In article , "Don White" wrote:


Doug Kanter wrote in message
...
Actually, the law about terminating animals is tested around here a few
times a year. It doesn't specify that the property has to be an
income-producing farm - just "food crops". My son's baseball coach was our
town justice, who clued me in to the law. He explained that it was almost
done away with in the early 1940s, but the advent of the victory garden
concept kept it on the books. He also explained that HOW one terminates an
animal is obviously crucial. If it's done with a firearm within town
limits,
you may be judged without fault for killing the animal, but slammed with a
(justified) weapons violation. Further, the "terminator" needs to exhaust
every other possible solution, which usually means you have to prove that
you tried to get help from the animal control dept and negotiate with the
owner of the animal, usually a dog. A side benefit of the law is that it
gives towns a reason to replace dog catchers who are overly sympathetic
with
dog owners who are perpetually irresponsible.


Wow! Up here it's against the law to discharge firearms within a certain
distance of a dwelling and certainly within town/city limits. You 'mericans
need to get rid of that NRA and civilize your firearm laws.

Don you dim bulb it isn't any different here. I don't know of many American
cities that don't have laws against the discharging of firearms within the
city limits. I live in Sugar Land Texas and you can't shoot BB guns in your
yard either or shoot arrows.

And the NRA doesn't have anything to do with what you are talking about.

In a free country with freedom of speech protections, groups made up
of ordinary citizens from all walks of life like the NRA cannot be gotten
"rid of" by wannebe socialist (tyrant) planners.

Get a clue.