START A RANT
SIGN UP / SIGN IN
GET PAID TO POST
FOLLOW ON TWITTER
START A RAVE
MY PROFILE
CONTACT US
ABOUT US
Science & Technology

Rant

Elderly Woman Kills Fawn Video Is Sad!

Posted 31 months ago|54 comments|3,199 views
VIDEOS
Written by
celebcrazy
New Orleans, LA
Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of deer?

Dorothy Richardson, 76, knows. She’s the “elderly woman kills fawn” video star! The woman claims she was defending herself from an imminent deer attack when she raised her shovel and beat a 25-pound fawn to death in her flower garden.

Wonderful quote from the news story: “She said the fawn's eyes contacted hers, like he was going to jump and bite her head off.”

The “elderly woman kills fawn” star claims that deer had been stalking her for years, so she finally smacked one down as a warning to the others. After the fawn was dead, Dorothy Richardson picked up the body, stuck it in a cardboard box, and left it out on trash day.

Unfortunately, not everyone in Euclid believes that the “elderly woman kills fawn” story is OK. If Dorothy gets convicted in the pending animal abuse lawsuit, she might have to do 60 days in jail and pay a $1,000 fine.
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: this woman is a whacko--and deserves everything. Maybe we can post her in a front lawn to warn other animal abusers the penalty of hurting the innocent. The only thing that she was in danger of--is stupidity. Oh look--she got that on her own.
JAK Gladney
JAK Gladney
Saint Albans, WV
31 months ago: It was eating her flowers!!! Elderly in my neighborhood would probably react exactly the same way.
Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: I don't think I would want to live in your neighborhood. If the women didn't have their bifocals on, they might mistake a person for a animal. There is no logical reason for that woman to kill a fawn. EVER. No excuse. If she got mad at a kid who looked at her wrong too, what would she do? It is the logic behind her behavior that scares me the most.
JAK Gladney
JAK Gladney
Saint Albans, WV
31 months ago: I agree. These people are touchy about their gardens, their flowerbeds--they spend a lifetime toiling in thankless jobs so they can putter around doing yardwork in their golden years.
31 months ago:

Well I have to say Gegoire has a point. As hard as it may be for some of us to believe there are people which have been so removed from wildlife animals that anything not resembling a domesticated animal appears dangerous. It is a sad story no doubt but I have seen people scared to death of dogs which only want to lick they're face at the worst. I also agree some animal "schooling" would likely be what she really needs so she doesn't massacre a bunny in her garden or something else of the sort.
Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: That-I can understand. However, if we penalize elderly drivers for the indiscretions, must we also not do the same when it comes to animal abuse? Overall--I think it is the BIG picture-we need to observe how it will effect other people--unfortunately, she must be made an example of. If my grandmother killed a defensive animal--I would be horrified. I would WANT her to be penalized to show others that what she did was wrong.(However--she had morals--she NEVER would have..EVER.) If it was someone younger--would this be an issue? As I said--look to what is going on now with elder drivers and crashes--this is ANOTHER law that has been broken.
31 months ago: Defenseless animal, a defensive one might eat you.

Even city-slickers should be aware of the laws that protect wildlife. I don't believe it is legal to kill a fawn in any state, same with most baby critters, except some fur bearers. She should be fined and required to do time, community service or something to atone for her rash behavior.

On the other hand, there are laws written so that "FARMERS" can eliminate pest critters any time of the year. I don't classify a flower garden around a home farm land but you can never tell what a good lawyer might wring from a sympathetic jury.....
31 months ago: Anyone who thinks this woman should be punished is foolish and illogical.

Many Ohio cities hire professional snipers to kill deer on an annual basis. Thousands of them are killed in northeast Ohio alone, and that number doesn't include numbers from hunting while in season.

