Not when they have injured your animal, and they are running wild causing damage. He warned the owner to contain her animals, thats all he needs to do. She obviously cant control them and has too many. What happens when a couple get rabies and hurt some kids? Its not cruelty to protect yourself, your family and your animals from out of control wildlife. If it doesnt have a rabies tag, or its too wild for you to check the date on the tag, its a hazzard to everyone in the area.
Sorry for the consecutive posts. I hate that, but evidently, Adam was posting at the time time as I.
I envy your right in TX to shoot to protect property, but even there, as here, you cannot shoot in an incorporated area. I do understand that you can shoot a human in an incorporated area, in order to protect property, but not an animal posing no imminent threat. Even if I said I was shooting because the cat was attacking and refused to comply with my command to stop, I'd have to explain what I was doing in my yard/shed with a .22 pistol. Clearly it was not for reasons of self-protection, since it would come out in court that I own several .45's. It would be seen that I was out looking for a confrontation and therefore premeditated.
Here, sadly enough, it's completely unjustifiable and will land you in the clink for a long, long time. Then, years of paying the incumbent fine.
Even if the planets aligned and I was acquitted the first time, there's NO WAY I'd be acquitted a second, and I had far more than one cat to quell.