Dog shot!

BornToKill

TheBegotten wrote: »

Have you seen a bison running from a lone wolf, let alone a herd of bison?

And this.

Caution: contains scenes of nature red in tooth and claw.

TheBegotten

Blay wrote: »

They're on the farmer's land, the dog is trespassing on the land, it is the owner's duty to control the dog, if they don't the dog gets shot, it's a simple law that has worked for years. Actions->Consequences.

I would agree, IF it was shot then it would be the owners fault for leaving him at large. I'm questioning the farmers attitude to land and property with regards to his right to shoot the dog. I.e. is he allowed to unconditionally destroy property (the dog) if it wanders onto his land? And if I find it GCD, I'll be sure to tell you.

Procrastastudy

Found it!

Its in the unenumerated rights because of the Christian and democratic nature of the state.

IsaacWunder

diarmo06 wrote: »

Personally, I would question the validity of this "farmer's law". Who decided the price of a sheeps life was any greater than that of a dog?
Flawed

TheBegotten wrote: »

Point taken. I can't quote or reference, it was a long time ago since I saw it on a similar thread. I'll look it up tomorrow, assuming this thread isn't closed, I have a notion its in the constitution.
Back to point, using your logic longhalliween, why should I care about someone else's sheep? If he doesn't adequatly protect them, its hardly my problem? Furthermore dogs are a type of wolf and cows are a sub-speices of bison. Have you seen a bison running from a lone wolf, let alone a herd of bison?

This stuff is comedy gold

Witcher

TheBegotten wrote: »

I would agree, IF it was shot then it would be the owners fault for leaving him at large. I'm questioning the farmers attitude to land and property with regards to his right to shoot the dog. I.e. is he allowed to unconditionally destroy property (the dog) if it wanders onto his land? And if I find it GCD, I'll be sure to tell you.

If it is a threat to his livestock and he follows the steps set out in legislation then he can shoot it.

longhalloween

BornToKill wrote: »

Well, there's this.

So all he has to do is prove to the guards that the dog was worrying his sheep on his land and that's about it.

Also : http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1985/en/act/pub/0011/print.html#sec3

Any damage done by the dog has to be covered by the owner.

BornToKill wrote: »

And this.

Caution: contains scenes of nature red in tooth and claw.

Ya learn something new every day (appropriate username BTW)

Procrastastudy

Okay really am going to bed now - all messing aside I really hope Toby turns up safe and sound. I reckon if the farmer was going to shoot him then he'd have told you he'd done it if he's as cantankerous as you make him out.

@TheBegotten - much obliged - however have a read of the act BornToKill linked. That's not to say you won't find case law as the act only allows for a defence.

Pottler

Blay wrote: »

If it is a threat to his livestock and he follows the steps set out in legislation then he can shoot it.

???
1.get gun
2.load gun
3.aim gun
4.shoot
5.hopefully hit dog, not neighbours car
6.hide dogs corpse
7.greet neighbour cheerily next day as if nothing has happened and deny all knowledge
????

Witcher

Pottler wrote: »

???
1.get gun
2.load gun
3.aim gun
4.shoot
5.hopefully hit dog, not neighbours car
6.hide dogs corpse
7.greet neighbour cheerily next day as if nothing has happened and deny all knowledge
????

Well yeah if you want to break the law but there are conditions one has to adhere to if they want to legally kill a dog on their land.

longhalloween

Pottler wrote: »

???
1.get gun
2.load gun
3.aim gun
4.shoot
5.hopefully hit dog, not neighbours car
6.hide dogs corpse
7.greet neighbour cheerily next day as if nothing has happened and deny all knowledge
????

I wonder does he have a pig farm too... :pac:

TheBegotten

longhalloween wrote: »

BornToKill wrote: »

Well, there's this.

So all he has to do is prove to the guards that the dog was worrying his sheep on his land and that's about it.

Also : http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1985/en/act/pub/0011/print.html#sec3

Any damage done by the dog has to be covered by the owner.

BornToKill wrote: »

And this.

Caution: contains scenes of nature red in tooth and claw.

Ya learn something new every day

Agreed. But he has to report it within 48 hours, and the OP can claim he made reasonable attempts to keep the dog restrained. I can't watch the video on my phone, I assume it shows some cowardly bison?