Also, as far as I'm aware, mouse traps and poison are still sold and widely accepted for use. Had this woman killed a mouse with a shovel would anyone be here raving about it? Go back to your life and get over it.
31 months ago: The woman is a loon, there is NO reason to beat a defenseless fawn to death. She has not been 'far removed from wildlife'. She said she has teneded this house alone for 10 years, so she has lived there at least this long. You would think she would have found a logical way by now to deter deer from her flowers. For crying out loud they are stupid flowers! The poor little fawn was likely scared and lost. Heaven forbid a small child ever get lost in her yard, she might feel threatend when it cries and beat it to death with a shovel. Then I suppose the rational would be 'well many cities in Ohio allow abortion on an annual basis, so what's the big deal beating to death one small child?' Give me a break. It's attitudes like, go back to your life and get over it that have this country as screwed up as it is.
Morwen142
Morwen142
North Ridgeville, OH
31 months ago: Yes Ohioans cull the herd of deers annually. Have you ever come across a starving deer? Have you come across the carcass of a fawn who starved to death? Driving over the holiday weekend, I stopped counting the number of dead deer on the side of the road. It was just too sad. I realize that many find culling the herds of deer to be cruel but I think it is a crueler death to starve or be hit by a car.

I am a nature lover and I have deer in my yard all the time. No I do not go after them and while it is frustrating when they eat my veggies I know they are just doing what they do and I try to come up with another way so that they can't get into my garden.

Yes this lady should be punished for what she did. She broke the law and the laws are there for a reason.
31 months ago: denizen, Stop and think, do you want your neighbors to smack your dog or cat in the head for pissing in their yard? Do you think it is ok to kill critters indiscriminately no matter what the law says? Do you realize that deer are a protected game animal and the killing of a fawn is never allowed even during hunting season?

This woman beat a defenseless baby creature to death because it was in her flower bed, not even a vegetable garden. She knew there were deer around; she had lived there for over 10 years since her husband died. She also should know that a fawn was not going to harm her and would run away if given the chance.

She should be punished and it should be very public what her crime was and what her punishment was so that others who might consider doing the same thing will take note and obey the law.

I am not a PETA supporter, I am not a hunter, I will eat game animals that are taken in season, and if accidently killed, I’ll eat them out of season. BUT! I will not support someone who beats a “baby” animal to death and then tries to gain sympathy by saying “Its eyes contacted mine and I was afraid it would bite my head off” (Or something to that effect) when that is the way it “reads” the level of threat of a creature it knows is not its mother, it looks at you.
31 months ago: Stupid deer should of stopped preying on old ladys. Dumb doe got what it deserved.
31 months ago: dr, oh so heartless!

Who said it was a doe? Do you know the difference?

31 months ago: doe rhymes with hoe. Dumb hoe got what she deserved. Its a joke, get it. Ugh, now that i explained it it isn't funny
31 months ago: Have any of you ever eaten 'BabyBack Ribs'? Oh yeah, those aren't 'BambiBack Ribs'.
31 months ago: If this woman was married most of her life this could be something her husband always handled. I realize this may not be the case also and her hobby may be going out on the weekends and slaughtering defenseless animals. However I suggest that she may never have had to deal with this type of situation before. Her husband may have always taken care of such issues and now since he was not there and it was on her property she may have just resolved it the only way she knew how to. It is very likely she was unaware there are people which could and would come and take the animal without "charging" money for it. I think I would have to give the woman the benefit of doubt in this case. Yes give her a talk about places to call and which animals will not attack her if she is in the situation again but if she has no prior record of this type of thing then give her a break.
31 months ago: If this woman was married most of her life this could be something her husband always handled. I realize this may not be the case also and her hobby may be going out on the weekends and slaughtering defenseless animals. However I suggest that she may never have had to deal with this type of situation before. Her husband may have always taken care of such issues and now since he was not there and it was on her property she may have just resolved it the only way she knew how to. It is very likely she was unaware there are people which could and would come and take the animal without "charging" money for it. I think I would have to give the woman the benefit of doubt in this case. Yes give her a talk about places to call and which animals will not attack her if she is in the situation again but if she has no prior record of this type of thing then give her a break.
31 months ago: Was she really scared of this precious little animal or just angry that it was in her garden? All I can say is that it's a good thing it wasn't a neighborhood kid playing hide and seek there.
31 months ago: @ Morwen142,

