Discussion in 'Strategies, Tactics and Training' started by Citadel99, Jul 30, 2019.
I do not think that that is unusual at all.
It's astounding to me. I tend to put human life above that of a chicken, goat, or puppy. The law, at least, in this case, does not. We won't solve it on this forum but why in the world is okay for me to shoot a dog that bit my chicken but not the dog that attacked my four year old?
Where does it say you are not allowed to shoot a mean dog (or coyote) to protect a human?
I suspect that when the law was written, human defense was taken for granted. Not like now, when every little thing is parsed by lawyers and your rights are few.
Strangely, in MN, the bastion of all things liberal, Statute DOES address this..
347.17 KILLING DOGS IN CERTAIN CASES.
Any person may kill any dog that the person knows is affected with the disease known as hydrophobia, or that may suddenly attack while the person is peacefully walking or riding and while being out of the enclosure of its owner or keeper, and may kill any dog found killing, wounding, or worrying any horses, cattle, sheep, lambs, or other domestic animals.
If they are not actually in attack mode,DO NOT SHOOT.
It could just be they are friendly and have a schmuck for an owner and he lets them out.
Call the law first,let them do an investigation.
And do any and all suggested to make your property dog proof [ mace & dog repellant ] .
Generally dogs are really gentle animals,and if not = yes I have had to put a few down when I was an LEO.
It was not the dogs fault it was not trained and raised well.
Horrible to see the photos of those beautiful children and know their lives were violently cut short.
Stupid for the animal shelter to have a drop-off fee IMO.
Years ago a woman who worked for me as office manager became a mother. When the baby was about 2 the woman's dog, with whom she had previously been inseparable, bit him on the face, just below one eye. She had the dog put down.
Try "wasp & hornet" spray, the kind that shoots a stream, not a "fog".
A new neighbor moved in recently and I have seen him walking this young pit. Even though it's less than a year old (~10 mths.), its head is already as big as a soccer ball ! We have talked and I have petted and scratched the dog and he is quite friendly. So is the owner but I'm more leery of him. The first time I saw him, he had on one of those multi-colored knit headgear like some Jamaican reggae artist with dreadlocks hanging out all over the place. He is an older man with some gray showing up in his beard so I'm reserving judgement for now and being polite and friendly to both.
Time to post this video again
A neighbor's two pugs have gone after me while I've been in my front yard. Spraying them with a hose does nothing. They just dodge the stream and continue with mock charges to a couple of feet from me while barking angrily and growling.
A few years ago I heard my goats raising a ruckus and went out to find two pits or Staffordshire type dogs with one of my goats by the throat. I yelled and they backed off. My son showed up with a Mini-14 and said "Kill 'em?" I told him to shoot near them and run them off, because if we killed them we'd likely never find out who owed us a vet bill. We saw the direction they took off in, called the vet, and the next morning I started going door to door. I found them a mile away. The guy said they were not his dogs, but he was caring for them while the owner was away. I told him that made him responsible and that he owed me $140, payable in 3 days, or the sheriff would get involved.
I warned him that the next time they got out the dogs would be quite legally killed. He payed me the next day.
Love dogs, not much of a cat lover. But hey, ya gotta have friends.
No, you used the garden hose wrong. You were supposed to use it like a whip to subdue the dogs.
Just kidding, of course.
I disagree with some of this. A stray dog does not have be in attack mode before I am going to shoot him on my property. All he needs to do is look suspicious, and not run away when I try to scare him off. By the time a dog is in attack mode, someone is going to get hurt and your ability to shoot the dog goes away.
I will make reasonable precautions to dog proof my property, but I do not have to take any and all precautions. It is my property, and the dog is on it.
It may not be the dogs fault that it was raised properly. I don't really care. If I shoot a dog, its because he is a threat, and his training or lack thereof is just not my concern. I don't like shooting dogs. I like dogs. Just like I like people. But if he is a threat to me, my family, or my livestock, he's gonna be shot.
I would make these suggestions to dog owners: Keep him on your property. If he strays onto other people's property, he may get shot. He is highly unlikely to get shot if you, as a responsible dog owner (you are responsible, right?) keep him on your own property.
Can't argue with this.
While I love dogs, we have chickens/turkeys/piglets and now kittens for our pole barn. Dogs roam due to their large territorial instinct (which is larger than most people's yards/acreages) and can go from calm to chase/kill mode in an instant. It IS the responsibility of dog owners to keep their dogs within their properties.
Our property is fenced (stock wire/T posts) and our 3 dogs do not leave our acreage as we trained them not to. They consider their job to protect the flock/herd/pack of our chickens/turkeys/piglets as they WILL DEFEND the flock/herd and the property and have killed everything that has entered our property.
We recently adopted two neutered feral kittens and have worked to bond with them (They are cutest, purring whenever they see us and lick us all over) and currently in the process of introducing them to our dogs who have tolerated chicks/chickens playing with them and protected hundreds of hatching chicks over the years. The hatched chicks are raised in clear bins in full view and access to dogs indoors and consider the dogs normal scenery as they grow into pullets/cockerels.
Once the dogs bond with kittens and consider them part of the pack (The mini piglets think they are dogs #4 and #5), the dogs will protect them as well and likely challenge any dog that may come around our property and pole barn, which will be kitten's home after they have finished bonding with us and dogs.
