No, in point of fact, it is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyTech
And even where leashing a dog is required, shooting an off-leash dog is (except where narrow exceptions apply) a criminal offence.
Printable View
No, in point of fact, it is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyTech
And even where leashing a dog is required, shooting an off-leash dog is (except where narrow exceptions apply) a criminal offence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Absolutely.
One of those is a bylaw matter, the most trivial law there is. The other is a criminal matter, the most serious class of offence you can commit.Quote:
Originally Posted by poltrojan
Shall we continue pretending these responsibilities are equivalent?
I did not condone the shooting, I just asked a question.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
I find it interesting how some people take up the crusade because they are dog lovers, but probably have something to say about the animal lovers who crusade against hunting. To me that is somewhat hypocritical. Just let the law deal with it.
My bad, I should never have opened this thread, I guess I know better when i see the next one. This forum seems to be heading in the same general direction as the rest of social media.
By the way I love my dog too, and would pursue legal action if someone shot him. But I don't see how that could happen as he is never out of sight when outdoors. He knows to maintain a line of sight at all times.
No,of course not. That would be ridiculous,but, I would like to draw your attention to Ontario e=laws,The Protection of Poultry and Livestock Act Sect.2(c)Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
Any person may shoot a dog running at large on property where livestock are or have been likely to habituate.
I once thought as you do until my muttly got away from the wife and ventured onto other property where horses were grazing. The DRPS showed up a while later with a $200 fine and a stern warning that any further incursions by our dog would result in it being immediately shot. I checked with our lawyer,found we had no recourse and could be sued for any damage caused by the dog,so, we STFU and paid the fine. FYI
Yes, I'm aware of that one, too (he remarked with a yawn.) Still not a criminal matter.
The level of responsibility involved in handling a firearm is much higher than in letting your dog off leash. Pretending the dog owner is equally responsible when a dog is shot is simply BS. The person taking the shot is responsible for the shot, period.
Yes, you can keep your dog safe by not letting it run at large. And I'm against dogs running at large for several reasons, such as dogs running deer. But that doesn't give anyone a free pass to shoot dogs.
Responsibility is the key here; we were given the privilege to own firearms (i'm not here to debate privilege/rights of firearms) as opposed to dog ownership, you don't need anything to own a dog but be responsible for it. I heard a couple of incidents in the past where a friend I played soccer with was mauled by a dog off leash ON HIS PROPERTY; simply lunged at him (I don't know the whole story) but I saw the face scar it wasn't pretty. Dog are also used as a 'weapon' in K9 units; dogs teeth are quite formidable and if the owner doesn't control the dog and just pretends its a play thing. Its the same thing mishandling a firearm. I don't have absolute faith in people's ability in controlling their off-leashed dog when I see its aggressive traits; I keep my pocket knife handy for those situations.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
So owning a dog is just as serious a responsibility as handling a firearm. And with that, we're in the silly season.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
No,but,it's just as important as owning a firearm,that's the point posters are trying to make,I'm sure.
If your dog poses a threat to others you have even more responsibility. If attacked I would not think twice. Far too many stupid, irresponsible dog owners think their little doggy can do no wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh