Justice for Mijo - Minister kills neighbors dog with machete

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by baja

Quote:
Originally Posted by critter171
I said it matters on the city i never stated a city didn't have leash law.
Oh, really? Then maybe you can explain to us all what these words mean: (from your post #170)

Quote:
Originally Posted by critter171
all cities don't have leash laws
And these words (post #173):

Quote:
Originally Posted by critter171
Its a well know fact not all city have leash laws.


First quote says - not all cities have lease laws ( likely true )

Second quote says - same thing


The line you are questioning;

''i never stated a city didn't have leash law"

means - he never named a city that did not have a lease law.

OK, I'll ask you the same question, Baja... name a city that doesn't have a leash law.

Me, I'd answer "Bangkok" ('cause I didn't specify a US city ). Seems to me that they aren't noted for having much of a stray dog problem in Bangkok either though 'cause over there, a stray dog just might wind up on someone's supper table.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by critter171

wonder why you took my words out of contet there more than just that why don't you find where i stated it was matters on the city instead of nippicking oh wait if that the case you still lose good day i am done replaying to you

No, you lose because your argument (that the owner of a dog that's running loose in a city bears no responsibility at all for whatever happens to that dog as a result of his failure to ensure that it stays where it belongs) was untenable in the first place. Had the dog bitten someone, the owner surely would have been paying the medical bills because he is responsible for his pet.

I was getting bored with your replays (sic) to me anyway.

[baja]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

OK, I'll ask you the same question, Baja... name a city that doesn't have a leash law.

Me, I'd answer "Bangkok" ('cause I didn't specify a US city ). Seems to me that they aren't noted for having much of a stray dog problem in Bangkok either though 'cause over there, a stray dog just might wind up on someone's supper table.

I don't know how to search a non-law.

But for the sake of this discussion let's say the city where the deed was done did have a leash law. According to the pilgrim's OP the dog got off the leash (or at least got away from the owner that was restraining him). That does happen and happens even when the dog's owner (hate the concept of ownership of a animal) is being responsible. But let's say in this case the "owner" was somewhat irresponsible. Are you saying the irresponsible owner and the machete murderer are equally responsible for the demise of this dog?

[critter171]

blueflame is clueless i stop debating you as you didn't listen to what i was saying and is a hyprocite

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by baja

I don't know how to search a non-law.

But for the sake of this discussion let's say the city where the deed was done did have a leash law. According to the pilgrim's OP the dog got off the leash (or at least got away from the owner that was restraining him). That does happen and happens even when the dog's owner (hate the concept of ownership of a animal) is being responsible. But let's say in this case the "owner" was somewhat irresponsible. Are you saying the irresponsible owner and the machete murderer are equally responsible for the demise of this dog?

OK... again, I am not in the city; I live a good 7 miles out in the country. You can hear coyotes howling at night and everything... but if my dog were to escape from my yard (regardless of how he got out or whether it was the first time it had ever happened) and my neighbors called police to complain, I would have a deputy sheriff at my door and I could be cited (and fined) for allowing him to escape. And if my dog were running loose chasing deer, most anyone who saw him do it would immediately get a rifle and put him down because here it's against the law for dogs to chase wildlife. And if I allow my dog to get loose and something bad happens to him (or anyone or anything else) as a result, I would be at least partially to blame for that because it's my responsibility to keep my dog where he belongs. Keeping your dog where he belongs can be done; my dog is never outside my yard unless he's on a leash.

I've already stated repeatedly that the machete-wielder's actions were inexcusable, reprehensible, and appalling. But it wouldn't have happened (presuming the story's true and not a scam to con money out of emotional sports-forum posters who love animals) if the dog's owner had kept him home, now would it?

I'm curious how much money "critter171" donated to the OP's cause...

[baja]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

OK... again, I am not in the city; I live a good 7 miles out in the country. You can hear coyotes howling at night and everything... but if my dog were to escape from my yard (regardless of how he got out or whether it was the first time it had ever happened) and my neighbors called police to complain, I would have a deputy sheriff at my door and I could be cited (and fined) for allowing him to escape. And if my dog were running loose chasing deer, most anyone who saw him do it would immediately get a rifle and put him down because here it's against the law for dogs to chase wildlife. And if I allow my dog to get loose and something bad happens to him (or anyone or anything else) as a result, I would be at least partially to blame for that because it's my responsibility to keep my dog where he belongs. Keeping your dog where he belongs can be done; my dog is never outside my yard unless he's on a leash.

I've already stated repeatedly that the machete-wielder's actions were inexcusable, reprehensible, and appalling. But it wouldn't have happened (presuming the story's true and not a scam to con money out of emotional sports-forum posters who love animals) if the dog's owner had kept him home, now would it?

I'm curious how much money "critter171" donated to the OP's cause...

So what's the argument?

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by critter171

blueflame is clueless i stop debating you as you didn't listen to what i was saying and is a hyprocite

Clearly if you're still posting with my username in the post, you haven't "stopped debating me". Nor have you stopped with the namecalling. Too funny.

So how much money did you donate? Or is your efforts on this dog's behalf confined to lashing out at anyone and everyone on an internet message board?

[critter171]

@ baja its the leash law that the where the agurement comes from blue uses examples like a dog attack. i used a person attack. and like i even have money to donate to this poor guy if i did have some extra money i would but i don't. its hilarious blue thinks "won" which is not the case

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by baja

So what's the argument?

There isn't one. If a pet owner is responsible and keeps their pet at home, then maybe the neighbors won't kill their dog.

