Tragic situation involving a neighbour's cat

jimgoose

pilly wrote: »

Not sure why you're arguing with me, we're completely on the same page.

I'm not! Sorry if it "flowed" that way, not my intention, chief! :pac:

seamus

jimgoose wrote: »

Any dog is capable of killing a human child. If they feel frightened or threatened they turn on tenpence straight back to their natural instinct, which is to attack. Young children and babies are particularly in danger, as their arrival often means altering the dogs position in the "pack", e.g. from centre of attention to just De Dag.

Pack theory in dogs has been thoroughly debunked as complete nonsense. Modern dogs are several thousand generations evolved away from wolves and don't engage in pack behaviour with pecking orders like wolves do. The introduction of a child doesn't alter their "order" in the pack.

It simply creates a change in noise and routine, and dogs like most animals (including humans) don't like variations in routine. This can cause them to become stressed and agitated, especially around the "new" thing, i.e. baby or child.

The vast majority of dog attacks can be separated into two groups;

- A snap or a bite, where the dog has become stressed to the point where it is left with the only type of communication available to it - teeth. This is usually a single bite, which while physically distressing to the person on the end of it, is rarely serious and even more rarely fatal.

- A mauling or attack, where the dog has confused the victim with a hostile intruder or prey. This almost exclusively occurs in situations where the dog has been trained to be hostile to visitors, or has been baited for fighting using smaller animals. The shouts and squeals of a small child can mimic that of a distressed rabbit or smaller dog, triggering a trained fighting dog to attack. Less often this will occur where the dog believes their family to be in danger.

When you introduce a change into a family, many family members often become grumpy, stressed out, shouty and even angry. Dogs do too. Except they only know how to go off in a huff, bark, or bite.

jimgoose

seamus wrote: »

Pack theory in dogs has been thoroughly debunked as complete nonsense. Modern dogs are several thousand generations evolved away from wolves and don't engage in pack behaviour with pecking orders like wolves do. The introduction of a child doesn't alter their "order" in the pack.

It simply creates a change in noise and routine, and dogs like most animals (including humans) don't like variations in routine...

Oh I agree, that's why I put "pack" in quotes. My point stands though, and you're quite right as well and reinforce the point that dogs and small children are an imprudent mix. The other matter is the legendary Baby Smell - in a house with a new-ish baby, that smell is like creosote to a dog nose.

PucaMama

jimgoose wrote: »

Any dog is capable of killing a human child. If they feel frightened or threatened they turn on tenpence straight back to their natural instinct, which is to attack. Young children and babies are particularly in danger, as their arrival often means altering the dogs position in the "pack", e.g. from centre of attention to just De Dag.

I must rush out to buy a muzzle for my pug we are in so much danger.

There are some dogs, even if they get angry or frightened, just can't kill.

jimgoose

PucaMama wrote: »

I must rush out to buy a muzzle for my pug we are in so much danger.

There are some dogs, even if they get angry or frightened, just can't kill.

I'm sure it could do a nice little electric chainsaw job on a toddler, just the same.

idnkph

I wonder if the neighbours cat got hit by a car would they be looking to get all cars put off the road.
The dog was in a controlled environment and no danger to anybody. Tell the neighbour you will get them a cat to replace just to try keep the peace of they refuse and keep up the ****e tell them where to go.
I would be installing a camera too in the back yard to protect the dog from any unwanted treats being thrown over the fence. Inform the neighbours about the camera too.

pilly

idnkph wrote: »

I wonder if the neighbours cat got hit by a car would they be looking to get all cars put off the road.
The dog was in a controlled environment and no danger to anybody. Tell the neighbour you will get them a cat to replace just to try keep the peace of they refuse and keep up the ****e tell them where to go.
I would be installing a camera too in the back yard to protect the dog from any unwanted treats being thrown over the fence. Inform the neighbours about the camera too.

Good point, they couldn't sue a driver or take his car off him.

PucaMama

jimgoose wrote: »

I'm sure it could do a nice little electric chainsaw job on a toddler, just the same.

Electric chainsaw?? He has no thumbs unfortunately

jimgoose

PucaMama wrote: »

Electric chainsaw?? He has no thumbs unfortunately

Now you are being deliberately obtuse. He has teeth, presumably? Sufficient teeth to gouge a small child nicely if he lost the rag for some dog reason?

ScumLord

pilly wrote: »

Good point, they couldn't sue a driver or take his car off him.

