Chesco sheep owner charged in killing of two dogs

[Adsos Letter]

Source: Philly.com

Carolyn Davis, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
Posted: Friday, February 22, 2013, 1:28 PM

Charges have been filed against a Chester County sheep-owner who shot and killed two dogs belonging to a neighbor after he found them on his property Feb. 12.

Chester County District Attorney Tom Hogan said today that Gabriel Pilotti, 72, was charged with cruelty to animals and recklessly endangering another person.

Initially, Pilotti told police that the animals, Bernese mountain dogs, were threatening his sheep in their pen. If that had been the case, his actions would be permitted under Pennsylvania's dog law.

West Vincent Township Police, however, concluded the dogs were not pursuing Pilotti's sheep at the time he fired the 20-gauge single-shot shotgun he legally owns and killed one dog by shooting it in the face. Pilotti reloaded his gun and then shot the second dog as it was fleeing, the district attorney said today.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20130222_Chesco_sheep_owner_charged_in_killing_of_two_dogs.html

[upaloopa]

1. Good and a big F U to those who say he had a right

to kill the dogs. Screw your cult of gun death!

[RKP5637]

3. K&R !!!

[Comrade Grumpy]

8. Back at you, intemperate one.

Much of the heat on the original thread was, I think, because two discussions were conflated:

1. Do farmers and ranchers have the right to kill animals threatening their livestock? The answer is yes.

2. Was this Gilotti guy correct in shooting the dogs? The state now doesn't think so. But the earlier article that prompted the heated discussion didn't have all the information we have now.

It would be helpful if people could keep the two issues separate.

[upaloopa]

10. It never said the dogs threatened sheep.

I lived with neighbors like this guy. They brag about killing dogs. People should be intemperate to people like that.
You know, any feeling human being would not take pride in killing man or animals.
We don't have to accept you view of life as the way things are.

[Nine]

91. On the contrary, that's exactly what it said.

Here is the story linked in the OP:
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/02/21/chester-county-man-kills-neighbors-dogs-for-chasing-his-sheep/

Here is the headline of that story:

Chester County Man Kills Neighbors’ Dogs For Chasing His Sheep

Here is an excerpt from that story:

But when the pair escaped from their Chester Springs yard last week, a neighbor found them chasing his sheep, and shot the two dogs in the head.

People did not just make that up; that was the story reported. Then the story changed.

[Adsos Letter]

11. No kidding. This guy jumped me for trying to point out exactly what you've said.

And you said it much clearer than I.

[Adsos Letter]

25. Yes, if someone is defending livestock that is actually being attacked by dogs

or any other animal, then yes, I believe they have the right to shoot.

That wasn't the case here.

[Comrade Grumpy]

29. You ought to learn some manners and some logic.

So, I'm a rancher and some dogs are killing my cattle. I'm supposed to let that happen? Or am I supposed to give them doggie treats?

So, I'm a parent and a pair of pit bulls have my toddler in their grasp. I'm supposed to say "shooting the dogs is never okay"?

I like dogs. I've owned dogs. But I can think of circumstances where the dog's life is not the highest value.

[dixiegrrrrl]

42. "But I can think of circumstances where the dog's life is not the highest value. "

Which is why a lot of places, including where I live, have laws that say it is ok to shoot at dogs who attack your livestock in the county ( outside of town limits)
but you have to call the Animal Control and/or police about roaming dogs in the city.
Around here, Animal Control is very responsive.

In both cases, roaming dogs, esp. if they are in a pack, present a potential danger.

I have had dogs come onto my property and chase and tree and my cats,
and a pack of 3 dogs were trying to get to my chickens last month.
Strays, never saw them before.

A neighbor up the street had 3 dogs, big ones, ( sheperd and Dobie mixes )
who repeatedly got out of the yard and ran thru the neighborhood,
they tried to fight my dog, who was on a leash, it took 3 guys to run out and drive them away,
the dogs ran up to kids who were playing in their own yard, and "rushed" a woman who was taking her baby,
in a car seat, out of her car.
( Cops really responded to that call, btw)

Neighbor was warned in 3 incidents by Animal Control, the 4th time he lost his dogs.
Turns out the animals were not neutered and did not have rabies vaccinations.

The power of the pack is not well undersood by lots of folks.

[Sugarcoated]

48. Well it's a good thing

your scenarios are not what actually happened here.

