And it is a property owner's right to zap them if they betread his turf, particularly if they cause a problem. When you go into the outdoors you are taking up your place in the food chain, whether you are a human climbing Rainier or a cat wandering in the suburbs.
Actually animals can have no rights; they are not human beings and to confer human rights upon animals certainly does damage to the whole concept of human rights. But humans certainly do have responsibilities and duties w/r/t animals in their charge or control, and one of the most fundamental duties is to be humane to the creatures and not cause them unnecessary suffering. This man has failed that standard of care (how's that for a dry understatement?).
Nothing here, though, indicates the cat was a problem, or that Reimann had any conceivable justification for harming it at all. (Since this is not a court, we can take his failure to speak in his defence as an admission that he hasn't much of a defence to offer). It sounds like this jerk just shot the cat for sport. Gratuitous cruelty. If that is the case he bears considerable watching, and should NOT be in a programme where his record will be expunged. While there are many creeps who are cruel to animals but don't hurt people, it's very true that men who harm people very often have a history of cruelty to animals, especially in adolescence and youth. Therefore, records of animal cruelty are very pertinent to certain criminal investigations and should probably always be permanent.
Of course, this may be a state like mine where an expunged record is invisible to the public but still available to criminal authorities for just this kind of purpose.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Would that be... Bast, the Egyptian deity?
(did you ever see a sign saying "No Cats allowed on the Beach)??.....
NO, but it's about time. I get tired of digging up cat p**p. Toxoplasmosis can be dangerous to certain individuals.