As far as I know the owner of the car could sue the owner of the cat for any damage done to the car. It's like that for dogs that run out in front of cars because the dog owner is supposed to be in control of the dog.

jimgoose

ScumLord wrote: »

As far as I know the owner of the car could sue the owner of the cat for any damage done to the car. It's like that for dogs that run out in front of cars because the dog owner is supposed to be in control of the dog.

Cats don't have owners, they're wild animals. Dogs are different, they have to be licensed and controlled.

PucaMama

jimgoose wrote: »

Now you are being deliberately obtuse. He has teeth, presumably? Sufficient teeth to gouge a small child nicely if he lost the rag for some dog reason?

Research the alignment of pug jaws. Our pugs teeth don't meet. He has trouble chewing, as do many others. Few pet pugs meet the kennel clubs standard for teeth.

This hysterical "all dogs could kill" just shows a lack of understanding of dogs. Any dog can lose its patience but a minority just can't do anything about it. Look at other flat faced small breeds. Pekes and the toy King Charles (not cavalier) as an example.

jimgoose

PucaMama wrote: »

Research the alignment of pug jaws. Our pugs teeth don't meet. He has trouble chewing, as do many others. Few pet pugs meet the kennel clubs standard for teeth.

This hysterical "all dogs could kill" just shows a lack of understanding of dogs. Any dog can lose its patience but a minority just can't do anything about it. Look at other flat faced small breeds. Pekes and the toy King Charles (not cavalier) as an example.

I have no more interest than the Man in the Moon in "flat faced small breeds". And "hysterical" is about the last thing I am. Where I come from, dogs work hard all day and live in barns.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

The vast majority of dog attacks can be separated into two groups;

- A snap or a bite, where the dog has become stressed to the point where it is left with the only type of communication available to it - teeth. This is usually a single bite, which while physically distressing to the person on the end of it, is rarely serious and even more rarely fatal.

- A mauling or attack, where the dog has confused the victim with a hostile intruder or prey. This almost exclusively occurs in situations where the dog has been trained to be hostile to visitors, or has been baited for fighting using smaller animals. The shouts and squeals of a small child can mimic that of a distressed rabbit or smaller dog, triggering a trained fighting dog to attack. Less often this will occur where the dog believes their family to be in danger.

I'm not sure there are two such exclusive groups as you maintain. A relative who is a veterinary surgeon tells me that she was taught at university that if a dog even snaps at a family member who come seeking advice, to always offer euthanasia as an option.

Now presumably the veterinary lecturers aren't sociopaths. But they see the potential of a danger there.

Even if the basis for a vet's advice is purely legal in nature, as I ventured when she told me this, it clearly implies that a snapping dog is capable of doing something more serious, leading to a case of negligence against a vet.

From my own experience as someone who has always owned dogs, a problem dog who snaps can be capable of much more violence. We keep a lot of terriers, which tend to be quite snappy. One day a particularly nasty article snapped at an utterly placid spaniel (whom I've never even heard barking), who quite literally tore the snapper's head off.

The murderous spaniel is still a favourite pet of my nieces and nephews, and the snappy terrier is RIP, and we're all better off for it.

Dogs can be unpredictable. It isn't a matter of dividing them up into discrete categories of dangerous biters and non-dangerous biters.

beertons

Time to unsubscribe. Getting boring.

PucaMama

jimgoose wrote: »

I have no more interest than the Man in the Moon in "flat faced small breeds". And "hysterical" is about the last thing I am. Where I come from, dogs work hard all day and live in barns.

And where I come from dogs mean more than their work.

My father had labradors. Best one he had could take a fish from the river and not leave a mark. Wonderful dog. But he slept in the house like everyone else.

DEFTLEFTHAND

In all fairness dogs are unpredictable. I've a lad at home who's the sweetish mutt going but I'd never trust him around a baby or small child, he's an animal at the end of the day.

ScumLord

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not sure there are two such exclusive groups as you maintain. A relative who is a veterinary surgeon tells me that she was taught at university that if a dog even snaps at a family member who come seeking advice, to always offer euthanasia as an option.

I think that's insane, it's like saying a person needs to be killed for shouting or pushing people, because if they can push someone or hit them then they could be capable of murder. A dog snapping can be down to a number of things, it can just be down to poor training, an owner not teaching the dog not to bite as a way of communication (which it basically is to a dog).

