Can IT confirm? - eviltoast
  • FireTower@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not even that. It just needs to look like more of a hassle.

    They really just let anyone buy those signs that say you have security cameras or an angry dog.

    • variants_of_concern@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Someone mentioned to me that those angry dog signs are a liability because if someone gets bit they can say you knew you had angry dog, so it’s best just to have a sign that says dog and doesn’t mention it’s mood

      • FireTower@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Might dependsl on your jurisdiction. But I wouldn’t be worried they’d probably need to prove you had a duty of care to them which you acted outside of which resulted in injuries that could have been avoided by you acting with a reasonable level of care.

        Also if you did have a duty of care to them and knowingly had a dangerous dog not warning someone of known dangers (the dog) might constitute a break of your duty of care.

        Tldr: It depends, you get what you pay for get your advice from actual local lawyers not random people on the street or the internet (like me).