Quote:
Originally Posted by rubicon
Pet friendly community vis a vis retirement community for people ?
No dogs allowed? I may be wrong but I haven't read one sign here yet
If a dog is allowed then an owner has every right vis a vis owners responsibilities?
Beside which a poster already stated that the only public establishment with a permit is Cody's
A dog is an "individual"??? vis a vis humans being described as individuals.
As individuals used here explains why some dog owners walk their dogs in baby carriages
As long as a dog is behaving vis a vis the unpredictability of when and to whom a dog will strike/bite.
The Villages is first and foremost for people
Cest la vie
|
Rubicon, you kind of lost me with all the "vis a vis'. In any case, my post that you quoted was written several days ago and it was in response to specific comments from other posters. To quote it now outside of the context in which it was written is unfair. For instance, my mention of the "individuality" of dogs was in response to a couple of posts that purported to "know" what makes all dogs happy. Dogs DO have unique breed traits and personalities, and based on those personalities, they like or dislike doing different activities. So a blanket statement such as "your dog is happier when left home", is not true for all dogs.
As far as "no dog signs", I've seen several "service dogs only" signs. Yes, I read the statement that Cody's was the only establishment that had a permit. Are you sure that information is current and/or correct? I don't know...don't really care.