While I agree with all of this, I think the car analogy holds. My being a shitty car owner and parking my car in your front yard does not give you legal or moral permission to set my car on fire, sell it to a junkyard, or simply hotwire it and claim it for your own.
The response to the initial crime is itself a crime, and should be treated as such.
Daniel
You snuck in while I was posting, Left Hand. I don’t park my cars on someone else’s property, either. If someone left their car on my property, I would have it towed pronto. If someone left smaller things on my property, I would dispose of them.
I just noticed the dichotomy here; here we have people getting all bent out of shape because an old lady poisoned cats in her own back yard, and in other threads we’ve seen people advocate killing any human who intrudes in their house without remorse or a second thought. I’m confused now; it’s okay to kill a human who intrudes in your house, but not okay to kill a cat who intrudes in your back yard?
Towing someone’s car is the equivalent of trapping a cat and taking it to animal control, or having animal control place a trap for the cat. I assume yo’d dispose of objects that were, in your opinion, of little value to the owners, correct? If so, I think that someone’s pet cat is not analogous to such objects: no reasonable person would conclude that a family is likely to value their cat as little as they value, say, a baseball or a kite.
You’ll find no such dichotomy with me: I do not support killing humans remorselessly under any circumstances (although there are some circumstances when it’s appropriate to kill humans, I think the killer should always be tormented by the necessity afterwards).
But even if I did show this dichotomy, the difference would be easily explained. When a human breaks into your house, there’s a very high chance that your own life is in danger: burglars are often armed, and a surprised burglar can often turn violent, and some housebreakers break in specifically to commit violence. A cat who intrudes into someone’s backyard has got an approximately zero percent chance of endangering your life.
Daniel
I think this is where your analogy breaks down, Lefty. A car is large, difficult to move, expensive, insured, registered with the state…Not really much resemblance to a cat at all. If my loud annoying neighbors next door got drunk and left their boombox on my front porch one night, they would be out one boombox, and I seriously doubt there would be any legal repercussions for me.
This is an interesting legal question, and I’d like to see someone with expertise answer it. Nonetheless, I think it’s fairly clear that most pet owners value their pets more than they value an inexpensive boombox. If we’re dealing with a boombox worth more than, say, $100 (and I submit that most pet owners value their pets at at least $100), if you maliciously destroyed their boombox or you kept it and refused to return it on their request, I suspect you’d be liable for damages at the very least.
Daniel
Well perhaps strictly speaking I would be. My guess, however, is that if someone called the police to report that they got drunk and left their boombox on my porch and now it’s gone, implying that I stole it, that nothing would come of it. Hell, I’ve called the police to report gunfire in my neighborhood and nothing came of it.
I don’t think the woman should have poisoned the cats. She should have trapped them and taken them to animal control, who would presumably have explained the leash laws to the owners. But I feel **very strongly ** that anyone who allows a cat to roam freely is culpable in whatever harm might befall it as a result. If it had been killed by a dog or run over by a car then all the venom directed at this woman should rightly be directed at the negligent owners.
Your disregard for other people is perhaps irrelevant, but the law isn’t. If its not a pest (legally) its not a pest, simple as that.
And that’s without even having to think about neighbourly relations, you must be such a joy to live beside :rolleyes:
Eh, it was only a couple of cats… Ones that were permitted to run loose, at that. You want to keep a pet safe and happy? Then keep it and enjoy it on your property where it belongs. If I wanted an animal to shit, piss, and dig in my yard, I’d get an animall of my own. If your animal comes here and does those things, I’ll treat it just like a rat, carpenter ant, or any other pest.
Again for the analogy to work, you would have admitted to having taken the boombox (the woman in the story admitted to having poisoned the cats). Alternately, we may suppose the cops investigating the boombox theft have strong sentimental ties to boomboxes and make an emotional decision to prioritize this type of crime–but then the analogy is starting to strain at the seams :).
I agree with all of this–but I don’t think that the owner’s culpability for their crime absolves the poisoner for culpability for her crime.
The difference between poisoning a cat and hitting it with a car or having it be eaten by a dog lies in intent: the woman intended to kill the cat, whereas the car-driver or the dog-owner presumably didn’t intend to kill the cat. If they did (if, for example, they trapped the cat and then released it in a room with their vicious rottweiler), I’d hold them equally culpable, and there’d be anger directed at the woman.
Daniel
It aint all that black and white.
