Our unacceptable President of these United States did do one thing positive
in all his inpropriortys and defense there of, and that was to educate me
in handling such self inportant ding bats as what Joe describes in the NYC
Health Dept. stand.
 
>The Board of Health is holding to its original story that the law of
>banning animals that are "wild, ferocious, fierce, dangerous or naturally
>inclined to do harm" was always in place, it's just that in June they
>decided to specify the animals they felt fell under this generalization.
 
THe above paragraph is directly cut/paste from Joe's FML post.  Ok, Unless
the "wild, ferocious... bloo blah...." animals are specifically mentioned
in the text of the written and voted on law, then there is not any
definition that is viable.  In fact, a bear could fall well outside of
that law where it fails, at least from what Joe posted, to qualify any
definition of those terms, and it also fails to specifically define any
particular animal by genus or latin name or further define by Geneological
strain.  Therefor, the law is fully subject to any amount or intrepertation
and litigation, and the Health Department is wide open for massive
lawsuits, both the office and those personally staffing it.  Ha!  Go for it
Joe!!!!!!  You have them by the proverbial... well, I left the brass monkey
outside last night, was a frost, and..  welll... lost a couple... ha!
 
God Bless and you have my support.
 
Capt. Nodrog, Byte-me and Nibble-ed
[Posted in FML issue 2851]