qtla9111
Monterrey, Mexico
Senior Member
Joined: 09/17/2003
View Profile
 Offline
|
Too bad they can't do that to humans and then attach their print to every product they buy. No one would think about littering then.
1998 Nissan Pathfinder
2004 Shadow Cruiser 18ft.
Living and Boondocking Mexico
|
Retired Wileys
Lake Jackson, Tx USA
Senior Member
Joined: 04/08/2004
View Profile
Offline
|
I deleted my first response to this. nuf said
* This post was
edited 10/05/08 06:56pm by Retired Wileys *
Herschal & Pam Wiley
2003 2500HD Crewcab Chevy
26H 2000 Prowler LS w/slide
|
Code2High
Agoura, CA
Senior Member
Joined: 12/21/2004
View Profile
Offline
|
I think snipers with rock salt loads, strategically placed, would be a much faster and cheaper way to convince people to pick up after their dogs.  Of course, you'd have to make sure not to hit any innocent parties, including the dogs...
I know, I know, that's bad, but if you saw how much dog waste I have to walk past daily with my dogs, you'd understand completely. Some people just need to be spanked.
susan
What I want to know is, when are they going to start selling Comfort Zone for HUMANS????? 'Cause some days...
|
Sunshine State
Viera, Florida
Senior Member
Joined: 04/18/2007
View Profile
Offline
|
Wow, now that is amazing!!?? It gets me to thinking of how that would work in this country...Plaintiff turns over poop of Defendant to "authorities". Analysis shows it to be Defendant's dog poop. However, Defendant appeals the case stating he/she did, in fact, pick up the poop and dispose of it in the garbage can. Defendant further argues that the evidence was "planted" by Plaintiff in retaliation for Defendant complaining to office about Plaintiff's dog barking excessively. Defendant produces witnesses who claim they saw Plaintiff take Defendant's poop bag from garbage. Plaintiff denies allegations of Defendant and calls his/her own witnesses who claim seeing dog in question pooping and Defendant failing to clean it up. Defendant then calls in additional witnesses who testify that Plaintiff's witnesses are his relatives and not credible. And further these so called witnesses were seen by other campground witnesses fishing and drinking beer at the time of the alleged incident....... Plaintiff decides to sue for defamation of character and loss of wages for pain and suffering.... Defendant counter sues for same..... Maybe a TV series could be created out of this. Oh, don't let me get started, I could really have some fun with this one. Judith
* This post was
edited 10/06/08 08:59am by Sunshine State *
|
dturm
Munster, IN
Moderator
Joined: 01/29/2001
View Profile
Offline
|
Sunshine State wrote:Wow, now that is amazing!!?? It gets me to thinking of how that would work in this country...Plaintiff turns over poop of Defendant to "authorities". Analysis shows it to be Defendant's dog poop. However, Defendant appeals the case stating he/she did, in fact, pick up the poop and dispose of it in the garbage can. Defendant further argues that the evidence was "planted" by Plaintiff in retaliation for Defendant complaining to office about Plaintiff's dog barking excessively. Defendant produces witnesses who claim they saw Plaintiff take Defendant's poop bag from garbage. Plaintiff denies allegations of Defendant and calls his/her own witnesses who claim seeing dog in question pooping and Defendant failing to clean it up. Defendant then calls in additional witnesses who testify that Plaintiff's witnesses are his relatives and not credible. And further these so called witnesses were seen by other campground witnesses fishing and drinking beer at the time of the alleged incident....... Plaintiff decides to sue for defamation of character and loss of wages for pain and suffering.... Defendant counter sues for same..... Maybe a TV series could be created out of this. Oh, don't let me get started, I could really have some fun with this one. Judith
I see a Peoples Court spin off.
|
|
|
Artie322
New Jersey
Full Member
Joined: 06/22/2008
View Profile
Offline
|
dturm wrote:Sunshine State wrote:Wow, now that is amazing!!?? It gets me to thinking of how that would work in this country...Plaintiff turns over poop of Defendant to "authorities". Analysis shows it to be Defendant's dog poop. However, Defendant appeals the case stating he/she did, in fact, pick up the poop and dispose of it in the garbage can. Defendant further argues that the evidence was "planted" by Plaintiff in retaliation for Defendant complaining to office about Plaintiff's dog barking excessively. Defendant produces witnesses who claim they saw Plaintiff take Defendant's poop bag from garbage. Plaintiff denies allegations of Defendant and calls his/her own witnesses who claim seeing dog in question pooping and Defendant failing to clean it up. Defendant then calls in additional witnesses who testify that Plaintiff's witnesses are his relatives and not credible. And further these so called witnesses were seen by other campground witnesses fishing and drinking beer at the time of the alleged incident....... Plaintiff decides to sue for defamation of character and loss of wages for pain and suffering.... Defendant counter sues for same..... Maybe a TV series could be created out of this. Oh, don't let me get started, I could really have some fun with this one. Judith
I see a Peoples Court spin off.
err, don't you mean Poopers Court??
Reggie
|
