Man shoots neighbor's pet Labrador, Some people are just sick Options

[Milkman delivers]

Did you read the rest of the article? The dogs have collars on which vibrate when they leave their owner's yard. They do not understand why the dog left their yard. The reason the guy knew something was amiss in the first place is because the dog was not there. It almost seems as though the dog was lured onto the other guy's property by something (gee whiz, what could it have been??).

I did not. The part that was pasted here said that he had to push a button to activate the collar.

But again, I'm not going to immediately believe the first article I read about animal abuse. It's a pretty hot-button issue right now and the media tends to run with these things and neglect to feature every side of these stories.

This post has been edited by Milkman delivers: Jan 25, 2012 -> 11:46 AM

[scenario]

Before crucifying that other guy, I'd like to hear his side of the story first. Obviously shooting the dog is going to be extreme no matter what and there were probably other measures to be taken, but who knows how many prior incidents took place?

The dog's owners moved in next door March 2011, less than one year ago. They had exactly one conversation with this guy prior to the shooting... Thanksgiving... when he walked out his door with a beer in his hand and yelled at them to keep their dogs off his property.

Think about the events here...

A guy goes outside with his dogs. One wanders away for a few moments. He notices it missing and he hears a shot. He goes running towards it... sees the dog running towards him bleeding... during which he hears another shot which hits the brush near him.

Timeline... when did the shooter have time to go get his rifle, etc? It had to be sitting somewhere relatively close and loaded.

First shot... He walked 4 steps out his front door and shot the dog from 50 feet away. There was no doubt he was shooting at somebody's pet Labrador Retriever.

Second shot... There was blood all the way down his drive. No doubt the dog was hit. Why the second shot? And did the shooter even think that possibly he could be endangering the owner who was calling and running towards the dog?

Guy goes back into his house and then comes smiling to the front door when the owner shows up to ask what happened.

Bottom Line: He not only inflicted cruelty on a companion animal (which is a Class 4 felony in Illinois)... he endangered the owner with the second shot. And he came to the door smiling about it???

This post has been edited by scenario: Jan 25, 2012 -> 11:51 AM

[iamshack]

The dog's owners moved in next door March 2011, less than one year ago. They had exactly one conversation with this guy prior to the shooting... Thanksgiving... when he walked out his door with a beer in his hand and yelled at them to keep their dogs off his property.

Think about the events here...

A guy goes outside with his dogs. One wanders away for a few moments. He notices it missing and he hears a shot. He goes running towards it... sees the dog running towards him bleeding... during which he hears another shot which hits the brush near him.

Timeline... when did the shooter have time to go get his rifle, etc? It had to be sitting somewhere relatively close and loaded.

First shot... He walked 4 steps out his front door and shot the dog from 50 feet away.

Second shot... There was blood all the way down his drive. No doubt the dog was hit. Why the second shot? And did the shooter even think that possibly he could be endangering the owner who was calling and running towards the dog?

Guy goes back into his house and then comes smiling to the front door when the owner shows up to ask what happened.

Bottom Line: He not only inflicted cruelty on a companion animal (which is a Class 4 felony in Illinois)... he endangered the owner with the second shot. And he came to the door smiling about it???

I'd be willing to bet he lured the dog onto his property and shot him in a drunken stupor.

[Milkman delivers]

The dog's owners moved in next door March 2011, less than one year ago. They had exactly one conversation with this guy prior to the shooting... Thanksgiving... when he walked out his door with a beer in his hand and yelled at them to keep their dogs off his property.

Think about the events here...

A guy goes outside with his dogs. One wanders away for a few moments. He notices it missing and he hears a shot. He goes running towards it... sees the dog running towards him bleeding... during which he hears another shot which hits the brush near him.

Timeline... when did the shooter have time to go get his rifle, etc? It had to be sitting somewhere relatively close and loaded.

First shot... He walked 4 steps out his front door and shot the dog from 50 feet away.

Second shot... There was blood all the way down his drive. No doubt the dog was hit. Why the second shot? And did the shooter even think that possibly he could be endangering the owner who was calling and running towards the dog?

Guy goes back into his house and then comes smiling to the front door when the owner shows up to ask what happened.

Bottom Line: He not only inflicted cruelty on a companion animal (which is a Class 4 felony in Illinois)... he endangered the owner with the second shot. And he came to the door smiling about it???

OK, I'm going to repeat this because I think it's very important. The smiling thing could incredibly easily be a fabrication. I'm not calling your friend a liar, but she had to be in a state of panic when she confronted him. I'm not going to take that as evidence, but unfortunately it's going to be a key point in the court of public opinion as it's already been brought up a few times in this thread.

This guy hunts on his own property. I'm guessing it wouldn't be uncommon for him to have a loaded rifle around, as unsafe as that obviously is.

Does it state anywhere that the owner was in sight when he fired the second shot? The part posted here seems to say that the neighbor simply heard the shot in the bushes. So while he may well have known that the owner was within range, he may have just as easily not known with tree/bush coverage.

I'm no lawyer, but this guy can probably get off with a slap on the wrist, or even less. Heck, he can maybe even say that he thought the dog was a coyote.

[Soxbadger]

Suing is not going to accomplish anything. The legal remedies are simply not strong enough.

What do you mean the remedies arent strong enough?

If they have to pay 5-10k in medical bills, why would they not want to try and recoup those bills from the person who caused the damage?

[Milkman delivers]

I'd be willing to bet he lured the dog onto his property and shot him in a drunken stupor.

See, you're already running wild with this. And you wonder why the media would run with a story like this and sensationalize it? Second page of this thread and the guy is already luring innocent puppies onto his property to drunkenly strangle them with piano wire.

[southsider2k5]

I did not. The part that was pasted here said that he had to push a button to activate the collar.

But again, I'm not going to immediately believe the first article I read about animal abuse. It's a pretty hot-button issue right now and the media tends to run with these things and neglect to feature every side of these stories.

Damn dude, did you enroll at Penn State or something?

[scenario]

See, you're already running wild with this. And you wonder why the media would run with a story like this and sensationalize it? I'm not going to immediately believe the first article I read about animal abuse.

Says the guy who didn't even read the article... lol

This post has been edited by scenario: Jan 25, 2012 -> 12:04 PM

[Milkman delivers]

Damn dude, did you enroll at Penn State or something?

I sorta get the joke, but it doesn't fit that well. The media will crucify this guy to no end, but there won't be a public outpouring of support from the media like there has been for Paterno.

[Milkman delivers]

Says the guy who didn't even read the article... lol

I figured if the content from the article were important enough, you might have bothered to post it all here. I suppose I gave you too much credit. Sorry, I will read it all and get back. But I'm going to go in expecting it to be sensationalized, which I'm more than certain it is.

[Soxbadger]

Also they should see if they can get a care credit card from GE to pay for the medical bills. I was able to get 18 months no interest on a 5k emergency vet bill recently,

[Milkman delivers]

Read it, still don't see anything wrong with what I've already written.

[witesoxfan]

I sorta get the joke, but it doesn't fit that well. The media will crucify this guy to no end, but there won't be a public outpouring of support from the media like there has been for Paterno.

To be fair, I don't know if there is necessarily a Joe Paterno in this situation.

[Milkman delivers]

To be fair, I don't know if there is necessarily a Joe Paterno in this situation.

Also true.

[scenario]

Read it, still don't see anything wrong with what I've already written.

I think you'd have a great career as a mafia defense attorney. lol

"Judge the guy tripped and fell on my client's knife, which he was only carrying for self-defense. Anybody with common sense could see that."