BergaminoCAV
Member
Isnt there a Make My Day law in some states where if some one threatens you on your property you can shoot them dead? I would think that term shhot dead might vary from state to state haha
Who would you use deadly force to protect?
- Thread starter Mandirigma
- Start date
- Status
And I agree with the poster who said the dog would die to defend you, don't you owe him the same.
no you don't because he is a dog and you are a human.
i'd really like to see this actual law that allows someone to use deadly force if someone is beating the shototer's horse.
no you don't because he is a dog and you are a human.
i'd really like to see this actual law that allows someone to use deadly force if someone is beating the shototer's horse.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
wva
1981 franklin
sunday afternoon guy shoots neighbor dead in driveway in front of 20 witnesses. dead guy had shot his dog day before outa "meaness" walkaway after investigation couldn't get him to trial.
if someone was attacking a stranger and i bailed i couldn't live with it. i regard it as getting them before they get to my kin.
1981 franklin
sunday afternoon guy shoots neighbor dead in driveway in front of 20 witnesses. dead guy had shot his dog day before outa "meaness" walkaway after investigation couldn't get him to trial.
if someone was attacking a stranger and i bailed i couldn't live with it. i regard it as getting them before they get to my kin.
lacoochee
Member
In so far as a pet goes...
My dogs guard my home, if they are dead it's because some son of a b... wants to kill me and my familiy...that's how I see it, they die that moment. In so far as the threat goes legally, it depends on how you look at it doesn't it? If you are merely about your business with a dog/pet on a leash and a stranger pulls a gun and he shoots or shoots at your dog wouldn't you assume you are next? Once that person pulled/brandishes a deadly weapon wouldn't the average person not even knowing at that point who the weapon is for assumed they are the target? If the average person believes that they were threatened with deadly harm would that not meet the legal definition of self-defense (at least in Florida)?
My dogs guard my home, if they are dead it's because some son of a b... wants to kill me and my familiy...that's how I see it, they die that moment. In so far as the threat goes legally, it depends on how you look at it doesn't it? If you are merely about your business with a dog/pet on a leash and a stranger pulls a gun and he shoots or shoots at your dog wouldn't you assume you are next? Once that person pulled/brandishes a deadly weapon wouldn't the average person not even knowing at that point who the weapon is for assumed they are the target? If the average person believes that they were threatened with deadly harm would that not meet the legal definition of self-defense (at least in Florida)?
Last edited:
M2 Carbine
member
Your logic is flawed.
Because deadly force can be used at the time the crime is being committed, that doesn't automatically make it a "capital crime".
For instance, aggravated kidnapping, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery aren't "capital crimes" but you can sure use deadly force to stop them.
I think our laws make a lot of sense.
Just don't be a BG and you probably won't get shot.
TimboKhan
Member
I take a hard line on this issue. I believe, quite strongly, that if you do not have the mindset to use deadly force, you shouldn't even bother with a defensive weapon. A point hammered in repeatedly to me while I was in the Marines is that there is no such thing as a "warning shot". As cold-hearted as this may sound, my mindset is that I will either not shoot at all or I will shoot to kill. period. Drawing the gun in and of itself is the warning, and I would hope that if it came down to that, drawing would be enough. If not, well, I am aiming center mass. If you are of the mindset that you will shoot them in the leg and hope for the best, I very much feel that you are not mentally prepared to defend yourself, your home or your family with a firearm. Now, that being said, I am not a violent or bloodthirsty person. I have no desire to kill anyone, and I really hope I will never have to do so again (combat experience, thus the "again"). I guess to sum things up, in my mind training to defend yourself isn't just about marksmanship and tactics. Neither of those will serve you particularly well if you haven't mentally conditioned yourself as well.
ronto
Member
TEXAS LAW
M2 Carbine,
I think YOUR logic is flawed. Your examples cite crimes against people NOT animals.
For example, if I steal your dogs bone (Robbery) then that means you can shoot me while the "crime" is being committed?