Terriers in particular are animals breed to be aggressive and attack things on sight. They're supposed to be on a farm killing rodents. If they can't do that they'll take out their frustrations in other ways. In reality people that live in cities probably shouldn't keep terriers unless their willing to put in some serious time fulfilling the dogs urges in a safe way.

Putting working dogs into a urban setting where they only get brought out for a walk once a day is a bit like putting a person in prison IMO. It's not surprising some of them get frustrated.

DEFTLEFTHAND

In regards to the OP it's a sad story but no blame lies with the dog owner. It can be hard to keep cats contained, they usually consider neighbouring gardens as part of their territory

PucaMama

ScumLord wrote: »

I think that's insane, it's like saying a person needs to be killed for shouting or pushing people, because if they can push someone or hit them then they could be capable of murder. A dog snapping can be down to a number of things, it can just be down to poor training, an owner not teaching the dog not to bite as a way of communication (which it basically is to a dog).

Terriers in particular are animals breed to be aggressive and attack things on sight. They're supposed to be on a farm killing rodents. If they can't do that they'll take out their frustrations in other ways. In reality people that live in cities probably shouldn't keep terriers unless their willing to put in some serious time fulfilling the dogs urges in a safe way.

Putting working dogs into a urban setting where they only get brought out for a walk once a day is a bit like putting a person in prison IMO. It's not surprising some of them get frustrated.

I also have a westie x jack russell she would have made a great ratter but she's still a pet and I doubt would kill on command unless there was something in it for her. She likes her comfort too. I believe because of the breeding in shorter breeds like the dachshund into the jrt to make the "miniature" jrt many terriers just wouldn't be suited to farm work. They end up with legs too short to run.

Ragnar Lothbrok

pilly wrote: »

Although this discussion is not about a child I still think it's pertinent to point out that ANY dog can bite a child and should be supervised at all times around them. I mentioned it in my previous post because some dogs are naturally more snappy than others, (not the dogs fault, just nature). Point being they should be careful when kids are around.

My own dog is a Springer Spaniel whom I've never heard even bark and I wouldn't leave him alone in a room with a child, just in case. Child could poke dog in the eye and he'll react the way nature intended.

Oh, I agree 100%. I was only pointing out that an attack on a cat or other small animal does not necessarily mean the dog would attack a child. Having said that, no young child should ever be left alone with a dog, particularly one as large as a German Shepard.

ScumLord

PucaMama wrote: »

I also have a westie x jack russell she would have made a great ratter but she's still a pet and I doubt would kill on command unless there was something in it for her. She likes her comfort too. I believe because of the breeding in shorter breeds like the dachshund into the jrt to make the "miniature" jrt many terriers just wouldn't be suited to farm work. They end up with legs too short to run.

Yes, a lot of modern breeds have been breed for their looks (which I'm very much against, its breeding abnormalities into dogs and it's wrong) but that doesn't mean the drive isn't still there, or won't come out given the right triggers. Dogs can differentiate their job from their social life.

Terriers don't kill on command either, they just kill anything they come across. They'd be loose on the farm actively looking for rodents day in day out.

ScumLord

ScumLord wrote: »

I think that's insane, it's like saying a person needs to be killed for shouting or pushing people, because if they can push someone or hit them then they could be capable of murder.

I think it's based on entirely sensible principles such as, a dog's life is less important than the risk of serious dangers to human health, and indeed that a dog is incapable of understanding ethics and bodily freedoms in a way that most humans are capable of understanding.

I'm not saying I'd have any of our dogs euthanised because of snapping. It depends on the context. I'm just saying that there is clearly some kind of mainstream veterinary opinion supporting the case that euthanasia may be appropriate.

A dog snapping can be down to a number of things, it can just be down to poor training, an owner not teaching the dog not to bite as a way of communication (which it basically is to a dog).

Some dogs are also bad dogs. Just like you get humans and horses who can be charming and obliging, you can get those who are utter bollixes, too. Dogs are no different. They all have their own personailities. It isn't all about the animal expressing pain nor is it always down to bad upbringing, although I accept it often is.

Terriers in particular are animals breed to be aggressive and attack things on sight. They're supposed to be on a farm killing rodents. If they can't do that they'll take out their frustrations in other ways. In reality people that live in cities probably shouldn't keep terriers unless their willing to put in some serious time fulfilling the dogs urges in a safe way.

Putting working dogs into a urban setting where they only get brought out for a walk once a day is a bit like putting a person in prison IMO. It's not surprising some of them get frustrated.

