Posted on 08/26/2008 5:43:18 AM PDT by engrpat
I don’t think anyone is arguing with you that killing dogs in your backyard would be a serious issue. Of course, in this story, at least according to the shooter, both dogs were in the shooter’s yard.
We disagree on that then.
“Given his previous threat(s), I find it more likely that he shot the second dog in its yard and then lied than I do that the wounded animal crawled back under the fence.
The fact is none of us know what really transpired. And I think the guy telling the story is full of it.”
So you think the person telling the story is a liar. You LOVE reading things into stories, don’t you?
According to you, the guy had it in for the dogs. Lied about the dogs being threatening, and lied about where the dogs were shot.
The guy that killed the dogs also should have filled in the hole under the fence, and shouldn’t have been allowed out of his house at night.
Would it have been okay if “Wyatt Earp” had fed, watered, and groomed the pets for the owner, too?
You have a really strange take on this story, not a single item of which is supported by anything in the linked article.
If a guy is shooting your dogs while those dogs are on his property (after you have been warned that he will shoot them if found on his property again), exactly how are you confronted with a deadly force situation. Clearly you are not.
And I do have to ask why you think it is the neighbor’s responsibility to fill in the hole under the fence when it was the dog owner’s dog who dug it.
Every time I hear of someone owning a pit bull, my opinion of that person plummets.
I would not buy a house or move into an apartment next door to pit bull.
The ownership of pit bulls sucks $$ value right out of a neighborhood... not because of my opinion or fears, but because of the breed’s earned reputation.
That being said, it's easy to safely own a pit bull, with just a little effort and resonsibility.
COMPLETELY irrelevant. Here in Texas it's his property. You can be armed with a friggin M-14 on your backporch if you want.
Was outside last night reading on the porch and heard distant neighbors shooting at coyotes.
Pit bulls are dangerous like electricity, maybe, in lightning form, but not like guns or cars. Those are inanimate objects that do not attack on their own. Pit bulls do have that ability.
Inherent, adjective.
1. existing in someone or something as a permanent and inseparable element, quality, or attribute.
Guns and cars are both inherently dangerous, when operated by clueless or irresponsible people. A gun in a safe, a car parked in a driveway, and a pitbull properly restrained are not.
You can safely own any of those things.
Couldn't be further from the truth. But keep trying.
That's premeditation in legal terms.
Why? His property is HIS. Ah, just checked your state. Yankee mentality.
Shoot, shovel and shut up. Only answer. It's too bad, but if the attitude is that you don't have a beef against the dog until after it's mauled your child, then what's going to happen is that one day the dog doesn't come home.
Around here there are still some small flocks of sheep. I sold mine 4 years ago. There are lots of people with the, "Oh I couldn't shoot a dog!" attitude, right up until they see the fruits of the first dog visit. There are also plenty of signs, some of them pretty pathetic, about missing dogs.
Yankee mentality? Yeah, we don’t really dig killing other people’s pets up here, I guess. You guys have animal control down there?
At home is fine. Sittin' on the porch with gun in hand is a little odd, IMO.
It’s a bad neighbor who buys two pit bulls when he knows there is a family with a six year old living next door. Little Scarface did not belong there.
Like I said ... I'm not taking sides here. I have no dog in this fight (pun intended). Just wondering about the shooter's motives and the reality of his story.
Yeah we do - what guage?
In describing the danger of cars and guns you used the qualifier “when” with the adjective “inherent” which needs no qualifier.
Pit bulls ARE inherently dangerous, no “when” about it, unlike cars and guns. Proper training and restraint does not change the inherent power and unpredictability of pit bulls, which always makes them dangerous animals.
Gun handlers and drivers may make cars and guns into dangerous or productive, protective devices - otherwise they are inanimate objects, not comparable to living animals. Without the control of a person, they possess no inherent threat. Dangerous dogs do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.