Cass

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Maybe find the missing shotgun shells that were fired and see if there's anything suspect where they are.

Too much CSI. A shotgun cartridge, fired, cannot be linked to a firearm. No rifling, and no bullet. Even if you found the spot you'd have to match the blood to a sample form the dog, and then try and prove the empties belong to the farmer, and then after all this try and prosecute.

IOW not a hope this would happen.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Crazy old man with a shotgun by the sounds of it. Could be the Posty next. No harm in a Garda looking.

Old = crazy. That's a tad presumptuous.

TheBegotten wrote: »

.....but you can only kill a dog if its threatening young livestock (lambs). However, aside from that her cannot kill Toby for trepass, because it isn't intentional.

The process is as follows;

• Land owner informs dog owner that their dog is on his/her lands, and instructs the dog owner to keep the dog off the lands.
• The dog returns to the lands so the land owner informs the local wrden to catch the dog.
• The warden fails to catch the dog as does the land owner.
• The land owner can now legally shoot the dog for worrying livestock (irrespective of the breed of livestock).
• The land owner now has 48 hours to inform the local Gardai that he has shot the dog.

As the land owner already returned the dog once that serves as notification to keep it off his land. The fact that you have lost the dog means you have not adequately controlled the dog. If the farmer follows the proper guidelines then he will have contacted the warden. However with local wardens, at least in my area, being hard to contact, he may just shoot it.

Again this is all presumption. I highly doubt the farmer would have shot the dog then lied about it. He would be on the right side of legal in what he has done so far, and the Gardai would not get involed in a civil matter. Which i believe this issue would be unless there is loss (monetary) of livestock or at worse someone sees the farmer shooting the dog, and claims reckless discharge of a firearm. Even then it's hard to prove.

drunkmonkey wrote: »

If he's wandering around making death threats i's assume that would be bordering on crazy. He 85, could be thinking he's john wayne for all we know.

Posty is next for a bullet from the farmer, runs over a lamb on the way in. Not out of the realms of possibility. .

You arr making wide sweeping, baseless accusations against a person you do not know simply because they are elderly, and a firearm owner. For no other reason than to sensationalise a situation.

diarmo06 wrote: »

Personally, I would question the validity of this "farmer's law".

It's not "Farmer's Law". It's actual law. The farmer has a right to protect his livestock, and livlihood as much as you have a responsibility to control your dog.

TheBegotten wrote: »

Believe it or not, dogs are protected under law.

That protection would extend to responsible owners that abide by the law. Had the farmer came onto the OP's premises and shot the dog then he has a serious case. So far, as said above, the farmer seems to be the only person in this scenario, that has complied with his responsibilities.

Furthermore, I would say its agricultures fault for spitting in the eye of natural selection and making a 250kg bovine that is afraid of a max 70kg dog. There's too much obession in Ireland on farming and land.

Not really sure how to respond to that. Blaming hundreds of years of agricultural practices instead of the irresponsible dog control practices? Smacks alot of "everyone else is wrong bar me".

ZETOR_IS_BETTER

Pottler wrote: »

???
1.get gun
2.load gun
3.aim gun
4.shoot
5.hopefully hit dog, not neighbours car
6.hide dogs corpse
7.greet neighbour cheerily next day as if nothing has happened and deny all knowledge
????
8 profit! !

Fyp :pac:

longhalloween

TheBegotten wrote: »

the OP can claim he made reasonable attempts to keep the dog restrained.

But he didn't and he hasn't made that claim anywhere in this thread. In fact he's admitted he lets the dog roam around the lanes and fields.

If he did the dog wouldn't have been on the farmers land the first time and he wouldn't be missing now.

blindside88

This should be renamed "I carelessly lost my dog and now want the guards to go all csi on my neighbours farm" from what your saying (along with those that agree with you) is that you and your dog should be allowed to act without consequences. If this man is 80 odd he's probably seen his fair share of the high horse brigade and lived to tell the tail. Be grateful that he brought the dog back the first time (I certainly wouldn't have) learn from this and keep your next dog under control

TheBegotten

GCDLawstudent wrote: »

Okay really am going to bed now - all messing aside I really hope Toby turns up safe and sound. I reckon if the farmer was going to shoot him then he'd have told you he'd done it if he's as cantankerous as you make him out.

