Posted by BethW on 3/26/2008, 4:19 pm, in reply to "Regardless of what we all know...(msg) "
The only law I'm aware of around here is the requirement for rabies vaccinations. So yes, you can let your cat wander outside, but then there are the property rights of others. If the cat is being a nuisance on someone else's property, they have the right of recourse, but that doesn't bode well for the cat. Nothing really protects the cat or any individual/group with the cat's best interests in mind. That's in terms of the law. Realistically speaking, I have no doubt that the DA's office is going to take zero interest in pursuing this. It's pretty weak, as well as totally lame. And what jury is going to convict someone, if they do catch someone, if the person comes in and has stories about this cat coming and causing harm on their property? And you know an unneutered male cat is going to be attracted to the site of a feral colony not under control yet. If you let your unvetted cat roam there's going to be no way to tell the difference between an owned and unowned cat. Kind of hard to tell someone they can't try to control such a problem on their property because some of the cats might actually have (crappy) owners. I don't see the DA wanting to get sucked into opening that can of worms. And either way you know it doesn't bode well for the cats. 
What would that woman have done if the cat hadn't been TNR'ed (you know from the ear tip that the person thought the cat was unowned) but had been taken to AC or some even worse fate befell it? If it got hit by a car she'd probably blame the driver instead of herself for letting it roam. Dumb*ss.
| 44 |
|
Responses:
|
