I'm with you on that one to a certain extent. The reason I don't wholeheartedly agree, is that several years ago I was attacked nad bitten by four dogs who were walking with their master (unleashed). The experience and the medical treatment that followed were pretty traumatic, and I still maintain that the owner was inconsiderate in letting his dogs attack people on the street.

I guess the optimal solution would be not to leash dogs, but to refrain from raising aggressive races and from training them to be vicious and violent (not being a rude jerk, like the aforementioned dog owner, would also help). But as it is we don't live in a perfect world. Perhaps some balance can be maintained: areas in which dogs run free and have fun, and areas that are more heavily populated when dogs are held more closely and kep away from potential victims.

"Inconsiderate?" "Criminally negligent" would be more appropriate, I think.

On the other hand, I'm not as familiar with US law as you are.

Oh, the incident I described happened in Israel. I was not making a legal observation about the person's behavior, I was making a personal one, though, I agree, the word I used was pretty mild (the whole experience was quite horrible, I must say). And I don't have any claims to familiarity with US law... though I suspect if there were a law here that forbids unleashed dogs, there would be a lot less unleashed dogs. People here seem to be a lot more compliant with this type of thing.