- oaklandp8ntbalr
- |
- Fabled Legendary Member
Generalizations.
Helping idiots hate other idiots since people have existed.
Posted by: SRQ baller24
Posted by: oaklandp8ntbalr
Posted by: What Is This1
Posted by: Methew
And if she's being neglectful, the appropriate response is to call the police again to have them enforce the law.
Not shoot the animal.
True, but it is still within his right depending on the law and situation of the given town/state along with the police's interpretation of the situation.
No, he was not within his right. Do I have to spell it out for you?
This happened in Iowa.
Therefore, this case falls under Iowa state law.
Iowa state law says that you cannot shoot and kill an animal on your property unless
1) The animal is threatening your life or
2) The animal is rabid
The owner shot and killed the animal.
The owner stated his motive for killing the animal: "I killed the animal because I didn't want it playing in my yard."
The owner did NOT state that the animal was threatening his life. Nor did the owner state the animal was rabid.
Therefore, the shooting was unlawful.
Yeah, she can sue and win. However, I bet she would rather have her dog back than a million dollars by the way she was acting on camera.
Unfortunately, dogs are treated as property to the law, so she will only receive the amount of money the dog is worth.
She can also sue for animal abuse. Killing an animal is animal abuse under Iowa state law and punishable for up to $5000 dollars and 2 years in jail.
Depending on how close she was to the man when he discharged the weapon, she can also sue for reckless endangerment.