You seem like a thinking individual. Surely you recognize the folly in comparing wildlife to someone's pet and therefore property. This nation's founding documents make very clear our HUMAN rights to life, liberty, and estate. If anything this deer should be viewed as a vagrant and a trespasser destroying the woman's private property. I would challenge the rationality of any law that would grant rights to an unthinking and unaware species at the expense of those belonged to a cognitive and intrinsically valuable human being. That deer didn't even realize that it existed and necessarily lacked the ability to appreciate or improve upon it's existence. Such animals are euthanized daily and by the thousands, and no one so much as bats an eye. Furthermore, there isn't a creature in the universe that truly laments their loss.

This is right about the time that someone will make the brilliant observation that animals have a nervous system and therefore experience pain and suffering. Really? Had she killed it painlessly would you be any less excited? Also, if pain or the lack of it is sufficient in establishing moral action...would you be willing to accept murder as moral so long as the victim experienced no suffering? Of course not because, as I've already mentioned, unlike animal life human life is accepted to be ontologically valuable. Moral arguments in support of animal rights are hypocritical in that manner, and become entirely contradictory every time you take a bite of a burger or eat a chicken nugget. The same arguments are laughably ridiculous when considered along side the typical liberal stance on abortion, but I'll let you intelligent people work those proofs for yourselves...

I'm convinced that had she met a human trespasser with the same aggression it would have received far less attention, especially from the loons who champion animal rights.

Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: @Denizen,

Shall we really start going into this argument? Life is not life if it belongs to something with less intelligence than, say, you? Really? You sure you want to stick with that? So, let's say myself-IQ 160-do I have the right to destroy ANYONE with a lesser IQ than myself? I don't see THAT holding up in court. I offer this up instead--the real argument here is about killing in a HORRIFIC and brutal way, a defenseless animal. The people who HAVE voices should be using them to champion for those who do not. This is why we have established laws on animal abuse. THIS is animal abuse-cut and dry.
And the 'loons who champion animal rights' NEED to because of ignorance such as yours. Remember--historically--our species has survived ONLY because we are the top of the food chain. wasn't always so. Oh-and a BIG BTW-a chicken nugget and a burger in NO WAY equate the brutality or randomness of this. We are not debating vegetarianism. WE are discussing violence.
Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: P.S.-perhaps she would have avoided her 'trespasser' (legally) if she had 'no trespassing' signs on the property. THAT--according to the laws in regards to man, would allow her to kill a human who trespassed. Even better--let's remove this argument completely-BUY HER A FENCE!!!
31 months ago: 160 IQ and you don't realize the differences between intellect, high level thought, and cognition?

I've killed a bat with a roll of newspaper. I've killed mice and rats with shovels. Should I have spent 2 months in jail?

My point about eating habits was simply to establish that moral arguments for animal rights are ridiculous. And, if there are no moral or logical reasons to uphold the rights of an animal at the expense of a being actually deserving of those rights...why do it?
Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: Believe me--I know the difference-between all three-I have worked very hard through study (getting my master's AND my doctorate; however, I believe the highest level of achievement when it comes to intellect is to understand that those who are NOT able to speak for themselves are given a voice for those who are able to. Again--let me restate the REAL point here--what you should be focusing on--as should everyone else. Despite YOUR personal opinion--the law feels differently. That is why animal abuse is against the law. Ultimately--did she break the law? Yes.
The moral argument deals with the most basic understanding of life--if it HAS intellect--of any kind--it deserves the right to life. Let's not bring the other arguments that you mentioned before (abortion, veganism, etc.) for they are completely different ideas; Perhaps it is the cruelty of the crime--or the woman's words upon completion of the crime--they are reminiscent of an individual who DOES not have higher level thinking.
Perhaps, what is supposed to distinguish us from the 'animals' is our compassion. If we kill indiscriminately, and state that the reason is 'because they don't deserve life' what truly makes you different from that of something in the wild? THAT is supposed to be the difference--THAT is the 'higher order level of thought' that should be used here. However--the old woman lacks that--you lack compassion. Not sure which is worse.
31 months ago: You never answered my question.

