Recent content by cockerchaos

I am SO proud of you and my baby boy (well, young man now...LOL)...WTG, and I knew you could do it too! That's one smart little boy there, as is his sister here as well. I can see he adores you and is quite focused on you as well. Good job!! :)

Oh, and in the case of knees, or any other joint disease, I think I would rather the handler BEFORE putting myself in a wheelchair because of it.

I have too...and I admire the ones that do even if the are few and far between. But the point I was trying to make is that it is nice to be able to have a CHOICE to use a handler or not without it being construed as a bad thing because one does not handle their own dogs for ANY reason.

Uuuuum, so no one should have a dog now that may be impaired?? Talk about convulted. Let's use bad knees for example....not bad enough to get around and function but the repetative rigors or showing or trialing would be hell on them and/or make it worse. I DO know a few show people that have...

Very true about coat types. For the cockers I like Pantene or the Suave/Equate equivalent...with a favorite being the Suave Humectant one. Another favorite is Cowboy Magic Rosewater shampoo...especially coats that are hair type instead of fur. I follow all baths with BioGroom SILK creme...

Have you ever given any thought to some PEOPLE who physically CAN'T handle their own dogs to titles because of a possible physical impairment? I'd rather have a title slapped on to none at all.

To your first statement, I would have to say it is because of the Oath's I have taken to protect ones legal rights to freedom, life, property, etc. I would be lying to myself and everyone else if I don't do what I swore to do...there is no room for my moral and ethical feelings when making some...

My oppologies...I did not see this before my previous post.

Aaaaw...is that a proposition? Seriously, for me, that would be a negative. For anyone else it would really depend on a particular states' Training and Standards protocol, which all Officers must follow when they take the Oath, regardless of what the law is.

But of course, so long as both are of legal consenting age...doesn't hurt if teacher is hot as well ;)

I, for one, ain't getting 'bare' with anyone here! :lol-sign:

In a definative form of course not. :rolleyes: In the context I was trying to convey, yes...ethics are an individual set values and morals that some may share or may not share with others and opinions are an individuals personal thoughts on something that others may or may not share. In other...

Ethics are like opinions are like as......well, you get the picture. So, there are 2 sets of forum rules somewhere...one based on ethics and one based on legal rights? I thought the same forum rules applied to everyone regardless of what thier beliefs and opinions were....stupid me.

It may not have been (or may have if one were to follow the trend of assumption on this board) started in malice...but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where it would ultimately go.

Because it is a derogatory title pinned to someone for standing up for the legal rights of others and not for something she may or may not personally do herself.