[DrTodd13]

If the dog pooped in his own yard but the neighbor picked it up and threw it over the fence into your yard and you exhausted all peaceful means to get the neighbor to stop then you have a right to collect damages from him. The punishment should match the damage. If he dumped a ton of poop then the damage is a lot. If only a scoop or two then the damage is very little. Of course, in the process of trying to collect damages from him he is going to resist you. Whether or not he resists, you have a right to damages and have a right to use whatever force is necessary to overcome him and receive your damages. If the guilty party wants to escalate this to a life or death situation rather than pay you damages then he is taking the risk that he'll be killed in the process of protecting his assets. So, I'm not advocating an "if your neighbor offends you, kill him" approach. I'm saying that you have a right to compensation and that it is moral to kill him if that is the only way to get compensated.

The alternative to this approach is unappealing. If one scoop of poop is allowed then why not two scoops. If two, why not 4? The logically consistent extension of this belief that you have no moral recourse to someone dumping ***** in your yard is for the local pig farmer to be allowed to haul in tons of crap and dump it in your yard. Most everyone here seems to have a lot of faith in society to prevent these sorts of abuses and to a large degree stuff like this is handled pretty reasonably. However, societies do sometimes go completely whacko and become a force for evil rather than justice. I won't name countries so as not to offend people but there have been multiple examples in the last century and into this century of state-sponsored genocide, religious persecution, sexism, etc. There is no reason to believe that it can't happen in your country. The way that it does happen is that people are so emersed in their own culture and their country's propoganda that they can gradually lose their moral compass. Look at all the people in the US who think that we have so right to act as the world's policeman and go about causing regime change.

I don't know about you, but I never signed a social contract. If I pay someone to protect me, does that mean I'm not allowed to protect myself? Anyway, you can guess my position, we never give up our rights even if we establish a mutual-aide society to help protect those rights.

[the saint]

DrTodd13, on Apr 27 2006, 10:11 PM, said:

If the dog pooped in his own yard but the neighbor picked it up and threw it over the fence into your yard and you exhausted all peaceful means to get the neighbor to stop doing it then yes, I think you have the moral right to kill him in order to get him to stop. If one scoop of poop is allowed then why not two scoops. if two, why not 4? The logically consistent extension of this belief that you have no moral recourse to someone dumping ***** in your yard is for the local pig farmer to be allowed to haul in tons of crap and dump it in your yard. Most everyone here seems to have a lot of faith in society to prevent these sorts of abuses and to a large degree stuff like this is handled pretty reasonably. However, societies do sometimes go completely whacko and become a force for evil rather than justice. I won't name countries so as not to offend people but there have been multiple examples in the last century and into this century of state-sponsored genocide, religious persecution, sexism, etc. There is no reason to believe that it can't happen in your country. The way that it does happen is that people are so emersed in their own culture and their country's propoganda that they can gradually lose their moral compass. Look at all the people in the US who think that we have so right to act as the world's policeman and go about causing regime change.

Death for Dog-*****? WTF? Moral Right? Can I have some of what you are taking please, your planet sounds wonderful.

[the saint]

This on the other hand would be entirely appropriate (As already used on the World Terrorism Forum):

'Don't do the crime, if you can't do the Keylime!'

[pbleighton]

"Death for Dog-*****? WTF? Moral Right? Can I have some of what you are taking please, your planet sounds wonderful."

It's something in our water, and you have to be born here to get the mental symptoms. Foreigners just get very loose and explosive bowel movements, and are therefore at extreme risk of vigilantism.

Peter

[DrTodd13]

Let's say the government is on your side and your next door neighbor is some old retired guy who keeps all his money under his mattress. They send the guy a ticket for having his dog poop in your yard. The guy ignores the ticket. What will the government do? After an endless series of warnings and telephone calls they'll eventually send police officers to the guy's house to arrest him and to take enough money to pay his fine. What if the guy is guarding his money with a gun? They'll try to convince him to drop it but if he intends to protect his money they are eventually going to shoot him. All this over a little fine for dog poop. All government action is ultimately backed up by the point of a gun.