Let me rephrase: Have you ever set a mouse trap? You don't see the contradiction in retail stores selling mouse traps and decon while this woman faces criminal charges for similarly disposing of a pest?

Don't accuse me of being without compassion. Hers is not the choice that I would have made, but there is no "real" or noncontradictory reason to prosecute her for it.
Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: In response to your question--I have NEVER set a mousetrap-nor do I agree with that-however, again--that is not the issue here. I have nursed abused animals back to health---I had a cat that was born in the wild that lost the use of its back legs. After bringing it to the vet--we asked--what is the humane thing to do? The vet answered--it depends on the person. If you can handle the hard work--it will be fine. And it was. That cat---who ran on two legs faster than most do on four--lived three years. However, I am sure--you would have in the same position--put the animal down- "for it's own sake". How often do we do things really for our own sakes--and not that of animals. Yes--I congratulate you and your wife for rescuing a dog from a shelter--but it goes beyond that-compassion--for life--plant life, animal life-human life--that is the only way that we as people--will evolve into BETTER beings. Perhaps your belief is that you are evolved enough--but with lack of respect for ALL living things--you don't see the universe for what it truly can hold. As I said before--truth is--this is neither here nor there. Lets get back to facts. Did this woman kill an animal--yes. Are there laws against that? yes.
31 months ago: You're still ignoring the heart of my question, and the implied logic behind it. Why is it legal for stores to sell items which were designed for the sole purpose of killing animals, and for consumers to purchase and use said items, while this woman faces criminal charges for carrying out the same action? The law is broken.

Also, last year our dog was in a fight with our neighbor's dog. Our neighbor got in between them and was badly bit on the hand. We made the claim on our homeowners insurance, and they naturally excluded our dog from further coverage. My wife and I struggled for days over the options before us. Keep her and run the risk of an uninsured incident and the possible social stigma that our pet and we as responsible home and pet owners may endure, or have her euthanized. I tried to find a shelter for her, but as you may guess, not many are willing to take such a high risk animal. After much thought and many prayers, my wife and I decided to keep her, and we've entirely restructured our lives to do so. For example, we can not have her boarded, and don't trust her with friends and family so we no longer take vacations without her.

31 months ago: Denizen, for killing the bat, I hope your home is deluged with the insects that it could have eaten in its lifetime. You will not like that. As for killing the mice and rats with shovels, not a big deal to me, they are considered pests and reproduce at a pretty astounding rate.

Now lets go into the difference. What makes a mouse, a rat and a bat different besides their species. For one their reproduction rates, the rat and mouse (R&M) each have large reproductive capabilities, (Wiki search) brown rat – up to 5 litters a year of 7 to 14 pups, if you kill a bunch of them they will reproduce faster to restore the colony, Fancy mice – 17 – 20 litters a year of 4 – 12 pups, the bat, one pup a year (sometimes twins). The R&M eat grains leafy things, insects and pretty much anything in your house, the bat, insects, thousands of them, its body weight or more per day.

http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/bats/survival.html

31 months ago: Now, which one do you think needs protecting from random killing? All provide some benefit but only one eats huge amounts of insects and reproduces slowly, that’s why it’s against the law to kill nearly every species of bat in the US and the UK.

But this isn’t about rodents; it’s about killing a fawn and the moral and legal repercussions an old lady should face for deliberately beating a fawn to death in her flower garden.

Legal, animal cruelty, animal husbandry, plain old common sense, just a few things a person should know about those. It is one thing to hunt a game animal and kill it with a good shot, blow or other death method, then harvest the meat, hide and other usable parts, it is entirely another to beat it to death with a shovel because it is lying in your flowers, then toss it into the trash. The first part of that sentence it regulated by law and the law states that the method should be as quick and painless as possible and it lays out the penalties for violating the quick and painless as possible part, as well as the time periods and amounts of game animals that can be harvested. The second section, the shovel, is in direct violation of the laws governing the quick and painless method as well as the fact that this was not a harvesting procedure or during the time period expressed in the law.