[Arkansas Granny]

44. Well said. The post last night did not have all the information.

[frylock]

52. a lot of the back information was posted and summarily ignored

[Katashi_itto]

20. Agree And to say it musically....

[Xithras]

26. Go back, read that thread again, and CTFO.

The originally linked article made it sound like he was some sort of sheep rancher defending his flock from dogs that appeared to be attacking them. I, and many others on that thread, said that he had a right to shoot the dogs in that situation. People have the right to defend their animals from other animals that are trying to attack or kill them. I've done it myself. It's not pleasant, but when you're in a situation where one animal or the other is going to be injured or killed, all you can do is try to make sure that the dead animal isn't one of yours.

ADDITIONAL information, linked into the thread later, made it clear that the original story badly mischaracterized the whole thing. The guy wasn't a "rancher" of any sort, lived in a residential area, and then trapped and shot dogs that were not behaving aggressively toward him or his sheep. That is a VERY DIFFERENT situation than was originally presented in that OP. Neither I or anyone else said he had a right to shoot at dogs simply for wandering onto his property, and I think that everyone was fairly clear on that point. He was NOT defending his animals, but was simply shooting dogs because he didn't like dogs. That's NOT a defensible position, and he should be prosecuted for doing it. Not a single poster in that thread ever defended his right to do that.

[Sugarcoated]

34. It was still extremely vague on that

and it was pretty ridiculous the extreme scenerios people painted to justify taking the life of two obvious family pets with collars and tags.

[Xithras]

39. That's just it...

...it was vaguely written, so everyone applied their own experiences to it. People were arguing with each other over different things.

For what it's worth, for those of us who actually have lived amid farms and ranches, it's really not an "extreme scenario" by any stretch. While I had to recently move back "into town", I'd estimate that 2-3 dogs a year were shot on my old road in exactly that situation (not 2-3 by me, but 2-3 between the dozen or so farms on the road, annually). It's a tragically common situation for farmers and ranchers with land that is outside of town, but still somewhat close to it. People dump their dogs in the countryside, the dogs go semi-feral, and the farmers and ranchers have to intervene to protect their animals. This happens every single day in this country, and the "fault" lays 100% at the feet of the cruel assholes who dump their animals in the country to "set them free". They're not setting them free...they're consigning them to a cruel death by slow starvation, car bumper, or a farmers bullet.

Many of us jumped to that scenario, based on the vague original article, simply because it's such a common occurrence. I was wrong...I'll admit it here, and I admitted it in that thread. Once the FULL story came out, it became perfectly clear that this guy had no reason to shoot the dogs, and that he should be prosecuted for doing so.

[Sugarcoated]

56. Right

but I live in this area, and knew this wasn't a ranch feral/pack dog scenario. The dog killer lives in the burbs. This isn't cattle ranching country where, I guess, going by so many posts from ranchers on the other thread, you shoot first. We don't have packs of feral or semi-feral dog problems. We are neighborhoods with dogs and cats who love our animals and understand that our neighbors do as well, so the pervading mentality here, is life is precious, even for our pets, and we don't shoot first because that's it, zip, a life gone, so in our parts we are careful about killing. It was never in doubt from the article that these were obvious family pets, with collars and tags.

[LanternWaste]

58. 4 years on a West Texas ranch, here. Never shot at any animals...

4 years on a West Texas ranch, here. Never shot at any animals... dogs never went after cattle or horses. Only gunshot I ever fired in my life was into the air simply to scare off a flock of buzzards getting too close to a birthing.

Only one rancher I know of shot at dogs... and pretty much everyone in the county thought him a "cruel asshole" regardless.

[Xithras]

73. How close to town?

That tends to be the difference. I once lived about 30 miles outside of town. Had no problems whatsoever, never shot a dog, and never had a neighbor do so. My last place was only a couple miles from a city of over 250,000 people. As our animal control people told us, we were "far enough out to feel like country, but close enough so that the lazy owners didn't have to do any real work to dump them". It was prime dumping territory, and a constant problem.

[Duppers]

89. same here in East Tennessee

I grew up on an 80 acre farm and to my knowledge no dogs were ever shot.

And, BTW, the great Bernese are bred to protect cattle - it's a natural instinct. The man was wrong to have killed those dogs.