[mike777]

"All government action is ultimately backed up by the point of a gun."

NO all government action is ultimately backed up by the people allowing you to govern" Otherwise they can die trying to get rid of the government and in dying find some degree of Liberty. One more reason to not believe in the "innocent civilian" theory.

[asdfg2k]

Actually, the circumstances as posted by the OP aren't that unusual. Frequently, one finds disputes between neighbors over dumping. trespassing and the like. Almost everything I have ever read agrees with Richard.

Lodge a formal complaint.

If that doesn't work, take independent steps that are reasonable. Building a fence is certainly a reasonable step. Or maybe installing one of those dog-training electrical fences - not to keep your dog in, but to keep others out. If you think building a moat is desirable, that would certainly be allowed.

Sue for damages.

Repeat as necessary.

Unless you can prove that your life was threatened and in imminent danger, killing the neighbor as a recourse isn't allowed. Except maybe in Texas. As far as killing the dog, that would also be judged in light of existing laws. And unless you could establish that you were threatened (definitely not as high a standard as would be required for offing the neighbor, but certainly higher than merely the threat posed by dog poop on your property), offing the dog is likely to be against a law or two, as well.

[mike777]

asdfg2k, on Apr 27 2006, 06:48 PM, said:

Actually, the circumstances as posted by the OP aren't that unusual. Frequently, one finds disputes between neighbors over dumping. trespassing and the like. Almost everything I have ever read agrees with Richard.

Lodge a formal complaint.

If that doesn't work, take independent steps that are reasonable. Building a fence is certainly a reasonable step. Or maybe installing one of those dog-training electrical fences - not to keep your dog in, but to keep others out. If you think building a moat is desirable, that would certainly be allowed.

Sue for damages.

Repeat as necessary.

Unless you can prove that your life was threatened and in imminent danger, killing the neighbor as a recourse isn't allowed. Except maybe in Texas. As far as killing the dog, that would also be judged in light of existing laws. And unless you could establish that you were threatened (definitely not as high a standard as would be required for offing the neighbor, but certainly higher than merely the threat posed by dog poop on your property).

those elec fences will not work, lol, you need to have a collar on the other dog. LMAO.

[Badmonster]

asdfg2k, on Apr 27 2006, 06:48 PM, said:

And unless you could establish that you were threatened (definitely not as high a standard as would be required for offing the neighbor, but certainly higher than merely the threat posed by dog poop on your property), offing the dog is likely to be against a law or two, as well.

Not to mention generally icky.

[asdfg2k]

Right, I left out the part about putting the collar on the dog, or potentially installing the fence on the neighbors side of things (as well as putting the collar on the dog) - both of which require some level of cooperation from the neighbor.

Who knows, maybe he is using the poop as a means of extorting from the OP's friend the funds to install an electronic fence.

[luke warm]

joshs, on Apr 27 2006, 02:06 PM, said:

Please help my friend out. My friend's neighbor has a dog. The dog leaves his waste everywhere, including my friends garden and where my friends children play. The children keep getting sick. They have complained to the neighbors and to the police but nothing has been done.

a. Is it in the legal/moral authority of the township to put the dog to sleep?

no

Quote

b. if the town continues to do nothing, can my friend take pre-emptive action before his kids get really sick? Can he kill the dog himself?

can he? well sure... should he? no i don't think so... we're a nation of laws

Quote

c. suppose my friend sold his house and moved, and the dog owner followed him to the new house with his dog, and the dog continued to threaten his kids health, can something be done then?

same answer... no mention of legal paths taken or of their results (complaining to the police might or might not work, perhaps each time they come by the dog is in the neighbor's house or leashed or gone fishing or something)... go to court, get an injuction, hire a lawyer, sue the guy, but don't take the law into your own hands - not over this