Killing someone that is THREATENING your dog with lethal force still makes no sense.
If I witnessed someone that actually killed my dog for no reason and I had a gun I don't know exactly what I would do but it's highly likely that would be the last dog they killed. To my mind, that's the right thing to do but I don't think the law would or SHOULD agree.
M2 Carbine,
I think YOUR logic is flawed. Your examples cite crimes against people NOT animals.
For example, if I steal your dogs bone (Robbery) then that means you can shoot me while the "crime" is being committed?
Killing someone that is THREATENING your dog with lethal force still makes no sense.
If I witnessed someone that actually killed my dog for no reason and I had a gun I don't know exactly what I would do but it's highly likely that would be the last dog they killed. To my mind, that's the right thing to do but I don't think the law would or SHOULD agree.
+1 for Stevelyn
He's right, you don't know who or what or why a stranger is doing X. The person with a pistol in hand, may have just taken out the bad guy who shot the clerk five seconds before you entered the store. Heck, he or she might even be an off-duty cop. Family only, or close friends who you know and are with (i.e. out for diner or movie).
Doc2005
He's right, you don't know who or what or why a stranger is doing X. The person with a pistol in hand, may have just taken out the bad guy who shot the clerk five seconds before you entered the store. Heck, he or she might even be an off-duty cop. Family only, or close friends who you know and are with (i.e. out for diner or movie).
Doc2005
Some of these responses are mind boggling. Let me rephrase that, some of these responses are nauseating. I would be willing to bet money that 90% of the posters in this thread have participated, outside of this thread, in one or more "self-defense scenario threads." In said threads, people puff their chests behind their keyboards and tell of how they would not hesitate to kill a human being who was placing them or their loved ones in danger. Yet now they are saying that they value human life more than that of an animal. You will never find a more loyal, faithful companion than an animal and you people would toss that aside for any human life - even one who doesn't deserve existance. Pure hypocracy, and I find it revolting. We have enough human overpopulation as is...
M2 Carbine
member
One of the recurring qualifiers, through out the thread, has been is that it is OBVIOUS that what you are seeing requires the use of deadly force by you. Then whether or not you act is your decision.
That is one reason that in the Texas statutes deadly force isn't allowed to be used to stop a kidnapping but is allowed in a aggravated kidnapping.
The difference being that the kidnapping (of a child) you witness could be an estranged parent and the child isn't in any real danger.
Deadly force is allowed in a "aggravated kidnapping" (when a weapon is used) is allowed for obvious reasons.
I haven't seen anyone here, who says that they would only protect their families, say they would pat a stranger on the back for doing the right thing, if he just stood by as their wife or children were killed.
Last edited:
Medusa
Member
Local law also allows to use deadly force to protect the strangers, but is pretty strict - the situation must be such that actually may need using a deadly force. Though, vocal threats and waving knives aren't considered as a threat of bodily harm 
:banghead: 
, not allowing the use of deadly force. But a LEO told me that pulling the gun on bastard is allowed, if presentation of gun stops the crime I wouldn't be in any legal hazzle, but if I pulled the gun and the BG still attacked I would be allowed to use it, using common sense and clear judgement, later I'd still must be ready to explain the situation and why I did find it nessesary to shoot the bastard
.
Otherwise mostly me&family, but also every other people, if situation is clear and I wouldn't be legally canned later. Saving somebody from mugging isn't worth leaving my wife and kid alone for years.
:banghead: , not allowing the use of deadly force. But a LEO told me that pulling the gun on bastard is allowed, if presentation of gun stops the crime I wouldn't be in any legal hazzle, but if I pulled the gun and the BG still attacked I would be allowed to use it, using common sense and clear judgement, later I'd still must be ready to explain the situation and why I did find it nessesary to shoot the bastard.
