According to the article, the police said that chickens are not considered livestock, which is absolutely not true, according to the statutes. So yes, the police were out of line.
Quote:
The town statutes are the ones that don't consider chickens livestock. The state law is wierd too. You can shoot a dog for harassing all livestock outside of city limts, but you can only shoot a dog for harassing livestock that are not chickens within city limits. Ed's turkeys were being harassed too, so it's a moot point. The law is pretty strangely written. The city ordinance is also what is defining a pellet gun as a firearm. The city even thinks that bows, BB guns and sling shots are firearms.
I think that what people are angry with the police about is the fact that they charged Ed when they weren't even familiar with the exact statutes, but didn't bother to ticket the dog owner, despite the fact that he even admitted to breaking the law. They may have been friendly and polite, but it's highly unlikely that the officers were not aware of the leash laws. I don't think that it's fair for an officer to enforce some laws, but ignore others.
I must have mis-read that way back when I was reading that. I knew there was something the police were totally incorrect on; I guess it was the leash laws, which are the most obvious.
Its a shame he has had to go through all of this aggravation even tho he was in the right. I hope he can get some compensation after all is said and done.
Mr. Harris and family
You all sure have been in my families prayers. I am so glad that the charges against you have been dropped. From the statements you have made here on BYC we can all see that you are an upright citizen and a great neighbor.
My family wishes you only shalom and peace as you continue to raise your pets and your children. So glad you joined BYC. We will continue to pray that all this hoopla dies down for you in your small town and that all this can be put in the past as quickly as possible. Welcome to BYC.
Quote:
I agree, somtime, the police will site, knowing that the DA will not press the charges. They do this so that they can not be betrayed as "doing nothing" by the alleged victim(s).
Edit to add: Welcome Ed. Good job, you have my support.
Quote:
I agree, somtime, the police will site, knowing that the DA will not press the charges. They do this so that they can not be betrayed as "doing nothing" by the alleged victim(s).
Edit to add: Welcome Ed. Good job, you have my support.
If thats the case, then the police should have to pay all the legal fees. Better they do nothing, than do the wrong thing.
Remember, we don't have all the facts yet, I could be wrong or I could be right, I don't know. I am just saying that there is a possibility. Just because the DA did not continue the charges, does not mean that they Police were wrong. If the Police were wrong, then that is up to Mr. Harris to decide to pursue, and prove they cited out of malice.
Edit to add: Don't get on me about this topic, I support Ed and what was done, I also support LEO's, I couldn't do their job, tired, I am certified as a Reserve LEO and I decided I don't have the patience for stupid people, lets face it, most of the people LEO's have to deal with are not that bright. Not the case here. In this case, I am sure the officers where being harassed by the ignorant dog owner.