06-15-2011, 05:32 AM
Let's separate out the owner's legal right to do what he did from whether it was right and moral.
I will address the moral aspect. We lack a critical piece of information here: was the dog physically harming the sheep, or was the dog merely distressing them? If tormenting them included biting or mauling the sheep, who lacked even a chance to flee, that is one story.
If on the other hand, the dog was not physically harming the sheep and there was an opportunity for the owner to safely protect them by using less than deadly force, then that is another story.
It would be inappropriate to sit in judgment unless we have all of the evidence from both sides of this story.
However, as general proposition, I find it immoral to blindly assert a legal right, knowing that the probable result is emotional distress for a neighbor. My neighbor's cat sometimes comes into the yard, much to my annoyance (because he kills birds). My dog would love to kill that cat. I accept the trespass while encouraging my dog to chase the cat out of the yard (I give the cat a head start). Although I would shed no tears over that cat, my neighbor would and that matters to me.
If it were my neighbor's pitbull coming over the fence, and I had a reasonable belief that the likely outcome was actual harm to my dog or to me, I would use deadly force, especially if I knew that nothing less would suffice.
I would not rejoice in having used such force.
I will address the moral aspect. We lack a critical piece of information here: was the dog physically harming the sheep, or was the dog merely distressing them? If tormenting them included biting or mauling the sheep, who lacked even a chance to flee, that is one story.
If on the other hand, the dog was not physically harming the sheep and there was an opportunity for the owner to safely protect them by using less than deadly force, then that is another story.
It would be inappropriate to sit in judgment unless we have all of the evidence from both sides of this story.
However, as general proposition, I find it immoral to blindly assert a legal right, knowing that the probable result is emotional distress for a neighbor. My neighbor's cat sometimes comes into the yard, much to my annoyance (because he kills birds). My dog would love to kill that cat. I accept the trespass while encouraging my dog to chase the cat out of the yard (I give the cat a head start). Although I would shed no tears over that cat, my neighbor would and that matters to me.
If it were my neighbor's pitbull coming over the fence, and I had a reasonable belief that the likely outcome was actual harm to my dog or to me, I would use deadly force, especially if I knew that nothing less would suffice.
I would not rejoice in having used such force.