Kay 3,709 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Well with the extra info I can sympathise with the farmer, but if the letter of the law is held up in court, he was still acting illegally.. A good prosecution lawer will have his nuts in court because he's come out and said he acted in anger.. Wonder if the RSPCA are lining up a prosecution against the dog owner? If they can prove through DNA that the dogs were responsible for killing sheep then they might have a case somewhere.. To be honest as the dog owners held her hands up & admitted it was down to her that the dogs were allowed to roam , i doubt anything else will happen to either party , the farmer held the bolt gun legally , she admitted she was responsible, cant see it going any further as the owners admitted it was down to her Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RossM 8,027 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 If they were on my land, killing my stock, I'd shoot them. - Legal, Job done. Now, You get some scroat pans in your Audi window, takes your stereo and say your fancy phone, but he trips up, or you happen to come out and catch him. What would you do? Would your actions be legal? Obviously, you'd invite him in for a cup of tea and try to explain the error of his ways......You'd take on board that times were hard, or the fact that where he may come from, it's no big deal??? F**K Off! IF the dogs dun wrong, he was well within his rights! END OF! Shite and you know it and your scenario is pish as well, they dogs don't know right from wrong. True.......it is up to the owner to take responsibility for their dogs........or face the consequences. Exactly! Rightly or wrongly the farmer is the only one facing charges here, now if the dogs were in the act of stock worrying then by all means he is within his rights to take what ever action needed to stop it, now the act has already been carried out, there's dead lambs but the threat, for the time being has been neutralised. The owner, yes lost control of her dogs but who's to say that wasn't a one off? Unfortunately the dogs weren't given the benefit of the doubt. We will agree to disagree, Yes the owner should've had control Yes he has the right to be angry No he doesn't have the right to tether the dogs up and cull in cold blood which is what he done. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Seeker 3,048 Posted March 15, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Well with the extra info I can sympathise with the farmer, but if the letter of the law is held up in court, he was still acting illegally.. A good prosecution lawer will have his nuts in court because he's come out and said he acted in anger.. Wonder if the RSPCA are lining up a prosecution against the dog owner? If they can prove through DNA that the dogs were responsible for killing sheep then they might have a case somewhere.. Doubt it Malt they will just jump on the band wagon that gets them the easiest result for prosecution. Talk about irony though if they had got hold of the dogs and no one collected or adopted them their fate would have been much the same at the hands of that charity. My opinion is the owner should have had her dogs under TOTAL control and should have been able to recall her dogs so is partly to blame however the farmer shouldnt have killed these dogs in this situation as they were not actively attacking his livestock. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
04fox8 168 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 (edited) If they were on my land, killing my stock, I'd shoot them. - Legal, Job done. Now, You get some scroat pans in your Audi window, takes your stereo and say your fancy phone, but he trips up, or you happen to come out and catch him. What would you do? Would your actions be legal? Obviously, you'd invite him in for a cup of tea and try to explain the error of his ways......You'd take on board that times were hard, or the fact that where he may come from, it's no big deal??? F**K Off! IF the dogs dun wrong, he was well within his rights! END OF! Shite and you know it and your scenario is pish as well, they dogs don't know right from wrong. True.......it is up to the owner to take responsibility for their dogs........or face the consequences. Exactly! Rightly or wrongly the farmer is the only one facing charges here, now if the dogs were in the act of stock worrying then by all means he is within his rights to take what ever action needed to stop it, now the act has already been carried out, there's dead lambs but the threat, for the time being has been neutralised. The owner, yes lost control of her dogs but who's to say that wasn't a one off? Unfortunately the dogs weren't given the benefit of the doubt. We will agree to disagree, Yes the owner should've had control Yes he has the right to be angry No he doesn't have the right to tether the dogs up and cull in cold blood which is what he done. I don't even have a dog! But the whole thing IS sketchy. It will be interesting to see what comes of it..........if we ever get to hear. Thanks for the debate, that's passed my evening. Edited March 15, 2013 by 04fox8 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RossM 8,027 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 If they were on my land, killing my stock, I'd shoot them. - Legal, Job done. Now, You get some scroat pans in your Audi window, takes your stereo and say your fancy phone, but he trips up, or you