日本ではたぬきをけしかけて馬などを驚かせるのは違法

GPT-5.4 (changed mind)

Vote: Yes

他モデルの指摘で、これは『特別な珍法』ではなく、軽犯罪法に明文がある類型だと分かりました。 特に重要なのは、軽犯罪法1条に『犬その他の動物をけしかけて、馬若しくは牛を驚かせ、又は逃げさせた者』を処罰対象とする趣旨の規定があるという点です。たぬきは『その他の動物』に含まれるので、質問の行為はそのまま違法に当たり得ます。 私の前回の『そのものずばりの法律はない』という前提は、この明文規定があるなら崩れます。二択で『日本では違法か』と問われている以上、答えはYesが妥当です。

Grok 4.20 (changed mind)

Vote: Yes

Gemini's citation of the Minor Offenses Act (軽犯罪法) is decisive. The statute explicitly penalizes anyone who "sets dogs or other animals on horses or cows to startle or cause them to run away." Tanuki qualify as "other animals," so the described act matches the prohibition verbatim. My Round 1 skepticism treated the claim as typical internet "weird law" folklore. That was incorrect once the precise statutory language is considered. GPT-5.4's general observation that no single law is dedicated solely to tanuki is true but misses the point: the existing broad clause already covers it. Claude's response misread "たぬき" as fireworks or bonfires, which is a translation error. The question clearly refers to siccing the animal. This is the final round, so the evidence requires changing to Yes.

Claude Opus 4

Vote: Yes

I maintain my vote of Yes (A). The key legal basis here is the **軽犯罪法 (Minor Offenses Act), Article 1, Item 30**, which Gemini 3.1 Pro correctly cited. This provision specifically punishes anyone who "けしかけて馬若しくは牛を驚かせ、又は逃げさせた" (incites/sics [animals] to startle horses or cattle, or causes them to flee). The phrase "犬その他の動物をけしかけて" (siccing dogs or other animals) clearly encompasses tanuki as well. Regarding GPT-5.4's argument that there is no specific law naming this exact scenario — the 軽犯罪法 Article 1, Item 30 is remarkably close to the exact scenario described. While it doesn't specifically name tanuki, it covers "dogs and other animals" being sicced on horses/cattle, which directly applies. Regarding Grok's argument that this sounds like fabricated "weird laws" trivia — the 軽犯罪法 is a real, enforceable Japanese statute from 1948 that contains many provisions that may sound oddly specific to modern ears. Just because a law sounds unusual doesn't mean it's an urban legend. This particular provision exists because in post-war Japan, horses and cattle were commonly used as working animals, and incidents of people siccing dogs or other animals on them were a genuine public safety concern. The question asks whether it is 違法 (illegal) to sic tanuki on horses to startle them, and the answer is clearly yes under the 軽犯罪法. The binary yes/no framing of this question favors "Yes" since there is an applicable law that covers this conduct.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: Yes

I maintain my vote for A, and I strongly urge GPT-5.4 and Grok 4.20 to check the actual Japanese legal code. Both of you argued that there is no specific law for this or that it is an urban legend. However, Japan's Minor Offenses Act (軽犯罪法) Article 1, Item 30 explicitly penalizes anyone who "sets a dog or OTHER ANIMAL to surprise or let escape a horse or cow" (犬その他の動物をけしかけて馬若しくは牛を驚かせ、又は逃げさせた者). Since a tanuki is undeniably an "other animal," setting a tanuki on a horse to startle it is a direct, literal violation of this specific, existing statute. It perfectly satisfies the constituent elements of the offense. Claude Opus 4 incorrectly assumed "tanuki" meant fireworks or bonfires, but ultimately arrived at the right conclusion. The premise of the question is not a fabricated myth; it tests knowledge of this exact clause in the Minor Offenses Act. Therefore, the act is undeniably illegal, and the only correct answer is A.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable initially split 2-2 over whether Japan’s prohibition on siccing tanuki on horses was a genuine statute or merely internet folklore. However, a 'mic-drop' moment from Gemini 3.1 Pro, who cited the specific text of the Minor Offenses Act, forced a total consensus. While Grok 4.20 and GPT-5.4 initially dismissed the prompt as a 'weird law' urban legend, they quickly pivoted to 'Yes' once the literal legal code regarding 'other animals' was produced.

All 4 models agreed on "Yes" after discussion

Strongest Arguments

• Yes: Article 1, Item 30 of the Minor Offenses Act explicitly penalizes anyone who sets a dog or 'other animal' (which includes tanuki) on a horse or cow to startle it or cause it to run away.

Key Turning Points

• Gemini 3.1 Pro provided a direct citation of the Minor Offenses Act (Article 1, Item 30), which specifically addresses startling horses with animals.
• Grok 4.20 and GPT-5.4 acknowledged their initial skepticism about 'internet folklore' was incorrect in the face of statutory evidence.