@TheBegotten - much obliged - however have a read of the act BornToKill linked. That's not to say you won't find case law as the act only allows for a defence.

Ditto. That was it though. I'm not sure why I thought it was in the constitution, and Legal Discussion isn't the place to debate the finer points of natural selection. Best of luck. As a final point I don't think I said the owner wasn't in the wrong, but whether the farmer was in the right.

BornToKill

TheBegotten wrote: »

Ditto. That was it though. I'm not sure why I thought it was in the constitution

Well, both articles 40.3 and 43 protect personal property rights.

tvercetti

longhalloween wrote: »

I'm sure Dev was shouting it from the steps of the GPO in 1916

No need to be getting DeV invovled, you'd have to say he looks good for his age.

nuac

A farmer may shoot a dog if it is worrying livestock.

Has your neighbour sheep? - it is not long after lambing time-

blueythebear

Jeebus. Five pages because of a missing dog?

To the OP, you don't even know what has become of your dog. For all you know the dog could still be roaming the countryside. You do not know if this farmer shot your dog and you do not have a shred of evidence otherwise. Accusing this farmer without evidence is guaranteed to further sour relations with this individual.

There is nothing that you can do but go out, ask neighbours and put up flyers. If you find the dog and he's been shot, then you can ask your neighbour about it but there's very little you can do about it. The fact is, the Gardaí will not be sending samples to the lab for ballistics comparisons to trace the gun the bullet came from over a dog. Hope your dog turns up alive and well all the same though.

MarkR

Loose dog doesn't come home. Not going to make crimeline. Dog could have been knocked down, stolen, run off, or shot.

Why didn't you keep your dog on your property?

nuac

diarmo06 wrote: »

Frankly, If you knew the dog you would understand how ridiculious the thought of damage caused could be. Merely months old, cross between a mongral and something unknown. Small dog! Gentle nature.
Yes, you will claim that's irrelevant. But, chances are ye're from farming backrounds yourself? Biast i would've thought.

Should an 85 years old man have the right to shoot on sight without any danger to his precious "livestock".

I realise this is long thread but did the farmer age five years since it started? He was 80 in the first post

christmas2012

did u find your pet?

Magenta

diarmo06 wrote: »

Frankly, If you knew the dog you would understand how ridiculious the thought of damage caused could be. Merely months old, cross between a mongral and something unknown. Small dog! Gentle nature.

Try explaining that to a pregnant ewe he's chasing.

diarmo06 wrote: »

Personally, I would question the validity of this "farmer's law". Who decided the price of a sheeps life was any greater than that of a dog?
Flawed

When farmers started making their money from their sheep and not from your dog.
Sorry, but you appear to take no responsibility or control over your dog. The owner already warned you about it trespassing and you didn't bother making sure it didn't happen again. Your dog is YOUR responsiblity, not everyone else's. Are you also aware that if your dog runs in front of a car and is hit, you are liable for any damages caused to the car? Or would you prefer the driver swerved, possibly into an oncoming car or a tree, because you weren't bothered taking control of your dog?

face1990

OP, I suspect you may be trolling. Nevertheless, if you live in a rural area you have to keep your dog under control and stop it wandering. If you think that's unfair then don't live in a rural area.

Pottler

face1990 wrote: »

OP, I suspect you may be trolling. Nevertheless, if you live in a rural area you have to keep your dog under control and stop it wandering. If you think that's unfair then don't live in a rural area.

or don't keep a dog... oh no, hang on..

Mike87

If a protected animal (such as a dog) is causing damage, and theres no time to call for help, and you try to scare it off using other means first... then yes, it can be shot on the spot.

Ive being there, got the t-shirt, still paying off solicitor fees :rolleyes:

MadsL

Next time use this..

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?rlz=1C1TSNP_enUS460US460&q=Electronic+fence&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=9696896938956955808&sa=X&ei=FvetT8SrD8no2AX-x_TpCA&ved=0COwBEPMCMAA

Hope your dog shows up but I have no sympathy for letting your dog wander, especially in May. I now live in horse country in New Mexico, if I let my (hypothetical) dog wander it would be me my neighbours shot not just the dog.