[Adsos Letter]

94. East Tennessee

Last May my wife and I took a two week road trip through Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. We passed through the far eastern corner of Tennessee on our way to Linville Falls. Easily some of the prettiest country on the trip (and we saw a lot of very pretty country on that trip).

I also crossed the state east-to-west about 7 years ago, on my way back to California after driving my daughter out to college in Philadelphia. Took a diversion down to Shiloh Battlefield in the process. You live in a beautiful state.

I'm off-topic, but I started this thread, so I suppose I can authorize a diversion,,,

[robinlynne]

75. And I kept telling people Bernese are sweet and gentle! I had one. I met many many Bernese Mountain

Dogs. There is NOTHING ferocious about them.

[frylock]

47. word up

[LanternWaste]

55. I'm glad you said it rather than me...

I'm glad you said it rather than me... I'm down to my three "fuck you's" for the month. Crap, make that two.

[joeybee12]

67. Exactly...it was nauseating what people were posting yesterday...knr

[robinlynne]

74. yes.

[Captain Stern]

78. I'm one of the folks that said he was in the right.

I based that on opinion on the first (only) article I'd seen.

If those dogs weren't really a threat to him or his, and he only killed them because he thought he could.....then fuck that guy.

I don't have a hard time admitting I'm wrong (no harder than most people, I hope), and I don't really have a hard time admitting that I hope this guy has a shitty life from here on out. I'm embarrassed that I defended him.

[dorkzilla]

82. Thank you, really, thank you for admitting that.

Not a lot of people can or will. I'm really glad I read that. A lot of us are still really pissed off at what went down on that thread yesterday, and reading that made me ever-so-slightly-less-nauseated.

Cheers!

[Angry Dragon]

2. Good

[Adsos Letter]

5. There was a lot more to this story than the initial OP suggested

The original news source made it sound like this guy was a rancher/farmer defending his livestock from an attack by his neighbors dogs.

Turns out it wasn't quite what it initially seemed.

[upaloopa]

7. He wasn't defending shit. You came to that conclusion

to justify killing the dogs.
No where did it say his sheep were in any danger. If you weren't so damn willing to accept the killing of other living things you would have seen that!
On edit: it is a part of the gun culture most of us abhor but to gunners killing comes natural. It's sick and the rest of us suffer for it.

[Adsos Letter]

9. If you take the time to look at my posts in the original thread

you'll see that I condemned the killing of these animals.

My point in my post above that you're knee-jerking to is that the original OP didn't give a good understanding of what went down.

[upaloopa]

13. Funny with the same OP some people abhor killing of dogs

and others accept it as the normal. That sucks!
My neighbor the cattleman at least had the decentcy to drive to my place and warn me about my dogs going into his cattle pen. You don't just fucking shoot other people's animals because you can.
I really doubt you could ever understand that. Most ranchers I lived near couldn't. It's too inbread I think.

[Adsos Letter]

15. "You don't just fucking shoot other people's animals because you can."

And that was the point where I, and others in that thread, condemned this guys actions.

[dorkzilla]

28. You're directing your anger at the wrong DUer, upaloopa.

The person you're lambasting AGREES with you. Take a deep breath, go read the post. There were several of us trying to reign in the "the dog's owner was at fault" assholes yesterday.

My blood is still boiling.

[frylock]

51. mine too. unfortunately i've been banned from that thread..

because i'd love nothing more than to start jamming crow into each and every one of their fugly faces.

[joeybee12]

69. Count me in on that, too...nt

[dorkzilla]

77. LOL!! I'm sitting on my hands right now...

so I KNOW what you mean! Those people...I mean, I'm still gobsmacked.

[dorkzilla]

79. Hey Frylock, I just saw you down thread winning more friends!

Being a New Yorker, I happen to find your kind of honesty homespun and comforting.

Fight the good fight, my friend. Keep giving them hell!

[RKP5637]

4. Excellent! n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. Justice. Good. n/t

[Jersey Devil]

12. Good. Not a very good neighbor

From the other thread on this it seems the dogs escaped when a tree broke the dog owners' fence and they never were out before.

The decent thing to do, since it was the first time he saw the dogs, was to try to find out whose dogs they were (from their license tags) before shooting them, particularly since none of the shooter's livestock had been harmed, and then contacting the owners to tell them next time their dogs harassed his livestock he'd shoot at them. He had to know it was a neighbor's dogs if they had collars and tags and it was not a very friendly thing to do to a neighbor.

