They should be closed but this is Selective enforcement of the laws, what about the numbers houses, they are not even legal..

Do you know that they have a squad called the 'Selective Enforcement' unit? Simply prejudice and discriminate.

Excellent point. I guess the night club owners don't believe in Bahamians like the web shop operators

Keep the numbers rolling.

A next thing these law enforcers need to look into is the amount of persons bringing their animals to a public setting (the beach). These animal don't even have proper tags (license), but on a public beach individuals are bring their full grown dogs amongst people. Keep in mind some persons are terrified of certain animals. I watch a lady yesterday (Sunday 23, March) ran across the road without looking, a car had to slam breaks to avoid hitting her because another individual had a dog on the public beach. A dog could do just as much damage as a knife or even a gun and doesn't need the swing of a human hand or pull of a finger to be deadly, so why is it persons are allowed to carry these unlicensed animals in public settings.

How do you know that an animal isn't licensed. There is no special sign a licensed dog wears. My dog is licensed and gets her shots and exam done yearly and the only thing she wears is a collar with her name and my home address and number on it. I bring my dog to the beach on a leash when I am home all the time. I bring a plastic bag in case she decides to use the bathroom, I also bring water, and snacks for her.

So because someone is frightened of my dog I am not allowed to have her out and let her enjoy being in the water and digging in the sand. That is just ignorant, if you are afraid of animals either say so before I settle with my dog and I will go elsewhere on the beach or if you met me there you go elsewhere.
People are always courting controversy...the beach is big enough that a few dogs will not create a riot. I guarantee that the few dogs that were there were probably people's pets and thus friendly. Most likely the dog wanted to play and the person misrepresented the situation and ran. I doubt a person who has a dog for guard purposes would bring that pet to the beach, it would be locked behind fences guarding what it was trained to do.

Yes a dog can do damage and in situations they have, but I have always been an advocate of animal rights and as a person who owns dogs I can speak and say a dog is a product of it's environment. Point is to say a dog doesn't need the human hand to be deadly is an inaccurate statement. The majority of attacks on humans by dogs were provoked attacks. Not saying there aren't unprovoked attacks but they weren't made by household pet dogs.

In your case BahamianAway your dog like you stated only wears (1) a collar with her name (2) your (the owners) home address (3) a telephone contact. Although again like you stated there is no special sign to show she is licensed, isn't that still a form of having proper tags which from my post wasn't present with the animal I saw. Then you went on to say, "If you are afraid of animals either say so before I settle with my dog and I will go elsewhere ... or if you met me there you go elsewhere." By you posting that you fully understand and are aware that some people are terrified of animals. So it all comes back to my point which you totally missed, the authorities need to monitor the animals that come to a public setting. Now this excludes you cause as you said your dog gets her shots and visits the vet regular but what about those persons whom bring their flea and tick infested animals to a public setting, let them scratch enabling their insects to be transfer among the bathers not to mention if the animal throws a fit and attacks someone.

My post totally excluded you cause like you said your dog is licensed so your comment I guess was to boast of your beloved fefee having her shots and being licensed. Yet again lets focus on you again supporting my point as you state in your second to final sentence, "the majority of attacks on humans by dogs were provoked attacks" So there still leaves a slim chance of someone whom brings their animal amongst strangers to have an accident.

Are you a dodo? Quite possibly and more likely not an animal lover. But let me clear something up for you....
First off you stated proper tags (license) which does exclude a collar. You never stated if that dog had at least a collar on, so I assumed at the very least the dog was wearing one. Secondly I am fully aware there are people that are afraid of dogs, people are afraid of men wearing hoodies the point is the police cannot monitor every aspect of public life just because there is someone afraid. And I highly doubt that a person who cannot be bothered to give "feefee" a bath and see that they at least wear a collar would be concerned about bring them to a public setting. People who tend to bring their pets to public settings are those who care for and about their pet- but I am almost willing to bet you don't own a pet and probably never have.

And using my statement of "the majority of attacks on humans by dogs were provoked attacks" to say that there is still a slim chance of attack takes it totally out of context. What it I am having a bad day and someone approaches me in a manner I deemed disrespectful there is a slim chance they will get popped in the face. Should the police then moniter every angry or aggravated person in public.

Use your common sense...people need to take responsibility for their own actions. As I said if dogs frighten you let it be known and deal with it.

Tags means 'Identification' which the dog was not wearing. Then yes using your example of the individual wearing the hoody, ever saw someone walk in certain public setting and not ask to take it off (bank). Also in this real world persons who don't bother to buy their pets collars or give them a bath at home (using pet shampoo) are the very same who use the public beach to rid their animals of fleas and other skin disease. Ever wondered who gets 'charged' for Disorderly Conduct? Yep, an angry or aggravated person in public, so if present, the police are monitoring them.

Now lets really put the common sense to use. If you have your pet and wish they accompany you in a public setting (extract from your post...) "take responsiblity for your own actions" and at least have proper tags on them. Lets take it one step further. In your first post you describe your dog as a household pet. So if you want to bring your pet in public settings make sure it has proper tags or leave your HOUSE PET at where? HOME

Positive, unlicensed dogs are no different from unlicensed bicycles, cars, or unpaid RPT taxes etc. You have made an excellent observation on the breakdown on tax collection in our country................ most Bahamians believe that they have an inalienable right not to pay taxes (ala Cleveland Eneas definition of a Bahamian)

Liquor license act was repealed effective January 1, 2011...

Then another thing. You go to a Chinese restaurant/take away and their visible shelf is well stocked with various alcoholic drinks. At most of these establishment you have the daily customers (alcoholics) harassing the 'other' customers whom at times are with their families consisting of young children cause keep in mind this is also an eatery. How is it that the Business License Dept. could allow such sloppy existence to be carried on from these establishment. If one desires Chinese food you either have to leave your children home, or risk being harassed by a drunken outside the establishment's door, or have your child harassed if you even leave them in the car. (Prince Charles few doors down from Blanco Bleach especially). That's a matter as well authorities need to address.