In article , "Doug Kanter" wrote:

"Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message
link.net...
In article , "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message
link.net...

Anybody that would advocate violent action against helpless and
innocent
animals is one sick puppy.

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?

I repeat. You are one sick puppy.

Actually, Henry, a garden *does* fall under that definition. These laws were
almost eliminated as farms began to vanish, but in many places, they were
kept intact because of the victory garden movement during World War II. The
current legal argument is that flowers have no intrinsic value unless
they're raised by a commercial grower. But, food *does* have value to anyone
who grows it. Therefore, any food garden is defined as a farm.

Sorry to burst your bubble.....

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.

You are twisted.

Like Charles says -"keep back--pedaling".