Fired my pistol in SD tonight...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Never fire a warning shot.

Shoot to stop or kill the animal.

Discharging any firearm in any neighborhood can lead to a stray bullet killing a child or someone else.

You are very lucky the home owner has'nt called police and had you arrested.

It does'nt matter at all that I personally approve of what you did.

It is blatently illegal to fire a handgun in a neighborhood unless you are in imminent personal danger and every shot you take has to be justified soley to stop that deadly threat.

You are three times guilty of endangering the entire neighborhood you were in and in Northern Virginia,you would be arrested and jailed and your handgun would be taken away.

You would also likely never be able to own a handgun again.

Only fire your handgun when you are responding to a deadly threat and fire it directly at and into that deadly threat.

Also,if you were convicted of a felony endangerment of that neighborhood,it could affect your ability to get a job for the rest of your life.

All of this is why I am thinking very seriously of getting one of those bear pepper foam cans and wearing it everywhere I go.

Especially when I cannot legally carry.
 
Not the part about stealing...

.... the part about killing. Nice sarcasm, PeetzaKilla, but note the following:

"any dog when owner may be identified by means of a collar bearing sufficient information or some other form of positive identification"

Why else would the ability to identify the dog matter, in that paragraph?

I don't think they're saying it's ok to just go around killing collarless dogs in the neighborhood.

Obviously, the bolded portion in your post exempts self-defense.
 
Not the part about stealing...
.... the part about killing. Nice sarcasm, PeetzaKilla, but note the following:

"any dog when owner may be identified by means of a collar bearing sufficient information or some other form of positive identification"
Click to expand...

It wasn't sarcasm. It says "any person". It doesn't say "read the tags first" it says "identifiable". In other words, if the dog has a collar and tags. The law has other sections dealing with pounds and such and it uses the exact phraseology to indicate such. I'm no lawyer but "any person" seems self explanatory.
 
It says collar or other form of positive identification

That would include microchips and tattoos, since they are positive ID forms. These would apply at vet's offices, shelters, and pounds.

I looked up the statute you quoted, PK. It's from SC's animal control laws. Guess what: this part of that statute probably pertains to animal control destroying a dog without making reasonable attempts to find an owner.

Where should your sarcasm be directed now?
 
No one expects a "civilian" to be able to identify a dog using RF tags and there is NO mention of such, while "collar" is specifically mentioned.

As for the purpose of the law:

"Title 47. Animals, Livestock and Poultry. Chapter 3. Dogs and Other Domestic Pets."

No mention of shelters, animal control officers or other specifications.

Once again "any person"....

How is this even a disagreement? Tuttle8 asked for the law, I obliged.
 
Last edited:
It's from the section under "Registration of Dogs"

And my mood is just fine. However, I misread your meaning behind, "it wasn't sarcasm."

But your cite is from Article 9, Registration of Dogs.

Yes, it says any person. However, some of the language ties in with the subsection that addresses responsibilities of animal control officers. My guess is they wrote this statute as all-inclusive, to include both abuse and other types of killings of dogs.
 
Never fire a warning shot.

Shoot to stop or kill the animal.

Discharging any firearm in any neighborhood can lead to a stray bullet killing a child or someone else.

You are very lucky the home owner has'nt called police and had you arrested.

It does'nt matter at all that I personally approve of what you did.

It is blatently illegal to fire a handgun in a neighborhood unless you are in imminent personal danger and every shot you take has to be justified soley to stop that deadly threat.

You are three times guilty of endangering the entire neighborhood you were in and in Northern Virginia,you would be arrested and jailed and your handgun would be taken away.

You would also likely never be able to own a handgun again.

Only fire your handgun when you are responding to a deadly threat and fire it directly at and into that deadly threat.

Also,if you were convicted of a felony endangerment of that neighborhood,it could affect your ability to get a job for the rest of your life.

All of this is why I am thinking very seriously of getting one of those bear pepper foam cans and wearing it everywhere I go.

Especially when I cannot legally carry.
Click to expand...

Funny how the Sheriff Deputy who shoots with me in the back yard has never arrested me. Don't apply arcane laws that apply in your area, and the layout of your area, to mine. ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WHY I SHOT INTO THE DITCH BANK AND NOT SHOT THE DOGS IS BECAUSE ENGAGING THE DOGS WOULD'VE BEEN MORE DANGEROUS BECAUSE THEY WERE DIRECTLY BETWEEN ME AND A HOUSE.

You are three times guilty of endangering the entire neighborhood you were in and in Northern Virginia,you would be arrested and jailed and your handgun would be taken away.

You would also likely never be able to own a handgun again.
Click to expand...

Yes I'm quoting you again. You're very quick to try and scare me into thinking I'm going to jail when you don't even know where I'm from or the laws in my area. Excellent legal advice. I'll keep it in mind :rolleyes:
 
Good thread, but after 7 pages there's little left to be said that hasn't been said already. Since there are some signs that tempers are beginning to wear thin, and since the thread has pretty much run its course anyway, I'm closing now.

Thanks for the discussion everyone!

pax
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top