She is in violation of the law. I mentioned common sense, she didn’t apply any, and common sense will tell a normal person that a wild animal will run away from a human if given a chance. This was a fawn and its protection mechanism is to stay hidden until the danger leaves, anyone who has seen Bambi knows this and this woman has seen Bambi, that or she has lived in a bubble her entire life.
31 months ago: You don’t seem to think she should be punished for that and therein lies the problem, you seem to acquaint the elimination of a pest without regard to the type of pest or the method with the right to protect your property and that is a gray area in that a homeowner is allowed to protect their property, as long as they do it within the law and since she violated the sections on method and then did not harvest the meat or hide, nor do it during harvest time, multiple violations. I will add that farmers are allowed to eliminate any and all pests at any time then need to, within the law, BUT, she ain’t no farmer.

And you have to admit, smacking a fawn over the head with a shovel has got to be a really cruel way to kill it.

We humans have a responsibility to our fellow Earth dwellers, all species. We should work to preserve what we can, harvest what we need and in the harvesting process, ensure that we do not harvest the entire crop! Some must be left to continue the species so that others can enjoy them in all their different uses, be it as nature or be it on a dinner plate. To deliberately kill something that is protected by law is just wanton disregard for life and the law. We are a nation of laws, never forget that. I don’t like some of them but that doesn’t get me off the hook when I get caught violating them and this woman should be punished the same as any hunter caught out of season taking game or any other person caught killing critters for fun.
31 months ago: Tidbit, there are bats that eat other things but 70% of the know species eat insects.
31 months ago: Content Removed by RantRave Admin
31 months ago: Denizen, not sure who you directed that last one to. I’ll say apples and oranges. One critter is considered a pest that reproduces rapidly, the other is a game animal. Why can they sell traps and poisons for one and protect the other? Because it is not categorized as the same by the way our laws are written. One is a pest that can carry disease into our homes and spread it rapidly within their and our community and the other is a meat and fur bearing animal that is protected by law because we nearly wiped them out.

40 years ago there were very few deer in my state, they had been over hunted. Now they are plentiful because the laws were passed to limit the harvesting. Instead of taking as many and as often as a person wanted to, they were limited to bucks, no does, now the limit is by age and permits are required for does. I my area there are too many but the law still stands. The mice and rats don’t have that problem, no one hunts them except other critters and they can reproduce very rapidly.

The reason stores are allowed to sell and consumers are allowed to purchase these items and use them to kill animals is because we, the human, are supposed to use good judgment in the implementation of the use of deadly force. Unlike our fellow Earth dwellers of the animal kingdom, we are tasked with the job of using our intelligence to manage their numbers where and when we see the need. They are not tasked with that chore of choice. They will reproduce until they have outstripped the lands ability to support them, then they die of starvation or pestilence. What controls a mouse or rat population? Food supply, predator numbers, disease and man.
31 months ago: This woman failed to use good judgment, broke the law, and then admitted it. Off with her head!, just kidding, I think the fine and a good lecture on the responsibility we humans are tasked with in the preservation of our game animals will be enough, that and the negative media attention she has gotten will assuage my disgust with someone who failed to live up to basic human standards of compassion.
31 months ago: denizen, on the dog problem, it cost me well over $300 when a neighbors nephew interfered in a dog fight between my daughters **** and the neighbors 14 year old ankle biter so I know where you are coming from. Since it occurred in her front yard, I paid the vet bill for a dead pet (yeah it died) and the doctor bill for her nephew who was stupid enough to pick up HER ankle biter which bit him. The one thing the daughters dog did wrong was go into her yard and she sicced her mutt on her, much to it's pleasure but since it was overmatched by about 40 lbs, quite foolish.