[critter171]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

There isn't one. If a pet owner is responsible and keeps their pet at home, then maybe the neighbors won't kill their dog.

and its a person repsoblittiy to use good judgement again your acting like he let the go for the hell of you act like he walk out his front door and let him go.

Let me ask you a question do you got the speed limit? if no turn yourself in your broke the law.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by critter171

and its a person repsoblittiy to use good judgement again your acting like he let the go for the hell of you act like he walk out his front door and let him go.

Let me ask you a question do you got the speed limit? if no turn yourself in your broke the law.

Matter of fact, I do obey the speed limit. So your point is?

[critter171]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

Matter of fact, I do obey the speed limit. So your point is?

that a lie anyone who drives goes over the speed limit.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by critter171

that a lie anyone who drives goes over the speed limit.

Not true. I use cruise control to ensure against being an ATM for the State Patrol. And because I'm a law-abiding citizen...breaking the law wouldn't have been a good example for my kids.

[critter171]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

Not true. I use cruise control to ensure against being an ATM for the State Patrol. And because I'm a law-abiding citizen...breaking the law wouldn't have been a good example for my kids.

sounds so lazy on driving. and i am sure you go over by 1mph your still over the speed limit.

i know you have broken a law how about this one have you ever cross a street without using a cross walk? that called jay walking.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by critter171

sounds so lazy on driving. and i am sure you go over by 1mph your still over the speed limit.

i know you have broken a law how about this one have you ever cross a street without using a cross walk? that called jay walking.

Using cruise control is "lazy"? Sounds like a stretch of an effort to lay down an insult. IDC though... using cruise control is better than a speeding ticket any day so it seems "smart" rather than "lazy" to me.

I already told you I do not live in the city. There aren't many crosswalks in my immediate neighborhood; hence no need to jaywalk.

[baja]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

There isn't one. If a pet owner is responsible and keeps their pet at home, then maybe the neighbors won't kill their dog.

Let's assume the dog was not a threat to anyone what do you think should be the punishment for the person that killed the dog if any?

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by baja

Let's assume the dog was not a threat to anyone what do you think should be the punishment for the person that killed the dog if any?

It's a civil matter, which is why law enforcement (reportedly) isn't getting involved. The only thing law enforcement (animal control) could or would have done is to cite the dog owner for the dog being off his leash and he's lucky they didn't do this.

[critter171]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

It's a civil matter, which is why law enforcement (reportedly) isn't getting involved. The only thing law enforcement (animal control) could or would have done is to cite the dog owner for the dog being off his leash and he's lucky they didn't do this.

is that why there investigation? and yes police need to know cite only the dog my fing butt. they can charged them man with abuse to animal

[baja]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

It's a civil matter, which is why law enforcement (reportedly) isn't getting involved. The only thing law enforcement (animal control) could or would have done is to cite the dog owner for the dog being off his leash and he's lucky they didn't do this.

Michael Vick went to jail and was disgraced by a nation for killing dogs.

So this guy machetes a dog to death and it's a civil matter. There seems to be a criminal element there to me.

Dog mutilation and killing is a civil matter. You mean like trespassing or not returning a neighbor's lawn mower?

[critter171]

http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=754706

link right in a news station good day

[baja]

Thanks for the clip

Looks like the dog may have had a history of getting out and being threatening and aggressive toward someone on their property who feared for himself and his family. If the is the case it will be hard to make any charges stick. Seems like he could have used another means of running the dog off his property.

On thing seems certain there is some history there.

[critter171]

Originally Posted by baja

Thanks for the clip

Looks like the dog may have had a history of getting out and being threatening and aggressive toward someone on their property who feared for himself and his family. If the is the case it will be hard to make any charges stick. Seems like he could have used another means of running the dog off his property.

On thing seems certain there is some history there.

the problem with this is 1. the guy said he only hit him once two yellows labs don't go around barking and biting people i have one i damn well know and thirdly.

http://www.aspca.org/news/animal-wel...achete-in.aspx

no the fact the police didn't do there invesgation from the start if you see the picture its a clear case of animal curelty even i the dog was on the loose you don't have a right to hit a dog three times. these guy who did this needs to be charged and behind bars.

[baja]

Originally Posted by critter171

the problem with this is 1. the guy said he only hit him once two yellows labs don't go around barking and biting people i have one i damn well know and thirdly.

http://www.aspca.org/news/animal-wel...achete-in.aspx

no the fact the police didn't do there invesgation from the start if you see the picture its a clear case of animal curelty even i the dog was on the loose you don't have a right to hit a dog three times. these guy who did this needs to be charged and behind bars.

Your points;

1. So he lies. Irrelevant. He admitted to killing the dog - dead is dead

2. bull shiit. Any dog, regardless of breed can be trained / raised to be aggressive.

[critter171]

Originally Posted by baja

Your points;

1. So he lies. Irrelevant. He admitted to killing the dog - dead is dead

2. bull shiit. Any dog, regardless of breed can be trained / raised to be aggressive.

1. lying to the cops is punishable ( he had to go get the wepon the dog was not attackign)

2. was that prove he was? just cause the minister says that does not make it true.

the guy is a needs to be charged i be fine if they got charged both for killing a dog and letting a dog run wild. it be the best but the fact of the matter police didn't want to handle it. and when he say he only hit him once and the picture there more than one wound all over his body is enough.

this not the first time nor will it be the last time this happens its lazy investigation.

[critter171]

here a comment from a local person where it happen "Pretty sad he gets away with it after this will be the third dog in this town we know of this same minister slashed with his machete, I knew he would come up with some lame story this is so sad!!"