LOL that's not what I was getting at, the specific case, which is DUH! I was getting at the GENERAL application of the law. Except apparently it DOES say "AND...", so maybe 1 DOES have to prove both the dog already attacked AND you feel threatened....
If it were just what I quoted - we all know how bad people's "perceptions" can be. Even what people SAW is often flawed in criminal cases, much less how they feel!
Yup, I realize that you were just getting at the application of the law. I just found myself wondering why you have cause to believe that the general application of the law will cause needless harm to innocent dogs.