Family pet mauled to death in bucklin

[Flying Dutchman]

First of all----dog lover here. I have raised, trained, worked with, sheltered and rescued them my whole life. I have put dogs to sleep for being aggressive, and rehabilitated those that were considered aggressive. I have a dog, and a cat, that have been with me longer than two marraiges and my children. Both of them are having their 16th birthdays this year and I would skin any person alive that hurt them. I have lost family pets and still to this day I miss them. I truly do empathize and sympathize with the family that has lost their pet. The owners of the Rotts, if they are being as cold and crual as it sounds, would be wise to never sleep in the same town as me.

All that being said, try to look at this without emotion attached to it, as the law is supposed to.

If this was, say, a pet bird or chicken that was killed by a neighbors cat, would there be this much outrage? You cannot replace the emotional attatchment of a pet so the courts do not even look at it. If the victims dog was a show dog, with an actual dollar amount of it's earnings as proof, then they have a case for civil court. They may have a case for vet bills too.
You cannot put human logic and thinking into the mix when it comes to animals. They did not attack a small, defenseless pet.....they attacked another dog. The fact they left their territory to go do it does make them a menace, and does show they are aggressive, but it shows no proof they would attack a human. Dogs do not notice size when it comes to other dogs. A small 5 pound dog will attack a Great Dane just as easy as it would a 2 pound dog.
The only thing I think you could get them on, if there is no city ordinance, is maybe criminal damage to property. Remember, you have to look at things very cold and matter-of-factly when dealing with laws. You would have to prove that the owners acted with complete indifference, and knowledge that their actions would lead to damage of another's property.

I feel sorry, I truly do, for this family and for what the daughter had to witness. I can only imagine the horror she was feeling while watching this. I can still vividly remember watching as one of my dogs was ripped and torn to shreds by another dog. There are no words to say to comfort her, but my heart is with her none the less.
The Rotts should be put to sleep. Not as a punishment, it is not there fault they acted this way. They should be put down because they have shown to be to aggressive and predictibly unpredictable.
The owners of the dogs should be sued. If one of them is employed by the county, she should be facing disciplinary actions for violating their policy and procedure in regards to making her employer look bad. Bucklin is no sprawling metropolis. The neighborhood should ban together and harrass the crap out of these people. Hang up flyers calling them "pet killers" or something all over town. They don't own the ditch, or easement, in front of their house.....cover it in manure. Get creative.

[Fred Sanford]

Well said Dutchman.

The dogs are the unwitting victims of ignorant owners. Since the SO refuses to deal with this inhouse disciplinary problem, destroying the dogs is the only remaining way of punishing their owners and insuring the dogs don't attack again, which is what I'd like to see happen.

The law is one thing, but the SO has the ability to mete out discipline to their employees when need be. The SO is getting a black eye over this and that alone should be reason enough to discipline their employees.

The law is not the only standard we live by.

[K C Muffin]

[Flying Dutchman]

It's not an inhouse issue-----the dispatchers and communications personel do not work for the Sheriff, they work for the county.
Putting the dogs to sleep does not punish the owners, they just go get more and continue to raise them wrong. You punish them by making them pay----with money or whatever. If the neighborhood would ban together these people would eventually move. If people complained, enough people that is, to and about her employer, she would lose her job.

[TexKan]

I agree - IF I broke the law or city ordinance it's not up to my employer to punish me..... I still say - it seems much more important to us than it is to the little dog's owners. Sometimes ya just gotta be persistant, call everyday, write letters, take an ad out, go to the mayor, camp at the animal control office........ but ya can't sit back and say..... I was so taken advatage of, it's so unfair, the system won't work for me........ IF YOU are not willing to use the system to your benefit........ just sad to me that this family has chosen to just let this get swept under the rug. Just a shame.

[Fred Sanford]

Mocking the victimes on the SO PA is not against the law. It is something that warrants disciplinary action from their employer. It's a show of low class and Ford County should deal with it.

Eventually this will become a story, and Ford County will wish they'd dealt with it when it was simple. Who is captaining the ship at Ford County anyway? He should pull his head out and manage his employees.

I'll make a call this morning and see if the Hutch newspaper will take on this saga.

[TexKan]

Good goin!!!........... but I don't believe the SO is responsible for thier employees occasionally acting like *******s........ If that employee was skipping on debts and actually breaking the law then the SO could serve warrents if requested. The SO nor the county would be in the right for taking a side here. They are an employer......... that's like saying Walmart should disipline any jerk that works there cause he's a jerk........... you know that's as illegeal as this situation is wrong.

I just wonder if the owners would be too "mild mannered" to speak to the paper. I think that stance is BS as well. Seems rather strange that it's "all over town" but only in whispers and whinnings.............The "martyre" stance is just as bad as the "bully"..............

[Fred Sanford]

TexKan, I was referring to employees using the PA at work to harass the victim. That is punishable.

It's an attitude thing with them now. The Smiths need an attitude adjustment as well as a bank account balance adjustment.

[TexKan]

Well that it is - Fred - you are right....... that shouldn't be goin on either. The employer should do something OR the afflicted could file harrasement charges on the Smith person - as long as they have a witness to the goings on - there is nuthing to stop them from making the complaint............

[Bubba]

They should take a digital voice recorder with them and record the harassment over the PA.