I'm not sure if this is aimed at me, but I come from a very rural background. Our terriers spend most of their days in the farmyard. They're superb watchdogs, nothing escapes them. But they can be snappy, and they're all quite scrappy, even in an environment that suits them.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I'm a big big big dog fan. I have two dogs who are the kings of my world. I would chase a stray to catch it/feed it. I'd buy my boys the best food and eat noodles for my own dinner, they come first. They get doggie massages, they have bed and beanbags, they get a lot of love and affection. I have to hand feed the youngest one and sometimes he will only eat home cooked food.

They're so important to me and they get so much love and affection and are so gentle and loving and kind, yet I would be terrified leaving them around strange kids or small kids. Not because I don't trust them, I do,but I can't read their minds and it takes one split second for a dog to lose his sh1t, and that'll be him out to sleep and a scarred child with a fear of an Amina's that may have otherwise been their best friend. Can't take chances with things you can't control

OldNotWIse

ScumLord wrote: »

I think that's insane, it's like saying a person needs to be killed for shouting or pushing people, because if they can push someone or hit them then they could be capable of murder. A dog snapping can be down to a number of things, it can just be down to poor training, an owner not teaching the dog not to bite as a way of communication (which it basically is to a dog).

Terriers in particular are animals breed to be aggressive and attack things on sight. They're supposed to be on a farm killing rodents. If they can't do that they'll take out their frustrations in other ways. In reality people that live in cities probably shouldn't keep terriers unless their willing to put in some serious time fulfilling the dogs urges in a safe way.

Putting working dogs into a urban setting where they only get brought out for a walk once a day is a bit like putting a person in prison IMO. It's not surprising some of them get frustrated.

Definitely second this. I have a JRT and she naturally has a very high prey drive. We regularly play "hunt" games with her toys (eg hiding the toy and asking her to find as well as standard retrieval). She also has frequent, high level off-leash exercise. If she misses out on exercise I will immediately notice an increase in "bold" behavior (in quotes because I don't actually consider it bold, just her acting out because her needs are not being met). And whereas we have a lot of cats and she is generally fine with them, she will occasionally give chase to them, even though she knows she shouldn't from our training, it's her drive. As for leaving her alone with children, never going to happen. I watch her like a hawk around kids and actively avoid them to be honest.

ScumLord

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm not sure if this is aimed at me, but I come from a very rural background. Our terriers spend most of their days in the farmyard. They're superb watchdogs, nothing escapes them. But they can be snappy, and they're all quite scrappy, even in an environment that suits them.

No, it was aimed at the person I was quoting.

I think with some breeds you just need to bare in mind that they have certain quirks. I've seen videos of belgian malinois, a dog used by police and military, a very highly strung dog that will turn on the police officer that's in charge of it and bite them in the heat of the moment. But it's accepted and known the dog didn't really mean it. They use these dogs to attack armed criminals, so they're given a lot of leeway.

You don't want one of these things coming at you, but I've other videos were the training is so comprehensive that you can leave them sitting on their own outside a shop, but if someone attacks the owner they burst into action and don't let go.

It's the same kind of thing for terriers, you have to bare in mind what they have been breed to do, they may well snap at you. It doesn't mean their vicious it's just the first thing that comes into their head when they get certain triggers.

ScumLord

LexieOnRale wrote: »

They're so important to me and they get so much love and affection and are so gentle and loving and kind, yet I would be terrified leaving them around strange kids or small kids. Not because I don't trust them, I do,but I can't read their minds and it takes one split second for a dog to lose his sh1t, and that'll be him out to sleep and a scarred child with a fear of an Amina's that may have otherwise been their best friend. Can't take chances with things you can't control

The dog we had growing up loved children, but hated really young children, and I didn't blame her, young kids would get rubbing the dog wrong and instead pull her hair or try and jump on her. It got to the point if a young kid came in the house she'd go "nope" and walk out the door. She wanted to snap you could see it in her eyes, she'd give me a look like, "get me out of here or I'm going to lose it with this kid". I think that's fair enough, what's the dog supposed to do? Just let this kid walk all over it and hurt her?

Musketeer4

Your friend's neighbours' suggestion that the dog be destroyed is beyond ludicrous. I understand they are upset but it was their cat that tresspassed.

