On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 22:25:49 -0400, "Don"
wrote:

"Henry Blackmoore" wrote
"Doug Kanter" wrote:
Actually, it's legally permitted, performed and tested in the courts on a
fairly regular basis. In many places, including what you'd consider
"normal
suburbs", animals which damage food crops may be killed as long as the
method does not endanger neighbors or violate weapons laws. You really
ought
to think before you hurl, boy.

Uh-huh. And you think that somebody's garden comes under the "food crop"
definition and that you have the right to kill your neighbor's pets for a
damaged tomato plant?

Can I come into your house and eat all your food, drink all your beer,
fondle your 13 yo daughters nubbins, issue you a matched pair of knuckle
sandwiches and take your DVD player on the way out the door?
If you choose to use MY personal property for YOUR use, YOU open yourself up
to that same behavior.
Doesn't anyone know how to *think* anymore?



Perhaps you need to measure your response to the situation. A damaged
flower is not the same as a break-in, theft, sexual assault etc.
Lethal force is justified in cases of imminent threat, but not for
lesser infractions.

Perhaps you need to surround your garden with a fence. Killing a pet
is an excessive response, and shows a general irresponsibility and
reckless disregard for other people's rights. There are other
effective (and legal) ways of dealing with a situation like this.

IMHO, people who can easily justify the killing of an animal for such
petty "crimes", is only one step away from using that same mindset
against humans as well. Psychological studies show that most serial
killers started out torturing animals. So maybe the ticking time bomb
analogy is not so far off the mark.......

Dave