From the article, bolding mine–
Although rural free-ranging cats have greater access to wild animals and undoubtedly take the greatest toll, even urban house pets take live prey when allowed outside. Extensive studies of the feeding habits of free-ranging domestic cats over 50 years and four continents [6] indicate that small mammals make up approximately 70% of these cats’ prey while birds make up about 20%. The remaining 10% is a variety of other animals. The diets of free-ranging cat populations, however, reflect the food locally available.
Observation of free-ranging domestic cats shows that some **individuals can kill ** over 1000 wild animals per year ** [7], although smaller numbers are more typical. Some of the data on kills suggest that free-ranging cats living in small towns kill an average of 14 wild animals each per year. Rural cats kill many more wild animals than do urban, or suburban cats [8]. Several studies found that up to 90% of free-ranging rural cats’ diet was wild animals, and less than 10% of rural cats killed no wild animals [9]. Recent research [10] suggests that rural free-ranging domestic cats in Wisconsin may be killing between 8 and 217 ** million birds each year. The most reasonable estimates indicate that 39 million birds are killed in the state each year. Nationwide, rural cats probably kill over a billion small mammals and hundreds of millions of birds each year. Urban and suburban cats add to this toll. Some of these kills are house mice, rats and other species considered pests, but many are native songbirds and mammals whose populations are already stressed by other factors, such as habitat destruction and pesticide pollution.
Despite the difficulties in showing the effect most predators have on their prey, cats are known to have serious impacts on small mammals and birds. Worldwide, cats may have been involved in the extinction of more bird species than any other cause, except habitat destruction. Cats are contributing to the endangerment of populations of birds such as Least Terns, Piping Plovers and LoggerheadShrikes. In Florida, marsh rabbits in Key West have been threatened by predation from domestic cats [11]. Cats introduced by people living on the barrier islands of Florida’s coast have depleted several unique species of mice and woodrats to near extinction [12, 13].
Not only do cats prey on many small mammals and birds, but they can outnumber and compete with native predators. Domestic cats eat many of the same animals that native predators do. When present in large numbers, cats can reduce the availability of prey for native predators, such as hawks [14] and weasels [15].
Free-ranging domestic cats may also transmit new diseases to wild animals. **Domestic cats have spread feline leukemia virus to mountain lions [16] and may have recently infected the endangered Florida Panther with feline panleukopenia (feline distemper) and an immune deficiency disease [17]. ** These diseases may pose a serious threat to this rare species. Some free-ranging domestic cats also carry several diseases that are easily transmitted to humans, including rabies and toxoplasmosis [18].
I’d call that pretty pest-like beahvior.
And if you did so, I’d encourage the authorities to treat you like any other criminal. Wonderful world, ain’t it?
Daniel
If you’d like, I think I could put together a pretty similar post showing that cars are pests–but I think you’ll concede that cars present even more dangers to the environment and to human health than do cats. I agree that it’s irresponsible to let cats run free, but that’s only one side of the equation.
Daniel
I sprayed some ants this morning, chuckles. You’d better get on the horn to the po-po right away.
What is it with you and cars, man? Is it that they are almost spelled the same as cats that make these comparisons so appealing to you? 
All kidding aside, exactly what do cars have to with this discussion? Do we need to define “pest” before we can go on? Virtually all cats who roam free are doing so in violation of the law. Most people I know who own cats and let them out have no idea of their impact. 39 million songbirds a year in Wisconsin alone. Endangering threatened species. Driving out natural predators. And for what? So folks will not have to be bothered with cleaning up their shit.
When people start driving their cats down to the emergency room when Timmy breaks his ankle maybe we can bring up the cat/car issue. Until then, I just don’t see it.
The only disregard for people here is by the owners of the dead cats. I realize that some places have fucked up laws that make disposing of pests illegal. I am really a very nice guy IRL. I do think that animal rights is a huge civil liberties threat and sympathise with many actions that are decried by animal rights types. Even if I wouldn’t necessarily take those actions myself.
As stated earlier, I have two cats, and I would have no problem living next door to Unregistered Bull. For all I know, I have neighbours now who would poison my cats if they came visiting all the time. I’m not letting them roam free to find out, though.
If you go leaving a vehicle abandoned on private property that you have trespassed on, I think that it is perfectally ethical for the property owner to dispose of the car.
FTR I wouldn’t poison the cat. I would most likely trap it and take it to an animal shelter. I just can’t condemn the act.
Keep up with the discussion, twinkles. Were those ants anyone’s property?
Daniel