Tell them to pipe down and if they continue to give greif well then, to be honest, its the neighbour who should be destroyed.

petrolcan

scamalert wrote: »

before someone comes in and says what if little jimmy climbed in to get his ball that he was kicking

Too late.

fxotoole

dfeo wrote: »

Firstly, I'd like to apologise for posting this in AH, I'd have posted in in Animals and Pets forum, but the content of this thread might strike a nerve with the community on that forum, so for that reason I'll park this thread here if that's OK. I might expect some more reasoned discourse here too.

My friend's alsatian killed a cat that ventured into her garden. Here's the background story.

A neighbour of a friend of mine has a few cats and my friend has a three-year-old alsatian. The cats would frequently pass through the garden (which my friend never minded about), but the alsatian was bothered with it and would often chase the cat away, the cats always got away on time.

However, her dad installed new overhanging trellises in the garden throughout the whole perimeter with flower boxes all around, (a bit like the one in the picture I've attached). No one in the house ever thought that it could impede the passage of the neighbourhood cats through the garden (they probably should have). The surface of the trellis is completely covered in.

We opened the door to let Lucy (the dog) out to pee, and walked towards the front of the house and suddenly heard screams like a banshee (presumably coming from the screeching cat) and barking noises.

We ran out and forced Lucy away from the cat, unfortunately, the poor thing passed away through the process. It obviously jumped into the garden and couldn't get out because of the trellises and the poor creature was cornered.

Such an awful death for the poor creature. I really feel sorry for the cat. However, the neighbour is trying to blame my friend and her family that the dog should have been more controlled and supervised when in the garden.

I realise that the dog has killed another creature and my friend is worried sick that the dog may have to be put to sleep. Her neighbour is adamant that she wants this and my friend is gutted that her dog and companion may have to go.
Does anyone have any experience with this kind of situation? The situation is very, very sad. Please try to be civil here discussing this.

It happened yesterday.

Thanks for reading folks.

IMHO, as a dog owner, I agree with the cat's owner. The dog can no longer be trusted and should be put down.

Musketeer4

The dog was in its yard. The cat tresspassed.

You should be put to sleep.

Banned.

ScumLord

fxotoole wrote: »

IMHO, as a dog owner, I agree with the cat's owner. The dog can no longer be trusted and should be put down.

What if the dog killed a rat? Would you still think the dog needs to be put down because it can't be trusted?

petrolcan

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I would chase a stray to catch it/feed it.

I did this when I was about 11. Brought a scruffy labrador home with the plan that it would fit in well with our other two labs. Big docile lump all the way home. Got to the back yard where my older brother was out with his newly acquired kitten. Newly acquired dog no longer docile and killed newly acquired kitten. Brother wasn't happy.

Roger Hassenforder

fxotoole wrote: »

IMHO, as a dog owner, I agree with the cat's owner. The dog can no longer be trusted and should be put down.

If you don't trust the dog, don't go into the garden where is is.
The dog just did what dogs do.

dfeo wrote: »

A neighbour of a friend of mine has a few cats

Therein lies the problem. Even crazy cat lady at work thinks the dog wasn't at fault.

jimgoose

PucaMama wrote: »

And where I come from dogs mean more than their work.

My father had labradors. Best one he had could take a fish from the river and not leave a mark. Wonderful dog. But he slept in the house like everyone else.

Yes, I know. There's a lot of it about. Did you say earlier that that little Pug yoke had been bred in such a way that it couldn't chew a bit of meat? It's a dog for Christ's sake - that's monstrous.

jimgoose

fxotoole wrote: »

IMHO, as a dog owner, I agree with the cat's owner. The dog can no longer be trusted and should be put down.

Nonsense.

muddypaws

Hey OP, bet you really wish you'd posted in API now

PucaMama

jimgoose wrote: »

Yes, I know. There's a lot of it about. Did you say earlier that that little Pug yoke had been bred in such a way that it couldn't chew a bit of meat? It's a dog for Christ's sake - that's monstrous.

Yeah. Can cause dental health issues. Teeth not aligned properly. He has an underbite. He's the only one of my dogs with problem teeth. Now, an up to standard show dog wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) have those issues but ours is 100 percent pet standard rescue.

One_Of_Shanks

fxotoole wrote: »

IMHO, as a dog owner, I agree with the cat's owner. The dog can no longer be trusted and should be put down.

I've read some bizarre nonsense on boards in my time but this takes the biscuit.

Unless I've missed something obvious the cat went into the neighbour's garden.
And what happened happened.