Keep your dog under control in future.

fasttalkerchat

F1ngers wrote: »

Open to correction here, but if your dog is in his field(potentially worrying his livestock) he has every right to shot your dog on sight.

By that logic the op could kill a cow or horse that wondered onto his land. I don't think that would stand up in court.

MadsL

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

By that logic the op could kill a cow or horse that wondered onto his land. I don't think that would stand up in court.

Cows and horses are predators now??? Jesus!

Would you suggest he shouldn't be allowed to shoot a fox?

fasttalkerchat

MadsL wrote: »

Cows and horses are predators now????

If you go by the logic that a small dog in a field is a threat to animals you could also say that a horse in a garden is a danger to children.

Procrastastudy

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

If you go by the logic that a small dog in a field is a threat to animals you could also say that a horse in a garden is a danger to children.

It certainly is - if you could show all the elements then you would claim in negligence simpliciter. I assume as the incidence of this happening in probably around a hundred times less likely than a dog, it has been left to common law. Perhaps you could be the kind soul that links and Acts or cases involving horses / cows / sheep being shot and what the legal position is there.

You have a duty to mitigate loss. If the only way to do that is pop a cap in Shergar then that would be considered as a defence. Shooting a dog opens up a farmer to damages. If you read the thread you will see where the relevant Acts and procedures have been linked which explain the law and defences in relation to dogs. All the farmer is doing by shooting the dog is mitigating his damages. If it wasn't allowed, what could he do? Film it and present the owner for a bill for thousands in damages?

BornToKill

The dog legislation has already been linked. The Control of Horses Act 1996 deals with straying horses.

ResearchWill

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

By that logic the op could kill a cow or horse that wondered onto his land. I don't think that would stand up in court.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1986/en/act/pub/0032/sec0023.html#sec23 this section does not give you a right to shoot a dog but does give you a defence to any civil or criminal action. So if a farmer thinks your dog not (your child, horse, donkey, cat, hamster or parrot) is worrying or about to worry his livestock and he believes nothing else will stop it and he shoots the dog he can raise the above section as a defence in any action.

kildare.17hmr

Op needs a reality check. Wondering dogs do so much damage and most of the time they are not vicious its the chasing that does the damage. A sheep that runs into a wall and cracks its skull or breaks its neck is not acceptable and what if the sheep jumps a wall and ends up on a main road infront of a car? All this can happen when dogs are roaming. Also they can run into sheep wire fencing and get caught up and die feom bleeding out which is a horrible way to go, i know because iv come accross this before, not a nice sight.

All the above can happen with cows and horses too and the dog thinks he is just playing.

Op if your dog did get shot you are the one to blame simple as and i suggest if you get another dog make your garden secure before you do and respect your neighbours next time

Worst time of the year for a dog to be wandering

nuac

I agree fully with Kildare 17. In country side, especially this time of year, dogs must b e kept under control..

Even if one has the most innocent, gentle pet, when they start chasing sheep or other stock the hunting instinct breaks out,

This is even worse if they group together in a pack.

Dogs are very clever about this and can arrive back at base looking very innocent. I heard of one case where a dog used to swim a river to wash away the blood, even tho the river was not on their way home.

In my experience much of the trouble regarding dogs out of control is from owners who have moved into the countryside and have little understanding of rural life.

Sittingpretty

Can I also just add that it's not just in the countryside that dogs should be kept safe. There is no place for roaming dogs anywhere in my opinion.

MadsL

Sittingpretty wrote: »

Can I also just add that it's not just in the countryside that dogs should be kept safe. There is no place for roaming dogs anywhere in my opinion.

It's a misdemeanor offence in most parts of the US. In some states there were statues requiring Sheriffs and Deputies to shoot wandering dogs with no metal tag on sight. The statutes were repealed recently in favour of dog pounds, but they were there for a reason. Wild dogs were a serious problem in the old US.

One of the laws in question gives dog owners 48 hours to kill their dog if it is found killing another animal. The other law requires sheriffs to kill any dog running at large without a metal dog tag between the months of August and February

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2009Mar03/0,4670,ShootingDogs,00.html#ixzz1ugmNcgai