Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ex-Texan
Hope they are sued for millions.

On what charge? Shooting a dog is not illegal. This is a loophole that cowards/sadists can use.

13 posted on 01/09/2003 8:02:55 AM PST by Hodar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Hodar
I don't want to bust your bubble, however, depending on the breed, it is legal. THE main thing is that this story has been posted several times. Call the mayor of cookville, tn if you want to do something.
19 posted on 01/09/2003 8:18:22 AM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Hodar
"Shooting a dog is not illegal."

So, you can kill anyone's dog that you choose?
50 posted on 01/09/2003 9:01:39 AM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Hodar
.... On what charge? Shooting a dog is not illegal. This is a loophole that cowards/sadists can use.....

Tennessee Criminal Code:


39-14-205. Intentional killing of animal.

(a) (1) A person who intentionally or knowingly unlawfully kills the animal of another, with the intent to deprive the owner of the right to the animal's life and without the owner's effective consent commits theft of that animal and shall be punished under § 39-14-105.


(2) In determining the value of a police dog under § 39-14-105, the court shall consider the value of the police dog as both the cost and any specialized training for such police dog.

(b) A person is justified in killing the animal of another if such person acted under a reasonable belief that the animal was creating an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to such person or another or an imminent danger of death to an animal owned by such person. A person is not justified in killing the animal of another if at the time of the killing such person is trespassing upon the property of the owner of such animal. The justification for killing the animal of another authorized by this subsection shall not apply to a person who, while engaging in or attempting to escape from criminal conduct, kills a police dog that is acting in its official capacity. In such case the provisions of subsection (a) shall apply to such person.

[Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 1; 1996, ch. 927, §§ 1, 2.]

Question is did the officer "reasonably" thought the dog was creating an imminent danger of death or serious injury to himself or others...Second part is was the vehicle stop valid otherwise it may be construed as a trespass...Then who put the officers in "danger" by not closing the car doors?

Put me on the jury as to whether the officers acted as reasonable people.



100 posted on 01/09/2003 11:25:04 AM PST by rolling_stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson