"John Smith" wrote in message
news:a59ic.10918$aQ6.877797@attbi_s51...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news:XL8ic.2312
Unlike Henry, you sound like a guy who has the mental capacity to mull
over
a hypothetical situation. In fact, this is based on reality. Here goes:

1) The animal control person fails to do his job after 15 phonecalls.
The
excuses are absurd.

2) The neighbor promises to improve the situation, but does absolutely
nothing.

3) You go to court and are told that it's not a small claims issue.

4) It's the middle of May, and you've put 200 hours of work into the
vegetable garden so far. It's literally being destroyed by a dog which
digs
there.

Now what?



At this point I probably would pick up the dog's **** and place it on the
hood of his car.

Ah ha! That could potentially be interpreted as a vigilante tactic. Very
good! But, I'd suggest that you lift a windshield wiper, drop the **** on
the glass, and let the wiper drop into the ****. Much more effective.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
... In my apartment is a tenant whose dog craps all over the small
grassy
area that's supposed to be shared by everyone. The crap on the lawn
makes it
seem like she was trying to create a perfect grid, with a pile every 2
feet
or so in every direction. The landlord is clueless as to how to handle
it.

Here's a suggestion... write a polite note and tape it to the dog
owner's door. Suggest that he clean up after his dog. Give him two days,
or until the very next time he doesn't clean up. Then (this is the
unpleasant part) you get a trash bag, and using it inside out so as to
minimize unpleasantness, gather all the deposits. Now tape the bag to
the neighbor's door.

Actually, I've spoken to this neighbor politely. She cleaned up the mess.
Once. Then, it started again. She apparently thought I meant "just this
time". This is actually standard practice for bad dog owners.


Another option is to explain to scout around for a dog-free place to
live, and tell the landlord that if he doesn't fix the situation you are
going to move and hold him responsible for your expenses since he has
violated your lease terms.

Nah...the next move will be to a house. And, the landlord is on the
defensive as of today. Money talks. At the end of my 2nd year in this
apartment, I told her I was looking for a house and asked if they'd go for a
6-month extension instead of a year. She said yes, but it meant I'd have to
pay an extra $50 per month. I asked how my request presented them with an
actual financial cost. Her answer: "That covers the cost of continuing to
service you". I don't know what mental picture that paints for you, but for
me, it's a bad one.

We spoke again this morning and I reminded her of my policy: If one thing is
broken, the whole package is worthless. This being the case, I would be
withholding the upcoming rent check until the package was made whole. "You
are NOT continuing to service me". She's consulting with her boss at the
moment. "Whole" means the dog goes, or anytime I see dog ****, I subtract a
day's rent. This complex has too much empty inventory. They'll go for the
deal.


About being polite... good manners always improve any situation.
Besides, if fuming & cussing is your default mode, how can people tell
when you're *really* mad? For example, 2 cultures, Southerners &
Japanese, are both very polite... and they are also both very dangerous
to have ****ed off at you.

Actually, when I get mad, I get quiet. I create the image that everything's
cooled off. The results have more impact that way.


Dogs are universal. It doesn't matter where you live.

It's not the dog that's the problem.

No, but if they're gone, so is the trail they leave.

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 20:09:12 -0400, (Bob
D.) wrote:


What you did is called communication and reasoning. Thankfully this tact
usaully works and I'm glad it worked out to your satisfaction. I also
think in all cases this should be tried, even before "calling the cops".

Still, I have come accross people who can't be reasoned with. Period.
Taking the case of your neighbor, suppose the neighbor's response was:

"My dog wasn't over there, must have been someone elses..."

There is usually more than one dog in any given neighborhood.

So you take picture of the dog crapping in your yard and show it to him.

"I really can't tell if that's my dog..."

Now he's pushing it..


So then you pound on their door the moment the dog crouches in your yard.
You finally have indisputable evidence the dog is crapping in your yard,
forcing the owner to own up to his responsibility, so he over and cleans
up the mess.

Are you always going to catch the dog crapping? Are you always going to
be able get the owner while the dog is crapping? Do you think based on
the owners previous responses that they will clean up the **** on their
own without your "indisputtable proof"?

I don't understand what the big deal is. Poop is biodegradable. It's
not like the dog dented your car or scratched your boat.

In short, this person's lack of responsibility has put the burden on
someone else. Either be more vigilant alerting the owner, clean the ****
up yourself, or deal with the consequences of dog **** in your yard.
Since you can't be vigilant enough to always see where the dog went, you,
your family, or your guest may have to deal with stepping in dog **** and
bringing it into your house.

Walking through my back yard is like walking through a minefield, yet
I can manage to avoid all of the "doggie doughnuts". So I imagine that
a single turd in the middle of a 15,000 sq foot yard would be
statistically "safe" from being stepped on for the week or so that it
takes to dissolve.


Please believe me, I'm not abdicating ANY course of action. I merely wish
to state that Doug is right in the sense that there are inconsiderate
people who can't be reaasoned with, and often if it not a criminal offense
the police (especially in larger cities) will not respond in a timely
manner.

While I agree that there are idiots in the world, the fact that the
police may find these little domestic squabbles to be beneath them,
does not justify someone taking the law into their own hands, and then
having the unmitigated gall to act surprised when that neighbor
retaliates.


When they do the inconsiderate SOB merely denies their fault.

Wouldn't you? It's human nature to become defensive when accused of
something. Provide me with proof that I did something, and I'll deal
with it. Otherwise, leave me alone.

This ofen leads to finding a way to tolerate it or finding a way to make
them stop.

I know I'm being picky (unfortunately that's who I am), but to me it's not
always the action that I find offensive. Often it's the fact that someone
who doesn't really know me is making an assumption that I should deal with
a mess that they've chosen not to. Without getting into semantics like
physical ability or age, an owner allowing their dog crap in my yard
without cleaning it up, indicates that the owners time is "too important"
to tend to his responsibility.

Lifestyles being what they are, this is often true. All people
prioritize their actions. When we judge other people, we are doing
nothing more than gauging their choices against our own subjectivity.
Who gives any one of us the right to make these value judgements
against other people?

It say that even on my property, their
needs come first. When I see someone flick ashes out of the window of
their new car, then throws the butt out it screams: "I find a messy car
offensive, here you deal with it okay?"

How are you dealing with it? Ashes and butts are biodegradable.


When someone parks their new car
in a crowded lot two spaces is says: "My car is too important to get
scratched so one other person will get to walk two blocks in the rain to
go shopping".

No, what it says is that the car owner invested a considerable amount
of money and time to get the car that he likes, and wants to take care
of it.. Since there are way too many people in the world who have no
consideration for other's property, and think nothing of "door
dinging" other people's cars, this owner has taken additional steps to
minimize this from occurring. The fact that some other people see this
action and incorrectly interpret it as a pompous, inconsiderate act
and then get an urge to "screw" with his car "just because",
underscores the antisocial nature of these same people.


If your neighbor blast their stereo at 3am they're
saying: "I don't care about your comfort:

Yes it does, and that's why we have noise ordinances.

Inconsiderate behavior in general screams a chorus of: "ME! ME! ME! **** YOU!"

Yes. But which behaviors are considered "inconsiderate" are often a
matter of opinion. Some things are blatant and fairly cut and dry. But
is the guy who takes up two spaces to protect his shiny new car any
more inconsiderate than the actions of those who would carelessly
scratch it?

Much of what you would consider "inconsiderate behavior" is borne from
a defensive posture. Many of us become "inconsiderate" to protect
ourselves from the "inconsiderate" actions of others.


And your right, Charlie, I won't waste my time hoping for something "bad"
to happen to these people, but I can't profess to being above smiling at
irony or in worse cases having a lack of compassion when the irony is
cruel.

I would call it God's revenge, but guys like Doug would cringe at
that.

In the case of people inconsiderate with their car, sadly, it
would make me chuckle if someone accidently bumped their car at the light,
scratching their bumper causing them to spill their beverage over their
new interior of the car that they burdened others with to keep pristine.

I have a problem with this. Why would you enjoy seeing someone's pride
and joy ruined? And why has his efforts to keep his car clean become a
burden to others?


If the inconsiderate neighbors dog get away and is hit by a car, I will
feel terrible for the dog, and the neighbors kids, but I doubt if any of
my sympathy falls with the neighbor.

Perhaps not. And one could make a good case that the dog owner's
irresponsibility placed the dog in the position that resulted in his
getting hit.


From what you write, your a very reasonable person and probably a better
person than I am. You seem like you would be a very nice neighbor to
have. People like yourself server as a good example that I have to
continue to try to be a better person.

The best neighbors are the ones who do not complain. Human nature
being what it is, means that in the normal course of time, that people
in close proximity will ultimately encounter some sort of activity
which "bothers" them. As long as they are not being grossly negligent,
then try to understand that people have the right to engage in certain
activities. Should the guy who works second shift have a right to
complain when his neighbor mows the lawn at 10:00 AM? When you put
yourself in this situation, you have to weigh the consequences of your
actions, and not expect the rest of the world to make adjustments for
your unusual lifestyle.

This is the basis of "majority rule". The majority of people live
within a certain range of activities. Those are given priority in
consideration over those who "march to a different (and sometimes
incompatible) drum".

Dave

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 04:17:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

If you ask a neighbor to control its dog and the neighbor refuses, then yes.
It is equivalent to molesting your daughter. I do NOT agree that the
neighbor should be shot. However, you must realize that by refusing to
cooperate, the neighbor has made a request.

No he hasn't. That's YOUR choice. He's not the one with the problem,
you are.

He has asked you to bring all
possible legal forces to bear on him as quickly as possible.

Key word: Legal. Killing his pet is not justified, unless that pet
attacks you.

If you do not
honor his explicit request, then YOU are a bad neighbor.

Why? He made no such request, despite your somewhat warped opinion to
the contrary.


It's your job to
involve the police, animal control people and courts immediately, the goal
being to remove the animal from the home, extract a huge fine, and cause as
much heartbreak as possible at the loss of a pet.

So you like inflicting pain on other people? I believe in giving back
too. If you killed my dog, lets just say that your land would soon
become unable to sustain life for the next several years....... And
then where would you be? Right, just where you are now, in an
apartment.


Remember: You are honoring
the neighbor's explicit request. As a side benefit, you will help his
children learn something which he was too stupid or lazy to teach them -
owning a pet involves work.

Yes it does. But it is not your place to teach them.

Dog owners like that really don't want to own pets. They probably get dogs
because someone else in the house wanted one, but was also too lazy to care
for it correctly.

That much is true in many cases. But it's still not your place.


In rural areas, it may be safe and legal* to shoot the
dog. Obviously, it's your responsibility to do just that, to honor your
neighbor's request.

Safe maybe, legal no.


Dave
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 01:31:31 -0400, "Don"
wrote:

What the **** is it with you John?
What the hell difference does it make if Doug agrees with me?
Don't you have a brain of your own?
Don't you have a backbone?
We're not talking rocket surgery here, just very simple basics.
Most kids are taught these things at about age 5, how old are you?
Here, I'll spell it out for you:
*Treat other people as you want to be treated.*
There, is that simple enough?
If you abuse that one simple rule of humanity you may pay a severe
consequence.
Don't let your dog **** in my yard, don't paintball my house, don't fondle
my daughter, etc.
In turn I won't do those things to you.
Does any of this make sense to you?


Fair enough. If my dog ****s in your yard, you have my permission to
**** in mine. If you kill my dog, then I kill you. Fair?

You seem to have this issue with comparing apples to oranges. In no
way, in any rational person's mind, should something so trivial as
"dog droppings" justify lethal force as a response.

Dave.

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


I don't understand what the big deal is. Poop is biodegradable. It's
not like the dog dented your car or scratched your boat.

I don't know about you, but by 5:00 PM Friday, I have a mental list of all
the enjoyable things I'm going to do over the weekend. There's no spare time
for cleaning dog **** off my carpet. "Biodegradable" is not relevant INSIDE
a house or car. I have no problem with people for whom coprophilia is a
hobby. It's not my hobby, though.



How are you dealing with it? Ashes and butts are biodegradable.

The filters are NOT biodegradable.


Inconsiderate behavior in general screams a chorus of: "ME! ME! ME! ****
YOU!"

Yes. But which behaviors are considered "inconsiderate" are often a
matter of opinion.

On private property, there is only ONE opinion: that of the property owner.

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 04:17:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

If you ask a neighbor to control its dog and the neighbor refuses, then
yes.
It is equivalent to molesting your daughter. I do NOT agree that the
neighbor should be shot. However, you must realize that by refusing to
cooperate, the neighbor has made a request.

No he hasn't. That's YOUR choice. He's not the one with the problem,
you are.

Nope. By his INACTION in managing his pet correctly, he has said "I'm doing
nothing, and I dare you to do something about it".


He has asked you to bring all
possible legal forces to bear on him as quickly as possible.

Key word: Legal. Killing his pet is not justified, unless that pet
attacks you.

The food destruction legalities have already been explained to you. They
will NOT be explained again.

As far as a dog simply crapping on your lawn: The law defines civil trespass
to INCLUDE causing or negligently permitting foreign substances to enter
private property. So, if neighbor's dog craps on your property, the human
has trespassed, even if he's on the sofa when the dog is on your property.
If your neighbor is spray painting his garage and allows it to drift onto
your car, he's trespassing. Get it?



It's your job to
involve the police, animal control people and courts immediately, the
goal
being to remove the animal from the home, extract a huge fine, and cause
as
much heartbreak as possible at the loss of a pet.

So you like inflicting pain on other people? I believe in giving back
too. If you killed my dog, lets just say that your land would soon
become unable to sustain life for the next several years....... And
then where would you be? Right, just where you are now, in an
apartment.