happen to come out and catch him. What would you do? Would your actions be legal? Obviously, you'd invite him in for a cup of tea and try to explain the error of his ways......You'd take on board that times were hard, or the fact that where he may come from, it's no big deal??? F**K Off! IF the dogs dun wrong, he was well within his rights! END OF! Shite and you know it and your scenario is pish as well, they dogs don't know right from wrong. True.......it is up to the owner to take responsibility for their dogs........or face the consequences. Exactly! Rightly or wrongly the farmer is the only one facing charges here, now if the dogs were in the act of stock worrying then by all means he is within his rights to take what ever action needed to stop it, now the act has already been carried out, there's dead lambs but the threat, for the time being has been neutralised. The owner, yes lost control of her dogs but who's to say that wasn't a one off? Unfortunately the dogs weren't given the benefit of the doubt. We will agree to disagree, Yes the owner should've had control Yes he has the right to be angry No he doesn't have the right to tether the dogs up and cull in cold blood which is what he done. I don't even have a dog!But the whole thing IS sketchy. It will be interesting to see what comes of it..........if we ever get to hear. Thanks for the debate, that's passed my evening. it's the "END OF!!" that got me! I wasn't even gonna pass comment again but that, and the 110% always get me rattled!! No bother glad to be of assistance on a Friday night Quote Link to post Share on other sites
04fox8 168 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 If they were on my land, killing my stock, I'd shoot them. - Legal, Job done. Now, You get some scroat pans in your Audi window, takes your stereo and say your fancy phone, but he trips up, or you happen to come out and catch him. What would you do? Would your actions be legal? Obviously, you'd invite him in for a cup of tea and try to explain the error of his ways......You'd take on board that times were hard, or the fact that where he may come from, it's no big deal??? F**K Off! IF the dogs dun wrong, he was well within his rights! END OF! Shite and you know it and your scenario is pish as well, they dogs don't know right from wrong. True.......it is up to the owner to take responsibility for their dogs........or face the consequences. Exactly! Rightly or wrongly the farmer is the only one facing charges here, now if the dogs were in the act of stock worrying then by all means he is within his rights to take what ever action needed to stop it, now the act has already been carried out, there's dead lambs but the threat, for the time being has been neutralised. The owner, yes lost control of her dogs but who's to say that wasn't a one off? Unfortunately the dogs weren't given the benefit of the doubt. We will agree to disagree, Yes the owner should've had control Yes he has the right to be angry No he doesn't have the right to tether the dogs up and cull in cold blood which is what he done. I don't even have a dog!But the whole thing IS sketchy. It will be interesting to see what comes of it..........if we ever get to hear. Thanks for the debate, that's passed my evening. it's the "END OF!!" that got me! I wasn't even gonna pass comment again but that, and the 110% always get me rattled!! No bother glad to be of assistance on a Friday night I'll need to remember that for the future..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cleanspade 3,322 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 sometimes it nessesary to do away with a stock worrying dog. but in this case they were killed while on leashes. . sorry but it doesnt sit right with me. ive met a few bolshie farmers that would shoot anything that dare walk on there land . the exeption rather than the rule thank fcuk as far as i can see. the farmer fcuked up and killed two dogs whilst they where under controll in a fit of temper. the owner fcuked up by allowing the dogs to be dangerously out of control. they should both be dealt with acordingly. the dogs should have been rehomed with a responsible owner. . and yes i have also pointed out to a farmer that his livelyhood is very fragile. and depends to a degree on the goodwill of the locals. not in a cowardly way. but whilst looking down the barrels of a side by side. standing in front of a very well behaved jr. as in any walk of life farming also has its share of arsholes. no winners in the above case . as it looks to me like both parties are arsholes 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LaraCroft 863 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 sometimes it nessesary to do away with a stock worrying dog. but in this case they were killed while on leashes. . sorry but it doesnt sit right with me. ive met a few bolshie farmers that would shoot anything that dare walk on there land . the exeption rather than the rule thank fcuk as far as i can see. the farmer fcuked up and killed two dogs whilst they where under controll in a fit of temper. the owner fcuked up by allowing the dogs to be dangerously out of control. they should both be dealt with acordingly. the dogs should have been rehomed with a responsible owner. . and yes i have also pointed out to a farmer that his livelyhood is very fragile. and depends to a degree on the goodwill of the locals. not in a cowardly way. but whilst looking down the barrels of a side by side. standing in front of a very well behaved jr. as in any walk of life farming also has its share of arsholes. no winners in the above case . as it looks to me like both parties are arsholes Isn't that the truth. The dogs The owner who has to live with a stupid mistake The farmer who has lost stock, and has to face the law for his reaction 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
