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 White wrote:
Wow! Up here it's against the law to discharge firearms within a certain
distance of a dwelling and certainly within town/city limits.

True here as well, except that the law reads "discharge a firearm
towards a dwelling" which makes more sense.

... You 'mericans
need to get rid of that NRA and civilize your firearm laws.


Yeah, it'd be a LOT more civilized to just let careless people's dogs
and cats trash our yards.

"An armed society is a polite society." Frankly I think that if you
can't be trusted with guns, or are afraid of them, then you shouldn't
have one. IMHO it indicates a lower level of civilization, like say for
example if you had not discovered agriculture or the wheel.

Speaking of which, since cars kill & maim a heck of a lot more people
than guns, it would make more sense to outlaw cars.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Don White wrote:
Wow! Up here it's against the law to discharge firearms within a
certain
distance of a dwelling and certainly within town/city limits.

True here as well, except that the law reads "discharge a firearm
towards a dwelling" which makes more sense.

... You 'mericans
need to get rid of that NRA and civilize your firearm laws.


Yeah, it'd be a LOT more civilized to just let careless people's dogs
and cats trash our yards.

"An armed society is a polite society." Frankly I think that if you
can't be trusted with guns, or are afraid of them, then you shouldn't
have one. IMHO it indicates a lower level of civilization, like say for
example if you had not discovered agriculture or the wheel.

Speaking of which, since cars kill & maim a heck of a lot more people
than guns, it would make more sense to outlaw cars.

Let's remember, too, that according to FBI stats, law-abiding people with
legally owned guns commit like....1 crime every 3 years. :-) Hunting
accidents are another story, but stupid people who do that were due for SOME
sort of horrible accident at some point, whether with a car, a table saw or
bathing with the toaster.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

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.



It's the same here, Don. That's why I said that although you might not be
breaking the law by killing an animal, you most certainly WOULD be if you
used a gun in certain places. But, 15 minutes outside the city, there are
100-200 acre properties where you *can* discharge firearms, but not within a
certain distance of the road. Having said that, I have a friend who does it
all the time, but he set up his shooting area in such an obsessively save
way that when the sheriff stopped by, he just looked around and said
"OK....just keep it this way, and make sure you supervise the
inexperienced."

Doug Kanter wrote:
It's the same here, Don. That's why I said that although you might not be
breaking the law by killing an animal, you most certainly WOULD be if you
used a gun in certain places. But, 15 minutes outside the city, there are
100-200 acre properties where you *can* discharge firearms, but not within a
certain distance of the road. Having said that, I have a friend who does it
all the time, but he set up his shooting area in such an obsessively save
way that when the sheriff stopped by, he just looked around and said
"OK....just keep it this way, and make sure you supervise the
inexperienced."

heh heh... makes sense... I taught my wife to shoot at our local police
range (which has since been closed to the public for reason none can
explain).

Certain people shouldn't be allowed to have guns... some because of
criminal tendencies, some for the same reason that certain people
shouldn't be allowed to use hammers or soldering irons...

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .

heh heh... makes sense... I taught my wife to shoot at our local police
range (which has since been closed to the public for reason none can
explain).

From what some gun shop guys have told me, when cops come in and unholster a
gun, you want to duck. Mucho bravado, but not as safety-conscious as
civilians. Maybe the presence of civilians embarrassed the cops at your
range. :-)

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.

Henry Blackmoore wrote in message
.net..

snip usual crap


Who the 'ell woke you up?. You're only a load short and a month late!

In article , "Don White" wrote:

Henry Blackmoore wrote in message
k.net..

snip usual crap


Who the 'ell woke you up?. You're only a load short and a month late!


Is it hard to sleep well dreaming about the NRA and Texas all the time Donnie?
Must be nightmarish for you...

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message link.net...
In article , "Don White" wrote:

Henry Blackmoore wrote in message
k.net..

snip usual crap


Who the 'ell woke you up?. You're only a load short and a month late!


Is it hard to sleep well dreaming about the NRA and Texas all the time Donnie?
Must be nightmarish for you...

Toothless hillbilly.