Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Oct 26, 2008
So some heartless idiot shoots a pet and the response is to punish everyone for the crime? Would such an ordinance deter a miscreant from harming animals? I think that greatly increasing the penalty for cruelty to animals would be a much more effective response than banning pellet guns. That would cover harming or killing innocent pets by any means, not only pellet guns.
Coffeebar opens in Menlo Park
By Elena Kadvany | 2 comments | 5,063 views
Couples: So You Married Mom or Dad . . .
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 752 views
Spring College Fairs
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 741 views
Willow-Gate, and Safe Routes to School
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 442 views
The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 0 comments | 93 views
Home & Real Estate
Send News Tips
Express / Weekend Express
Circulation & Delivery
Palo Alto Online
Mountain View Voice
© 2018 The Almanac
All rights reserved.