am i within my rights? the questions at the end.

[springmom]

Welcome to the High Road!

Go to www.packing.org and read the laws regarding deadly force for New Jersey. You've gotten some very good advice regarding the dog. Bring it inside. The dog will be safer. You'll be safer. Besides, outside dogs are more likely to be subject to other issues, including heartworm infestations, fleas, ticks, accidents, etc. Your dog deserves to be safe.

Springmom

 

[Frog48]

This guy has to be a troll... and his sentence structure and thought logic could use some work.

 

[Bazooka Joe71]

My question is the same as everyone elses....Why in the world is a professionally trained guard dog locked up outside?

Get that sucker in the house where he belongs. If he is in the house, more than likely you would never need that gun, because he'd take care of things himself.

But like a couple other people said, people coming into your house changes the dynamics drastically.

Hehe, Grant I was getting ready to tell you to save the insults until you're for sure he's a troll, but you beat me to it.

 

[Jim K]

A pit bull needs protection from people? Isn't it usually the other way around?

Jim

 

[atblis]

Yep

I voted yes that you are within your rights. However, that does not mean you will not be in a legal world of pain.

Unfortunately (or fortunately perhaps), my opinion is not the law.

I wouldn't go as far as to call the op a troll, but the post is a little strange.

 

[magsnubby]

Sounds like an anti troll(ing) for answers like "Hell yeah. Git yur self an AK47 an' blow them butt wads to crap."

 

[Aguila Blanca]

The general rule of thumb, applicable in pretty much every state, is that you are allow to use deadly force only when you or a third party is in imminent danger of grevious bodily harm or death. You may not shoot someone who is stealing your hubcaps or probably, your dog.

Except in Texas ... and then only at night.

I believe I am correct that Texas is the only state allowing the use of lethal force for the protection of property.

We've been over the ethical and legal issues related to lethal force use in the defense of property. The board consensus is that you are not ethically entitled to use lethal force to hold property that is not essential to sustaining your life and you are not legally allowed to use lethal force for the same situation.

I disagree. I don't believe there is any board consensus to that effect or anything similar. If you were to drive up and ask me, I'd say that the consensus here is overwhelmingly that ethically and morally it should be perfectly okay to shoot people who are stealing your property. I also think it's obvious that most of us accept the reality that the laws in general don't countenance such defense of property. So there is a large discrepancy between the law and the ethical/moral foundation for the law.

 

[Geno]

This thread has a feeling of an "anti" trying to get posts placed here about it's fine to kill a human being over a dog. The High Road Mods enforce a "No Blood-lust" policy. This seems too close to blood-lust for my likes.

I suggest that the moderators close this thread.

 

[Art Eatman]

It has pretty well run its course...

Art