If you allow your dog to litter private property, YOU obviously enjoy
inflicting pain. What if a neighbor needs to take 3 hours off from work to
wait at home for a carpet cleaning service. You have stolen from them,
Davey. Because of your dog, the neighbor may end up experiencing friction
with his boss. If the boss is an asshole, the employee may not hear the end
of the aggravation for quite some time, all because you were too busy on the
sofa to walk your dog.


Remember: You are honoring
the neighbor's explicit request. As a side benefit, you will help his
children learn something which he was too stupid or lazy to teach them -
owning a pet involves work.

Yes it does. But it is not your place to teach them.

Losing your dog is better than prison, don't you think?


Dog owners like that really don't want to own pets. They probably get
dogs
because someone else in the house wanted one, but was also too lazy to
care
for it correctly.

That much is true in many cases. But it's still not your place.

Here, after 3 complaints, the dog catcher will remove the dog from the owner
PERMANENTLY and arrange for a $250.00 fine. Do you think the dog catcher
enjoys inflicting pain?


In rural areas, it may be safe and legal* to shoot the
dog. Obviously, it's your responsibility to do just that, to honor your
neighbor's request.

Safe maybe, legal no.

Legal, yes.

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 01:31:31 -0400, "Don"
wrote:

What the **** is it with you John?
What the hell difference does it make if Doug agrees with me?
Don't you have a brain of your own?
Don't you have a backbone?
We're not talking rocket surgery here, just very simple basics.
Most kids are taught these things at about age 5, how old are you?
Here, I'll spell it out for you:
*Treat other people as you want to be treated.*
There, is that simple enough?
If you abuse that one simple rule of humanity you may pay a severe
consequence.
Don't let your dog **** in my yard, don't paintball my house, don't
fondle
my daughter, etc.
In turn I won't do those things to you.
Does any of this make sense to you?


Fair enough. If my dog ****s in your yard, you have my permission to
**** in mine. If you kill my dog, then I kill you. Fair?

You seem to have this issue with comparing apples to oranges. In no
way, in any rational person's mind, should something so trivial as
"dog droppings" justify lethal force as a response.

Dave.

How about this: I'm creating a new art form. It's sort of like etchings. I
use a key on the side of your car. It won't be just a scratch, mind you.
It'll be an actual picture. This is identical to your allowing your dog to
crap on my lawn. Is my new art form OK with you?

Doug Kanter wrote:
Nah...the next move will be to a house. And, the landlord is on the
defensive as of today. Money talks. At the end of my 2nd year in this
apartment, I told her I was looking for a house and asked if they'd go for a
6-month extension instead of a year. She said yes, but it meant I'd have to
pay an extra $50 per month.

No, it means they'll have an empty apartment 6 months sooner



Dogs are universal. It doesn't matter where you live.

It's not the dog that's the problem.


No, but if they're gone, so is the trail they leave.

Agreed. It's a shame that there are so many people who feel they ought
to have a dog, but really don't have the time or the know-how to keep
one or train it properly. It's a flaw in our civilization IMHO.

Dogs cannot raise & train themselves, and they certainly can't make it
in this world on their own. They didn't ask to be born any more than you
& I did. But then my attitude is shaped by always having had a dog, and
always having cared for & trained them properly, and been rewarded by
always having *good* dogs.

The flip side of the coin is people that are pathologically afraid of
dogs, go ballistic around dogs, and seem to feel that dogs ought to be
prohibited anywhere they feel like going. I've had people scream at me
simply for having a dog, and one neighbor (who has since moved)
threatened me with violence because my dog sniffed at his mailbox.

Regards
Doug King

You don't know what you're talking about.
Go Google: Lysander Spooner and find out what real *Law* is. sheesh.....

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:8H7ic.9827$w96.1023873@attbi_s54...
What you said was "....The *law* says that if you touch my stuff, I am
required to shoot your
stupid ass in the face. Get it?"

What the law really says is you can not use deadly force unless a
reasonable
man would feel in danger of his life. If you shot someone because they
touched your stuff, you would be charged with murder.



"Don" wrote in message
...
John, you better straighten up your act or you will be sent to the
corner
for contemplation.
Where in my single sentence below did I mention dogs?

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:vr%hc.5371$YP5.524839@attbi_s02...
Don,
Again, I am confused, are you saying if your neighbors dog takes a
crap
in
your lawn, you are required by law to shot him in the face?


"Don" wrote in message
...
"Henry Blackmoore" wrote
Show me where the laws in a suburban area in this country have
been
interpreted to allow a homeowner to hide under the guise of
growing
"food
crops" while killing his neighbors dog or cats? Garden be damned.

The *law* says that if you touch my stuff, I am required to shoot
your
stupid ass in the face. Get it?