We live in the country, far from city limits and outside city laws of pet control. I didn't have to pay a penny but did it because it was the right thing to do. She still hates us but nothing I can do about that. Your situation is worse because you made a claim. We didn't and unless they force me to, I won't even admit we have pets because they unfairly penalize you for them, even if they never have or ever do cause a problem.
31 months ago: 6, you live in the country. You know there are fawns and does. Lot's of them. Momma DOE is probably also a witness. Is this real? I hate to see a fawn or any other animal die needlessly. However, how long will you allow them to invade your garden or property and disrupt your life before you crack.

Sorry to hear you had to shell out some bucks when your daughters aggressive dog invaded anothers property and killed a poodle/chiuaua/rat dog. You should be thanking your lucky stars that you got out so light and you know it.

Get a fence??? I read that statement a few posts back.
Deer can jump some mighty high fences. It would have been better to say, build a greenhouse.

I have the first 10 bucks to donate to the 'Free Dorothy Richardson' fund. That putz 'fat boy counselman' needs to find a better campaign issue for his next election cycle.

Suggestions for campaign slogans anyone?

"Free the Fawn" - "Venison is a Vice"
31 months ago: @ Morwen14, your contention that cognitive capacity is the basis of intrinsic value is human egocentricity at its worst. Try experiencing life with your heart, not just your head. You'll be more fulfilled and the world will be a better place for it. With respect.
Teacherspet
Teacherspet
Assonet, MA
31 months ago: I agree--we too often differentiate between the two. However, if we lived our lives incorporating these separate but equal ideas better into our lives--we might be more evolved (and INVOLVED) individuals.
31 months ago: jammies, have you been staring at the light from your prisms too long? Have a clue how they work? Which end of the spectrum are you on? Don't answer. I already know.
31 months ago: TCG, a few miles from town, lots of trees, a few neighbors. Yeah, I live in the country. The deer are always welcome, they don't eat much and they don't destroy anything except some plants. Makes it easier during season to take a few, legally. I am not a hunter so don't worry, won't be me taking the shot, but I'll help process it and eat it. As for cracking, some people think I did long ago.

Wasn't an aggressive dog, she was under attack by the ankle biter otherwise she would not have had to defend herself and my children. Once the attacker was rendered immobile she let it go.

It is customary in the country to walk with your dogs and if you go to a neighbors house on foot, they go too and since we were new to the neighborhood (moved my family back to AR before I retired) and setting up house, it was natural for the kids to explore, with the dog. Like I said, she sicced the mutt on them, very un-neighborly and this was a sister of a friend, who bought land from my father.

They were walking down the common driveway that ends at our cemetery, our house is the last one and the neighbors is closer to the main road so they have to pass her house anytime they go toward the road. She has never been very friendly to anyone, should have stayed in town living in an apartment. We own all the land in front of her house (south) and to one side (east), north and west are owned by other people, the driveway is ours with access granted in legal documents.
31 months ago: more evolved? What does that mean? I am truly stumped. I understand the INVOLVED. That is where this 76 year old lady was turned in by her neighborhood counselman. He was rewarded by getting his fat mug some free publicity on the local news.
31 months ago: 6, don't take it wrong. But you said your daughters dog was on a property other than your own. Right? Please correct me if I have read this wrong.

Now you add that your she was defending your children. I totally understand and agree with the concept of protect the children.

But this new information begs the question. If the daughters dog was not on your property while protecting your children. Doesn't it stand to reason your children were also not on your property and might have been somewhat involved in the situation? Like I said. I agree that if it was protecting an attack to your children it needed to be stopped. I am only exploring provocation and who was really the aggressor and who was the protector.
31 months ago: Like I said, I paid because it was the right thing to do, not out of fear of a lawsuit. The counter-suit for siccing her dog on ours and the children would have far outweighed any she could have brought for the loss of her mutt. Last I checked, endangering a child is far more serious than a dog killing another dog while protecting its owner.

Yep, they can jump pretty high. Better to just let them do their own thing and learn how to make them avoid your property.

Save your money. She did break the law, and her punishment (fine/jail time) is well deserved.
31 months ago: 6, I'll have to contact a Title Company with a Survey to figure that one out. Regardless of who owns surrounding property and has right of way rights. Did this occur on private property. Who crossed the line?
31 months ago: Sorry, had to finish the original post and got it in after your response.