This wasn't a case of a neighbor whose dogs got loose over and over again and who was warned, or of dogs that actually attacked the sheep.

[MoonRiver]

14. GOOD! POS, SOB!

[Cali_Democrat]

16. "the dogs were not pursuing Pilotti's sheep"

Just what I suspected. That's the thing with the gun nuts. They really want to use their weapons whether they are going after unarmed teenagers like Trayvon or somebody's dogs.

They really want to squeeze that trigger and kill. In their sick twisted minds, they think they are defending freedom and fighting tyranny, even if its two dogs on their property.

[markgee]

17. atleast it wasn't an assault rifle

20-gauge single-shot shotgun he legally owns

[Sugarcoated]

19. Which he used irresponsibly

and could've shot someone in the neighborhood.

[Adsos Letter]

22. I wonder if that's where the "endangering another person"

part of the DA's charge comes from?

[Sugarcoated]

30. Yes, it is.

[dorkzilla]

31. I think its because he discharged a firearm in a residential area.

I'm just connecting the dots here.

[DreamGypsy]

57. From the article...

Directly behind the dog and in the line of fire was a house with residents home - facts that spurred the endangerment charge.

[Adsos Letter]

59. Looks like the article was updated.

A lot more information, links, and photos.

[HangOnKids]

27. Could you translate your point?

I'm unclear exactly what you are attempting to say.

[GoneOffShore]

60. Welcome to DU

Enjoy your stay.

And mind the gap.

[2ndAmForComputers]

99. Also approves beating up tenants who are late on rent.

It's never only guns, is it?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2420386

[Paladin]

18. Good. (nt)

[SammyWinstonJack]

21. Good! What a horrible person he is.

[sinkingfeeling]

24. Good. They were beautiful Bernese Mountain dogs. I saw their picture yesterday.

[dorkzilla]

32. SUCH great news!

Thanks for following up on this. I've been out all day and have to dash to another meeting, but I wanted to check in to see if anything else happened.

I hope the douchenozzles from last night are proud of themselves.

[Adsos Letter]

36. This morning I decided to find out as much as I could about the event

just to satisfy my desire to get as accurate a picture as possible, given the conflicting initial reports.

The link to the news hit as I was checking out the fb page for the dogs.

I think too many posters last night reacted to the thought that this was some kind of rancher/farmer defending his livestock, and then found it difficult to accept that it might have been something else. One of the posters up-thread pointed out that two themes became intermixed: the right of ranchers/farmers to defend their livestock, and the illegality/moral bankruptcy of killing the dogs simply because he could.

Enjoy your meetings, if such a thing is possible...

[dorkzilla]

43. Ah, but you see, the thing that pissed ME off is they all jumped to conclusions.

One guy even said something like (i am paraphrasing) 'I am sure that the farmer has talked to the dog owner about this in the past'. Huh? Really. You are SURE. Well isn't that special!

As the rest of us were saying "its not always acceptable to shoot a dog", the idiots were basically drawing the line at "your dog gets near my livestock for any reason, I am killing them". Also they made ALL SORTS of assumptions as to whether or not the dogs were repeat offenders, or that the owners just let their dogs wander the area etc. I don't recall a single instance where one of them backed down from their absolute line in the sand although I could be mistaken.

How any one with a heart could put a bullet into another living creature they werent intending to eat is beyond me. This old prick is a cold-hearted fuck, and I hope the other inmates find out what he's done. Its likely the animal lovers will want to have a word or two with Gabe.

BTW, these meetings are fun! I am opening a restaurant and I'm picking out finishes. This is the fun part. After that...not so much.

I'll check in later...maybe some of the crazies from last night will come onto this thread and admit they jumped to conclusions...NOT!!

[Adsos Letter]

50. Yes, it became pretty extreme, and ther was a lot of knee-jerk going on.

On another note: good luck with that restaurant! I was a painter for 30+ years, and I've been on the other end in many of those type of meetings.

It was usually a good experience, if somewhat trying at times.

[riderinthestorm]

33. Ugh. Shot in the face. Those poor dogs and the fear and terror of their last moments....

[Sugarcoated]

35. All so a gun nut could get his rocks off

He'll get his, and it'll be one more straw in the push for common sense gun law safety so their senseless murder will not be in vain.