Otherwise mostly me&family, but also every other people, if situation is clear and I wouldn't be legally canned later. Saving somebody from mugging isn't worth leaving my wife and kid alone for years.
gulogulo1970
Member
I voted for Family, Freinds and Pets. I couldn't vote all just because you never know who is the bad guy is. I guess I'd have to vote, depends on the situation.
I would have to say that I too would use deadly force to stop someone harming my pets, they are family as well.
Well, there is one of my wife's dogs, I might let it slide just once.
I would have to say that I too would use deadly force to stop someone harming my pets, they are family as well.
Well, there is one of my wife's dogs, I might let it slide just once.
Lone_Gunman
Member
If you kill someone who killed your pet, you better hope I am not on your jury.
ronto
Member
TEXAS LAW
KD5NRH,
Thank you for posting the complete law. It looks like you could legally shoot someone ,even a minor, who steals your apples (CM) as long as it's night time.
Just wondering if you know if there are actually many justifyable homicides that occur under this law and any statistics that show a decrease in these types of crimes since it was enacted.
It appears it would not be a smart move to be a thief in Texas...but most criminals are not known for their high IQ.
KD5NRH,
Thank you for posting the complete law. It looks like you could legally shoot someone ,even a minor, who steals your apples (CM) as long as it's night time.
Just wondering if you know if there are actually many justifyable homicides that occur under this law and any statistics that show a decrease in these types of crimes since it was enacted.
It appears it would not be a smart move to be a thief in Texas...but most criminals are not known for their high IQ.
M2 Carbine
member
Some animals are quite valuable monetarily and could be looked at (I suppose) as valuable property.
The law says nothing about the value of the property and can be no more than what's in your wallet that you are using deadly force to protect.
I haven't heard of any cases where deadly force was used to protect a pet but I'm sure there are some. It would be interesting to know if the defense was to protect property, CM or what.
There are many cases of thieves being killed attempting to steal cars, caught in the middle of a robbery or burglary, etc.
I don't hear much about CM. Everyone knows that you don't go on someone's property and act up, especially at night, because it's very likely to get you shot .
A few years ago in Houston a guy was drunk and banging on a homeowners front and back door. The homeowner, fearing a home invasion, shot and killed the drunk through the back door. It was ruled a justifiable shooting.
Zach S
Member
First, myself and my family. No question there.
Friends, probably. I'd have to be in the situation before I could make that call. However most of my friends are considered family, friends that arent family are just co-workers. I kinda like the solitude.
My pets, yes, if they were in danger of another animal. I dont see myself using deadly force against a two-legged critter to protect my dogs, strictly for legality reasons.
Total strangers are a grey area.
Friends, probably. I'd have to be in the situation before I could make that call. However most of my friends are considered family, friends that arent family are just co-workers. I kinda like the solitude.
My pets, yes, if they were in danger of another animal. I dont see myself using deadly force against a two-legged critter to protect my dogs, strictly for legality reasons.
Total strangers are a grey area.
Nitrogen
Member
I voted "Myself, Family, and Friends", basically anyone that would risk jail for my safety, i'd risk jail for theirs.
Who Me? No I'm not kidding. If you have have an animal pet for a while do you look at it as something expendable? No you don't, you look the pet as a part of you family. If you don't then there's something really wrong with you upstairs. Animals have feelings too you know.
22-rimfire
Member
I second the You have got to be kidding, PETS? I believe extending the practice of protection with deadly force outside yourself and immediate family is a great way to be thrown into prison.
BoomBoom25
Member
I would use deadly force to protect my family and friends no matter what. I would say it depends for strangers and pets. I would use deadly force for instance to protect my pets if it were a wild animal or somthing of that nature attacking them. A stranger it all depends, it depends od the enviroment, whats going on at the time and what kind of threat the stranger is facing. If it were a sitiuation were my life could eventuallybe at risk then of course I would use deadly force. For anyone who truly beleives in using deadly force i suggest taking some kind of self defense course, Thunder Ranch by the way has a great one if you can find the time and money.
- Status