Thankfully, we have not seen any stray/loose dogs in recent months. Perhaps attaching notes to their collars has worked and they certainly have appreciated the free eggs that are readily shared with the neighbors. While I will protect our chickens/turkeys/piglets, it will break my heart to have to shoot any neighbor's dogs and will take proactive steps to prevent it.
Many jurisdictions have a veritable hop-scotch of regulations when it come to animals. Where I live, some laws pertain to wild animals of some sort, some to other kinds, and there are several that pertain to dogs. Some have to do with protecting livestock, and others, wirh protecting people.
One might be able to mount a successful defense against charges under one code section and be convicted under another.
It is a defense against charges injuring or destroying a dog if other has a reasonable apprehension (that has a legal meaning) of immediate injury to oneself or other humans.
But the burden of proof is on the defender.
Me? I'll do what is necessary. But I will try to stay out of court and off the prohibited persons list .
NOT SMART !! There was a news story I was reading a couple of days ago where a woman lost ALL FOUR of her limbs (both legs and both hands) because her DOG licked her and she had some small scratches. A bacteria that lives resident in the mouths of both dogs and cats got into those scratches and caused an infection that necessitated the removal of her legs above the knees and her hands above the wrists.
I live in the middle of nowhere. There is no dog pound here like you city boys have. If I wait til a dog has someone by the throat, its too late to do anything. If you don't want your dog shot, keep him on your on property.
Mail carriers in cities do not rely upon the dog pound to protect them.
No one would suggest that.
As I said, where I live, it is a defense against charges of injuring or destroying a dog if there is a basis for a reasonable apprehension (that has a legal meaning) of immediate injury to oneself or other humans. But one would have to present some kind of evidence to prevail in that defense.
Laws very greatly, both among jurisdictions and according to just what the circumstance are that lead to shootings.
It is a very good idea to know the laws in your area--not just the written code, but also the jury instructions and case law. Do not on what a sheriff may of told you, or what you may have hears about someone not being charged for something. You may not be so lucky.
By the way, you are unlikely be able to learn anything applicable from the average practicing attorney. Few even have any real knowledge of self defense law, which is a different, but much more common, subject.
That advice applies to many things-, and just the subject at hand.
I seriously doubt that one can lawfully destroy a dog, or any other property, simply because it is on your property. Find out what the laws are where your property is situated.
One who posts such a comment in a public forum, where it is permanent and readily retrievable, may create evidence that could later weaken, or even destroy, a legal defense.
That advice applies to many things, and not just the subject at hand.
In his blog post yesterday, Attorney Andrew Branca of the Law of Self Defense mentioned dogs as being among the subjects having to do with the defense of property that lead many people into trouble.
A few days ago, he addressed the case of a law enforcement officer necessarily and lawfully shooting a dog that was attacking him. He explained that the lways of self defense did not apply at all--that such principles as a necessity defense or the concept of competing harms come into play.
I recommend a premium subscription to the LoSD Blog, and watching the daily blog posts. They address actual, recent cases and the legal outcomes. On can learn a lot from them.
"In his blog post yesterday, Attorney Andrew Branca of the Law of Self Defense mentioned dogs as being among the subjects having to do with the defense of property that lead many people into trouble."
That is a great post. A few years back, I got out of my car with my son. Immediately we heard screaming. A German Shepard was attacking a young woman. I told my son, to get in the house and call police. I then ran to the attack and was about to get the dog off of the young woman, and told her to get in my house. She went into the bathroom, and they called for me. She had her pants pulled down and her inner thigh was flayed down to the bone. It was scary. Now here is he interesting thing. The dog belonged to a neighbor. I have approached the owner many times and complained that his dog was vicious and asked him to make sure it never got loose. Well this fool, went out of town for a few days. He hired this young lady to come over and take care of the dog. So the next day, she comes over, has a key and the dog attacked. Now in this case, you can hardly blame the dog. But for sure, you would have a great law suite to discuss.
Personally I have no use for any vicious dog and less use for a owner that has one.I do know the dog was put down, but I would have rather seen the owner get the same.
If you have a shillelagh or similar club, one hard smack on the bridge of their nose and they will go away. (Especially if you hit them hard enough to break it)
That's right, but then I was not talking about the dog simply being on the property. In this state, if a dog is a perceived to be a threat (ie, it is causing risk to humans or other animals), deadly force can be use (humanely) without incurring risk of civil liability and without violation of animal cruelty laws.
Again, the best strategy for dog owners is for them to be responsible and keep their dog on their own property. Its the only way to be certain your dog will stay safe. Having him collared is a good idea. Most people aren't going to shoot a collared dog, even if its acting a little wiley because they figure it is someone's pet.
Good. But your post was not at all clear on that, and a prosecutor could use it with great effect.
Do you know upon whom the burden of proof to support such a perception would fall?
Not sure, and not sure I care too much. Just like any other self defense situation, I would only use deadly force if no other alternative and there was risk of imminent injury or death. The only difference is that I would include risk of death to animals and livestock in the case of a wild dog.
To clarify a previous post, when I said suspicious looking, I am meaning that he is a threat. I am not really sure what I suspicious dog looks like, but I do know what a threatening dog looks like.
I am also talking mostly about wild dogs. If a dog is collared and appears to be a pet, thats a little bit different than a wild dog.
Separate names with a comma.