[Liberal Classic]

Note that, as people have less rights to defend themselves physically, that they come to rely on police and animal control and demand restrictions on dog ownership and the like.

[ZULU]

That's true also.

But the state cannot protect us and is on record as maintaining it has no obligation to do so.

[Protagoras]

Note that, as people have less rights to defend themselves physically, that they come to rely on police and animal control and demand restrictions on dog ownership and the like.

I have never met a classical liberal who didn't agree that the proper role of government in a free society is to defend the rights of it's citizens.

I would be happy to defend my rights, at gunpoint if necessary. If the government does not allow me to, or even if they do, don't they have a duty to defend my rights?

If so, are laws forbidding my neighbors from keeping dangerous animals where they can harm or kill me or my family, wrong?

[SauronOfMordor]

Note that, as people have less rights to defend themselves physically, that they come to rely on police and animal control and demand restrictions on dog ownership and the like.

One reason why Leftists and the government don't like large dogs is that they are likely to defend their owners against any thug that tries to kick in the door

Even if the thug is wearing jackboots