[Colt .45]

"A bum is living in a park with a vicious dog. I have a 16 month old daughter, and we live right by a park with a war memorial. We walk there all the time. If there was a smelly bum living there with a vicious dog who was biting people that got too close to the memorial I would want him gone, too."

Seems kinda irresponsible to me that you would let your kid go near the dog. And if the guy stinks, so what, walk upwind of him ... its a free country!

" But it is absurd to think that this guy has a right to live on the war memorial."

In my view, he has more of a right to be there than someone like you would. He paid for his right to be there in blood and his own flesh! What have you given?

[Rodney King]

Seems kinda irresponsible to me that you would let your kid go near the dog. And if the guy stinks, so what, walk upwind of him ... its a free country!

I wouldn't. Thats the point. Public lands are public lands, and people with vicious dogs should not be allowed to just stake them out to prevent me and my daughter form walking by. You are right about the "stinks" part, that was out of line.

[Rodney King]

In my view, he has more of a right to be there than someone like you would.

Yes, he would. Are you saying thought that every vet has a right to stake out land in the middle of any park in any town and protect it with a vicious dog? If being a vet entitles one to land, that's great. I don't think the Feds should own all the land in the west that they do. Let's have a new homestaed act and give this guy 200 acres somewhere.

He paid for his right to be there in blood and his own flesh!

So is it your belief then that any US vet has a right to stake out any piece of land anywhere in the US and defend it with a violent dog?

What have you given? Given that I was only two at the time Saigon fell, and in high school during the gulf war, the answer is nothing if you are referring to combat service.