ORIGINAL: deepzak
ORIGINAL: rick64
ORIGINAL: deepzak
I agree that the guty should not have shot the dogs, but if they were strays, how fair is it for tax payers to have to foot the bill to care for a bunch of strays until an owner can be found, if ever.
What I see coming from this is that it's now basically illegal to trap on your privately owned property. I guess that the state has just issued a warning order to all trappers that their chosen pass time has now basically been outlawed due to having to worry about what type of animal come onto your property and gets caught in your traps.
People who own animals and let them run free and uncontrolled are criminally neglegent and just as wrong as the guy who shot the dogs and both should be prosecuted for breaking the law. Additionally, the guy who found the dogs was more than likely tresspassing to have found the dog on the shooters property and should be prosecuted for that as well. Before anybody breaks out the right to retrieve law, remember that that law is for hunting dogs only (domestic pets are not covered under VDGIF codes) and if they were hunting dog, why were they running out of season without the supervision of the owners?
I know that this will not be a popular opinion, but it is one other way to look at the issue. If pet owners do not want anything to happen to their pets, keep them at home, in their yards/houses and you can pretty much bet that nothing will happen to them.
It wasn't any issue with the man trapping on his property, he was charged because he shot the dogs. The issue of who has to "foot the bill" doesn't matter, if he had called animal control it would have been their problem and that's their job. The one dog owner was probably trespassing and both owners were in violation of the ordnance. It didn't say if they were charged, but they did lose their pets. Any further punishment probably wasn't necessary.
The money for animal control comes from somewhere, and don't you believe for one minute that it's all charity. Taxpayers foot the bill for all these programs. The more "abandoned" animals they have to deal with, the higher OUR taxes go.
I knowsome/most expense ofanimal controlcomes from taxpayers, but it's there for a reason.The owners would have had to pay to recover their dogs.