[BainsBane]

41. I don't know if a shotgun makes him a gun nut

But the man certainly is cruel.

[dorkzilla]

37. ...and they were really just puppies. The one who was shot while trying to escape....

was only a year old.

My friend has a Bernese. He takes her to our dog park, and she (the dog) knows I love her to bits and she runs to me as soon as she sees me so I can give her a "massage". Now, I have 2 dogs of my own, but she - - and all the other Bernese's I know--is such a sweet, loving, smart dog that I end up ignoring my 2 just to spend time with her. You don't know doggy love till you've been loved up by a Bernese.

[robinlynne]

76. exactly.

[BainsBane]

38. Good.

From the article linked, the man sounds like a cold-blooded murderer. If that had been my girl, I don't know what I would do. I'd be inconsolable, for sure.

[Liberal_in_LA]

40. +1

[dorkzilla]

45. "Vicious Bernese Mountain Dog"...said no person ever.

I had to say it again. Poor babies

[auburngrad82]

80. Said no person familiar with dogs or the breed

You do understand that some people don't see a big goofy, fun loving dog when a Bernese wanders up. They see a very large, potentially dangerous dog.

My best dog ever was a 90 pound lab chow mix. The sweetest dog in the world, she would never hurt anyone. But people backed off when they saw her because 1) she was black and 2) she was huge.

Black dogs are the last dogs to be adopted. Why? Appearance. People do judge books by their cover, so to say.

I'm not defending the guy, but I will say it's up to us as dog owners to do everything we can to protect our animals. We fenced in two acres of land and we padlock their kennels if we put them outside and leave, even for an hour. Accidents happen and animals, including mine, get out.

It looks like there'll be a trial. If he killed them out of meanness or spite or just because he could it will come out. Unfortunately it will probably be a misdemeanor or a low cost penalty since most states see pets as property and not family members. Animal abuse laws are too soft and there's not much deterrent to stop people from doing this.

On the other hand, if the dogs were running his sheep, (even if they weren't technically attacking them it just takes the appearance of aggression to the owner of the sheep) he was within his rights to protect the animals, just as we're within our rights to protect ours. I have herding dogs and I know how aggressive they can be when herding and to the owner of the sheep it is possible that it appeared they were attacking the sheep.

The story has already changed considerably since the first article was posted. I think it will probably change before there's a resolution. I wouldn't be surprised if there was bad blood between the "farmer" and the dogs' owners. But I'll wait to pass judgment until I see more details.

[Comrade Grumpy]

61. I'll quit alerting on you once you learn to be civil.

Did your post add anything of value to this conversation?

Have you had your cathartic moment now?

[frylock]

66. i'll refer you to this post..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022414295#post46

[Sugarcoated]

68. I kinda liked it

The crazy scenarios posters used to defend the actions of a gun nut who killed two beautiful, and obvious, families dogs, deserve some scolding.

[DreamGypsy]

49. This clears up a troubling situation.

When I first read the previous post about this tragedy I was deeply saddened for the dogs and the family. Seeing the photos of the two young Berners just tore me up.

However, I could not offhand condemn the actions of the farmer based on the information I knew...I could rail against his apparent impatience and use of violence, but I could not discount possible negligence by the owners.

Now we know more.

No dog breed is immune to impetuous or aggressive individuals, but my two Berners were the sweetest animals possible. Clancy was a perfect Swiss gentleman and Ciara a complex, but loving lady.

My two dogs and I, and the spirits of Clancy, Ciara, and Luka, wish the Bock family solace in the memories of their time with Fergus and Fiona and a timely passage to welcoming new, loving canine companions into their home and hearts.

?gl=US

[Adsos Letter]

54. Lovely dogs, and a great photo! n/t

[Progressive dog]

53. Good for the DA

The farmer's actions were horribly wrong, and they were wrong even if the dogs had been threatening his sheep.

