The dog doesn't know any better. It's instint. A person who shoots a neighbor's dog is making a conscience decision to end a life it has no right to end.
R.I. Gen. Laws § 4-13.1-4
§ 4-13.1-4. Control of vicious dogs.
(a) All dogs that have been declared vicious shall be confined in an enclosure. It is unlawful for any owner or keeper to maintain a dog that has been declared vicious upon any premises which does not have a locked enclosure.
(b) It is unlawful for any owner or keeper to allow any vicious dog to be outside of the dwelling of the owner or keeper or outside of the enclosure unless it is necessary for the owner or keeper to obtain veterinary care for the vicious dog or to comply with commands or directions of the dog officer with respect to the vicious dog, or to comply with the provisions of § 4-13.1-3(a)(1) or (a)(2). In this event, the vicious dog shall be securely muzzled and restrained with a leash or chain having a minimum tensile strength of three hundred (300) pounds and not exceeding three feet (3′) in length, and shall be under the direct control and supervision of the owner or keeper of the vicious dog.
History of Section.
P.L. 1985, ch. 400, § 1; P.L. 2004, ch. 365, § 1; P.L. 2004, ch. 374, § 1.
R.I. Gen. Laws § 4-13.1-7
§ 4-13.1-7. Action for damages — Destruction of offending vicious dog.
If any dog declared vicious under § 4-13.1-11, when unprovoked, kills or wounds, or assists in killing or wounding, any domestic animal, belonging to or in the possession of any person, or, when unprovoked, attacks, assaults, bites, or otherwise injures any human being or assists in attacking, assaulting, biting or otherwise injuring any human being while out of or within the enclosure of the owner or keeper of the vicious dog, or while otherwise on or off the property of the owner or keeper whether or not the vicious dog was on a leash and securely muzzled or whether the vicious dog escaped without fault of the owner or keeper, the owner or keeper of the dog may be liable to the person aggrieved for all damage sustained, to be recovered in a civil action, with costs of suit. It is rebuttably presumed as a matter of law that the owning, keeping, or harboring of a dog that has been declared vicious in violation of this chapter is a nuisance. It shall not be necessary, in order to sustain any action, to prove that the owner or keeper of a dog that has been declared vicious knew that the dog that has been declared vicious possessed the propensity to cause this damage or that the dog had a vicious nature.
History of Section.
P.L. 1985, ch. 400, § 1; P.L. 1986, ch. 429, § 1; P.L. 1998, ch. 274, § 1; P.L. 2004, ch. 365, § 1; P.L. 2004, ch. 374, § 1.