TexasCHLforum.com

I intend to file a complaint but I cannot file one until someone actually sees him do it. It's my word against his. Although he doesn't deny it, he does not admit it either.

Oldgringo wrote:What's the problem? If your neighbors don't want to know their neighbors and their foibles, don't invite them to y'all's next block party. Y'all may find they're alright with one on one, or small groups, but shy away from the 'group grope posturing' type get togethers.

I have no issue with anyone that prefers to keep to themselves or smaller groups. This man goes out of his way to interfere with us. He is crossing the line when he throws chemical bottles in our backyards because he doesn't like dogs. To make it clear, he has to cross an alley to throw a bottle in my yard and 4 of the 8 neighbors. As soon as I actually see him do it, I will file a complaint, however, the law is on his side. One of my neighbors has already filed a complaint (he has not denied his involvement). The LEO investigating stated to the woman that filed the complaint that she must prove his intent to poison her dog. Simply throwing a chemical bottle in one's yard does not prove intent. That burden of proof is not required if someone threw the same bottle in a backyard where a small child was playing. It would be considered child endangerment, assault or attempted murder. In that case, I doubt any prosecutor would indict the parent for the use of lethal force. My dog is my family. She has been by my side through a burglary, a bad car accident and chemotherapy. Everyone whose met her, loves her instantly. A pet's life should not be treated as having no value. Any idiot that would shoot a non-threatening pet that is lawfully restrained should be treated as a threat to the family safety.

Jim Beaux wrote:It's shocking the number of cruel people who go out of their way to kill a well mannered, well behaved dog for absolutely no reason....why Im shocked I say..... maybe these wanton killers should learn to be like me and enjoy the daily clean up of several large & stinking piles, embrace the joy of picking up shredded newspapers strewn across the yard, & learn to enjoy wolf howling 50' from the bedroom window....btw, before offering unsolicited advice be advised; my city puts the onus on the victims instead of the pet owners.

I must have missed the comment where someone stated that there was a shocking number of cruel people who are going out of their way to kill well mannered dogs. As I understand the thread, due to the recent news the OP simply asked would one be justified in using lethal force to protect their pet if someone chooses to harm him without provocation. If I misunderstood, please correct me.

I happen to be in a unique situation where the problem is the neighbor and not the dogs. I will not get rid of my dog to make my neighbor a more pleasant person. I respect him, his family and his property and he should do the same. I live in a nice middle class neighborhood where we all respect one another and respect each other's property. If there is a problem we will talk to each to resolve it as quickly as possible. His house is the odd one out. He and his wife not only dislike dogs, they dislike children flannel shirts, pickup trucks and people who use their garage as a shop. He puts no effort into getting to know or work with his neighbors.

I don't believe my neighbor would kill my dog. It's a hypothetical situation that wouldn't be entirely unrealistic. Its not any different than a homeowner asking what his rights are to lethal force should he arrive home during a burglary and the perpetrator has not posed a threat him or his family. Although one hopes it would never happen, one would like to be prepared if it should.

JCole wrote:

Rex B wrote:If you keep the dog in your property, and someone enters your property and attacks your dog, then you are on pretty good legal ground to defend your property.
If the dog is not on your property, and is being a nuisance to neighbors, then your best option is to retrieve the animal and apologize.

There we go!

That only solves for the shooter entering your property. If the shooter attacks your dog without stepping foot on your property then it still leaves it open as to the level of force that is allowable by law. My dog does not leave her backyard without a leash. I don't believe in having any pet roaming the streets freely. They are fenced in, leashed or in the house. The same applies to cats. The whole statement that it's "just a dog" does not apply in my household. My dog is an integral part of my family and she would be morned no different than a loss of a family member.

I have a similar problem with a neighbor that does not like dogs. I don't believe he would kill one of them however, I would not put it past him to try and make one sick. Should he decide to cross that line, there are gaps between the boards of my neighbors privacy fences that he could easily shoot a dog without stepping foot on someone elses property. In that instance it would be very difficult for me not to protect with lethal force. I often wondered this same question after finding unexplained chemical bottles close to my dogs water bowl. This is the sole reason my dog no longer has a water source in the backyard.