[sigmasix]

62. makes the point

This story- and the knee-jerk defense of the dog murderer by some gun fetishists- points out the immoral position of those that believe legal gun owners have special powers that give them the ability to do no wrong, while ending the life of another. Lots of gun fetishists have deep emotional issues related to the fantasy of killing another being- and they spend a great deal of time dreaming of, and preparing for the moment they can "legally" end the life of another being with thier oh so sexy arsenal of death tools. Everyone that has spent any time around gun culture intensive areas of the country has met at least one of these blood-lusting, murder fantasy addicts. The original OP only said that the "rancher's sheep may have been herded" by these two pets. It was the usual gun fetish appologists that jumped on the OP with sick excuses and blanket declarations of the ignorance of anyone that would suggest the dog murderer should have found another way.
See, this is the thing that seperates responsible gun owners from NRA members that fantasize about the moment they will be called upon to use thier guns to kill another human being- legally. Responsible gun owner only ever use them as a tool of last resort. NRA nuts see it differently; why try to peacefully negotiate a non-lethal outcome to any situation when the gun fetishist has a legal right to shoot to kill? Those that defended the dog murderer knew that he killed the dogs, but spent loads of energy coming up with anecdotal evidence for the need to kill those dogs on the part of the responsible gun owner.
Gungeoneers were caught red handed applauding the murder of someone's pets and declaring that the right to shoot a living being is sufficient reason to shoot.
Embracing paranoid conspiracy theories about guns and immoral murder fantasies should disqualify someone from having the legal right to own a gun.
Ever.

[Sugarcoated]

63. Your post is perfection.

[The Magistrate]

65. Hear Hear, Ma'am

[joeybee12]

70. +1

[Stinky The Clown]

84. Indeed!

[dorkzilla]

85. +1,000,000!

[Nine]

86. Yes, but there was another thread on this.

And in that OP, the news article stated unambiguously that the dogs were chasing the livestock. It's not something that people just assumed or speculated on, it's something that was reported as fact.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2410618

[life long demo]

87. Excellent!

Is it something that happens to "some" people who acquire guns that they need to prove something, or that makes them the shoot first type.

[Paladin]

93. I've Been Here A Long Time, sigmasix, And I've Never Seen It Better Stated.

Outstanding post. Profound thanks.

[Tom Ripley]

96. +1000

[smokey nj]

97. Beautifully said!

[Helen Reddy]

64. My work companion

just this morning told me her neighbor ran over her dog about 2 months ago. They live in a non ranch, non livestock rural area outside of a town. Her husband was outside and saw the neighbor purposefully hit the dog and left the scene with the poor pooch badly injured. They had to take it to the vet....there was nothing to be done.

About 6 months prior to that, my friends other dog (who was admittedly on the neighbors property) was shot and killed by the same neighbor! (IN FRONT OF HER GRANDDAUGHTER) The poor little girl still has nightmares from that so I'm told.

There are other ways to handle these situations, other than harming another living being.

We have a German Shepherd dog, and live in close proximity to a guy who raises a few head of cattle. I took the dog to meet him immediately to reassure him if she ever got close to his cattle, it would be for her wanting to "herd" them. Her namesake right? She has never meandered over to his property. (too busy trying to sit on our laps)

Those poor dogs and my hope is the shooter is punished to the full extent of the law.

[cabot]

71. This is much clearer than the previous article

Since he isn't a sheep farmer (rancher? who knows) and his livestock wasn't at risk - good. I'm glad he's being charged.

[life long demo]

72. I hope they throw the book at him, although they

probably won't other than slap his hand. It won't bring back the dogs but it's some justice. This didn't have to happen.

[nolabear]

81. I used to have a Berner. They're herding dogs for fucks sake!

They were bred to herd cattle and pull carts. I have never, never, NEVER heard of one stalking an animal of any kind. Poor babies. They are sweet, easily embarrassed darlings and I hope they throw the book at him.

[Stinky The Clown]

83. BRAVO!!!!!!!!

[Kurska]

88. Good and I hope this comes as a big fuck you to all the fools empathizing with this psychopath.

Bernese Mountain Dogs are the epitome of gentle giant. These dogs were never a danger to anyone, but the psychopath with the gun sure was!

[smokey nj]

90. Like I posted in the other thread about this, the people defending this sicko should be ashamed of

themselves.

[tabasco]

92. Throw the book at the asshole.

If somebody hurt my dogs, they would deeply regret it.

[Tom Ripley]

95. Fuck that sick bastard

[Starry Messenger]

98. Good.

You don't just have a license to kill dogs just because you think you can get away with it. Those beautiful babies. I've read up on this, and animal control laws are pretty clear about the circumstances in which it is appropriate to defend your livestock with lethal force.

This wasn't one of them.