- Thread starter
- #51
Trust me, I have stayed away as much as I possibly can. I don't even like to go on that side of my yard, but I have to eventually. Before this, I never even looked over the fence. I had no idea what was on the other side. Nor does it interest me in the slightest.At least where I live, Animal Control Officers are considered "cops" and go through the same training as the others, initially, and wear the same uniform. But I don't know about other areas... Where I live, if an officer is aggressively approached by a loose dog, it will be shot, especially if it is a pit-bull. The people who own them complain, but they have no case because the dog is loose and aggressive. It sounds like the Animal Control Officer is just trying to do her job... But they may get tired of the complaints eventually and quit responding to them, if there is repeatedly nothing to cite after they respond. It is unlikely that they are necessarily "out to get you" personally. When a complaint comes in, they have to respond, at least initially. Hopefully, you will get anymore personal threats from these people on a recording device (your cel phone?) and take that to the police. Make these neighbors come to you to do such things, you should stay away from them and off their property. That way, they can't say that they were provoked in any way, which would have prompted the threat.
The animal control officer is new, so she may be a bit overzealous in carrying out her duties. My concern is that she is acting as their agent, and she is therefore biased, because I have complaints about them that are just as valid, and their dog has already bitten her. Yet I'm the one who received a written warning for an issue that is totally subjective and no ordinance supports it. This issue was settled in court years ago, only the parties were different. The case was dismissed, and to my knowledge the issue has not come up again until now. Either the City has amnesia, or someone is trying to rehash an old issue.