprophilia is treatable with psychiatric help, but first,
they have face the fact that they have a real problem.


I didn't think you could be any more ridiculous than you already had been.
I think you hate dogs, and you hate inconsiderate people. So you're
lumping them together. Somehow making the generalisation that all dog
owners become inconsiderate.

Jen

"Jen" expounded:

I didn't think you could be any more ridiculous than you already had been.
I think you hate dogs, and you hate inconsiderate people. So you're
lumping them together. Somehow making the generalisation that all dog
owners become inconsiderate.

Actually, Jen, he's a troll. Don't feed him.
--
Ann, gardening in Zone 6a
South of Boston, Massachusetts
e-mail address is not checked
******************************

"Ann" wrote in message
...
"Jen" expounded:

I didn't think you could be any more ridiculous than you already had been.
I think you hate dogs, and you hate inconsiderate people. So you're
lumping them together. Somehow making the generalisation that all dog
owners become inconsiderate.

Actually, Jen, he's a troll. Don't feed him.


I'm not a troll. I've been gardening for 35 years, and I contribute useful
information. But, are there no subjects about which you feel strongly? If
you're asked about them, do you respond with anything less than total
honesty?