TCG, yes they were on her property. Have you never lived in the country? Have you lived in the city all your life?
31 months ago: TCG, the rest of the story..... They were retreiving the dog who had wandered up the driveway to the front of her house. Perfectly innocent and perfectly normal behavior for country folk. Maybe in the big city you would consider it improper to stray a few feet onto the property of another, but in the country it is perfecty normal and sometimes even neccessary.

What would you have done had your ball fallen into another person yard? or your dog went under or over the fence? Leave it there? No, you would have made an effort to retrieve it without expecting to get threatened for your efforts.

I'm goint to add some to the story. She also shoots at any animal on her property, and that includes children.
31 months ago: Short answer, I do not live in the city. I commute 40 miles oneway to work. I understand the 'Free Range' and 'Roam Free' logic. Even simple country folk have property rights. If she is shooting any animal on her property you have reason to document it. I suggest you contact the SPCA and have them run a sting. I for one would figure out what kind of music she hates and run a loudspeaker into a tree and play it during the legal hours. I did that with a neighbor using celtic music. It drove them nuts. Funny after I turned it off we became friendly again. Whenever, they start being goofy I just smile and point to the loudspeaker in the tree.
31 months ago: You ever watch a TV show or movie where someone has broken into a house and been shot by the owner? Ever hear the cop say "Good thing he was inside the house when you shot him". Once the perp crosses the threshhold, he is fair game if you feel he is a threat to your life. A child or dog in the yard is not a target no matter what state you live in the tresspassing laws will not allow you to harm them unless they are attacking you.

Since they were not attacking her, she was inside the house till she let the mutt loose, she didn't have any legal authority to make a claim of attempted harm to her. They hadn't even made it to the porch steps when she opened the door and sent the dog to it's doom.

We are off topic, sorry, I'll smack my hand for you.
31 months ago: The SCPA wouldn't bother with her, to infrequent for them to invest the thousands of dollars it would cost.

I'll leave the terristic harassment to those who would do such things, besides, this was in the past (since 2001) and my daughter now lives there, we moved about mile away to the other end of the property.
31 months ago: Opps, 1999, losing my memory.
31 months ago: 'terristic harassment to those who would do such things'

Funny. I never deprived anyone of sleep or basic utilities.
It was not blaring. Very low. Are there not companies that sell frequency transmitters to keep unwanted animals out? That's legal?

Unlike the Clinton and Reno tactics used at Waco to enforce a bogus machine gun / armament claim.
Yeah, I know, I breached reality there.

Or did I?
31 months ago: TCG, ok, that sounds better, but, there's always a but, even at low volumn it was pretty effective harrassment. We'll agree to drop that line of thought?

Keeps pests out, very legal and very approved by those who don't like traps. Also we humans can't hear them.

Back to the fawn. If she had used your method only with a radio tuned to a 24hr station and played at a low volumn, she probably could have avoided any deer taking up residence in her flowers!
31 months ago: To answer the previous.

I CARRY. I CARRY more than one sometimes. I would look to see if ther was LIFE THREATING circumstances before I cleared the leather. An 'ankle biter' would not need more than a quick kick to protect me or mine. Mindset seems to play into this query. Yes, I will BUST CAPS if needed to save another from deadly force or injury. I will not shoot to KILL. That is against the law. Sorry if they die but I didn't shoot to kill. I aim at kneecaps and elbows knowing that a ACP .45 will knock them down and the damage will remain for life. Sorry for the cold hard facts. I would rather kneecap them and leave them crippled for their entire life to dwell on it.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.
All Categories | Arts & Entertainment  |  Culture & Lifestyle  |  Economy  |  Food  |  Health  |  News & Politics  |  Offbeat  |  People  |  Products  |  Science & Technology  |  Sports  |  Travel

Frequently Asked Questions  |  Community Guidelines  |  Editorial Reviews  |  Get Paid to Post  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use  |  Contact Us  |  Sitemap  |  Report Spam/Abuse

©2012 RantRave