king of the bog 2 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Just remember the media doesn't tell the full story as we should know more than most 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
patterdalejoel 669 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 even if them dogs only killed 1 ewe each, bearing in mind they would be heavily in lamb, thats over £700 worth of damage. would that woman paid that when she turned up? no shed of got her dogs and gone. this story is in y local paper, so not all bullshit daily mail. i think the chap has gone to his fields, found a few dead ewes, come home fuming, been handed the dogs and exacted his revenge. i know someone that shot a saluki that killed over 20 ewes, that is a hell of a lot of money that farmers dont have. so its not all laughs and jokes and a "few sheep" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
patterdalejoel 669 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 i definetly think he knew they had killed sheep, either seen them or found out after. i had a patterdale in with my chickens once, worth a lot id of given it a kicking if i had the chance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxing machine 144 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 wat a prik he seems. if he done that to my dogs for no reason he wouldent be working the farm enymore thats for sure. i must admit tho it dose seem a bit extreem that he would do that for no reason? strainge Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Blackbriar 8,569 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Everyone's making the assumption that those dogs have been worrying/killing sheep, like Paid said above - there's not enough facts.. my dogs mean the world to me but if any of my dogs were loose and out of control worrying a farmers sheep or livestock and he shot them in the act thats down to my own fault but if my dogs were worrying his sheep and some one handed them over to the farmer on a lead i would gladly pay the farm for damage that my dogs may have caused i wouldent expect the farmer to shot them then its a diffrerent ball game john+1 Didn't have any likes left! A lot of assumptions being made - PeakOil makes many valid points, not least of all that the Daily Wail has never won any awards for giving a full and balanced view about anything -EVER !! Wait til you know the whole story. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Greg223 4 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 the farmer was wrong for shooting the dogs while on the leash but the dogs obviously weren't trained by there owner and if there anything like my dogs when they were younger they'd chase anything that ran until they were taught that they weren't mean to. is this the first time these dogs have ran off on the owner? although if it was a fox killed the lambs would we even hear if the farmer shot it? also can they test the dogs to see if theyd killed the lambs?? (say swab the tongue and test for sheep dna) 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxing machine 144 Posted March 15, 2013 Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 A few months ago in the same area over 20 sheep were either mauled or killed by dogs,the local farmers were of the opinion it was lurcher owners.This woman had 3 dogs running free in the area,she lost them all and after searching for a couple of hours went home and reported them missing,the dogs were seen chasing sheep and two were caught and handed to the farmer,he then searched his land and found several dead lambs that had been ripped to bits by dogs,he went straight back to the barn and humanely killed the dogs,he later found aborted lambs and other mauled sheep.When he informed the police he was arrested,the dog owner who was the only person that commited an illegal act as not yet been charged with any offence,even though she,s commited several,the farmer did nothing illegal and has he stated "it won,t have been the first time the dogs have done it and dogs like that will do it again".Any dog out of control chasing and killing stock wants a bullet and the owners should face up their respnsibility.Why should a farmer have his livelihood threatened because some ignorant twat could,nt stock break their mutts and decided to then let them run free amongst sheep.If you cannot stocktrain your mutts,then accept the consequences of your own lazy stupidity.The barn burners and stock killers need to have a long hard look in a mirror. i agree with that 100% mate. but we sheep are killed in an area and you walk your muts thair wat fecking [BANNED TEXT] dose a farmer have to hearl abuse and threaten people with a load of shit that they wouldent follow threw with in the first place [BANNED TEXT] he dosent no who it was??? you carnt just take it out on the next person you see in the area. as for thair barns ect its not fair but a lot of them bring it on them selves being arses with people for no reason or because of someone elses stupidity jmo atb fm Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.