Point number one is that the dog sees it as his/her territory.
Point number two is that it's the dog owner's own garden.
So if anyone should be giving out lectures about supervising their pet it's the owner of the cat.

Cats kill far more living creatures than dogs, far more.
So if a cat is allowed wander into other people's gardens it will most likely kill birds etc in other people's gardens. (lots of people find this upsetting and like birds etc to be left alone in their own garden)
This time the cat went into another person's garden and got killed.

That's life, that's nature and that's bad ownership on behalf of the cat's owner.

It's baffling how it's OK for a cat to go into neighbours' gardens and kill animals/birds/etc there but all hell breaks loose if a dog is in someone else's garden.

And it crosses into silly stuff if a cat goes into someone else's garden and gets killed by the residing dog and it's somehow the dog owner's fault.

Tell them if they get another pet in future to keep it on their own property or accept that these things happen.

midnight city

The dog was in its own yard a natural prey for a dog walked by and was killed. I don't see why the dog should suffer.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Cats are usually fearless. We had a cat on the farm years ago. She was boss. Afraid of nothing. She would strut down the wall in the cattles shed, and they'd come over to look at her, and she would swipe her paw across their faces. We had one cow in particular who was terrified of her.

im sure given half the chance the cow would have wanted to eat that cat.

buried

A dead cat isn't "Tragic" either. Its a dead cat for christsakes. I buried a pet cat of mine not 3 weeks ago. Sad? Yes, for about 1 day. "Tragic"?? Come on lads

fxotoole

fxotoole wrote: »

IMHO, as a dog owner, I agree with the cat's owner. The dog can no longer be trusted and should be put down.

I don't believe you are a dog owner.
I don't see how anyone could blame a dog for attacking something in its own yard.
The dog was under control, the cat clearly was not.

One_Of_Shanks

midnight city wrote: »

The dog was in its own yard a natural prey for a dog walked by and was killed. I don't see why the dog should suffer.

Of course the dog shouldn't suffer. This is like if I have a budgie and I let him fly into your garden and your cat kills the budgie and I blame you for not supervising your cat in your own garden.

The owner of the pet who goes into the other person's garden is the one at fault.
If you have a pet keep it on your own property or accept that things may end badly if it goes into someone else's property.

Pim Pictus

buried wrote: »

A dead cat isn't "Tragic" either. Its a dead cat for christsakes. I buried a pet cat of mine not 3 weeks ago. Sad? Yes, for about 1 day. "Tragic"?? Come on lads

It's tragedy. When the morning cries and you don't know why. It's hard to bear. With no cat beside you.

buried

Pim Pictus wrote: »

It's tragedy. When the morning cries and you don't know why. It's hard to bear. With no cat beside you.

Wouldn't worry about it. There'll be 200 more felines nearby what got the death notice and will picket your gaff for the housing application for the next 2 months

HellSquirrel

buried wrote: »

A dead cat isn't "Tragic" either. Its a dead cat for christsakes. I buried a pet cat of mine not 3 weeks ago. Sad? Yes, for about 1 day. "Tragic"?? Come on lads

Okay, just because -you- don't get attached to your pets doesn't mean that others don't love theirs. Sure, I'm not that emotionally bonded to animals (or if it comes to that, most humans either), and I'd be upset, but I'd get over it.

But I wouldn't assume that everyone else was exactly like me in that regard. It's a rather selfish outlook on the world, isn't it?

buried

HellSquirrel wrote: »

Okay, just because -you- don't get attached to your pets doesn't mean that others don't love theirs. Sure, I'm not that emotionally bonded to animals (or if it comes to that, most humans either), and I'd be upset, but I'd get over it.

But I wouldn't assume that everyone else was exactly like me in that regard. It's a rather selfish outlook on the world, isn't it?

No it isn't. If someone can't get over a dead cat in, lets say, the space of a few weeks, say the space of a few days, then maybe cat ownership isn't such a viable option for them as a pet. They should get a pet that will outlive them, like a South American Macaw or a giant squid.

wakka12

There is absolutely no chance he would be forced to put down a dog for killing a cat that wandered onto your private property

metaoblivia

Cat lover here. I don't think the dog is at fault. That's what happens when cats are let to roam.
There are so many things that can kill them in a an urban/suburban area, including cars, dogs and other animals (I saw a coyote roaming through the hills behind my apartment complex just a few weeks ago). When you let your cat out to roam, those are the risks you take.