laws about defending your dog

Theophilus said:
If I remember right, I was told by way of the Tueller drill that if an intruder shows a knife on the other side of the living room (less than 21 ft away), then legally your life is in danger, b/c he can cross that distance in an instant.
Click to expand...
You may remember correctly that this is what you were told, but that is NOT what the Tueller drill was all about. There is no way the Tueller drill makes a legal, magic 21-foot free fire zone surrounding you. And the Tueller drill certainly said nothing about "intruders."

First, the Tueller drill was for uniformed police officers.

Second, while it was intended to demonstrate that an assailant within 21 feet could be a threat, it did NOT teach that opening fire was the correct (or legal) thing to do. An alternate response, for example, might be to step back a couple of paces to increase the distance -- or to draw your weapon and hold it at low ready to reduce your reaction time IF the assailant charges you.

ALL the Tueller drill was intended to do was to show that an armed adversary within 21-feet could be a threat. Do not try to make anything more out of it, except at your (legal) peril.
 
Last edited:
Hook686 said:
To add confusion to this issue ... my dog is a level three service dog, working to become level 4. I use him for vision, hearing and mobility assistance. This is what he is trained for. I figure his value to be about $30,000. While I would most likely survive without the dog, it would definitly lead to serious injury (doctors reason for recommending a service dog).

Does that change the outcome ?
Click to expand...
Nope. Your $30,000 dog is still "property."
 
Once a knife is produced I'm assuming that my life is in danger and will act accordingly. You are not shooting to protect the dog, you are shooting to protect yourself.
Click to expand...

This reflects my feelings on the matter. How do I know what the intention of the intruder is ?
 
Low-ready my rear-end. If there's an intruder in my house with a knife, the best he can hope for is that I only point the gun at his head. What happens from that point forward will be driven by how well he follows directions.
 
maestro pistolero said:
Low-ready my rear-end. If there's an intruder in my house with a knife, the best he can hope for is that I only point the gun at his head. What happens from that point forward will be driven by how well he follows directions.
Click to expand...
I was addressing a significant misunderstanding of the Tueller drill, not what to do when you find an armed intruder inside your home. In any state with any sort of castle doctrine law, an armed intruder inside your home is considered a threat and you are justified to use lethal force to defend yourself.

But that's because of castle doctrine law, NOT because of anything arising out of the Tueller drill -- which had nothing at all to do with us "civilians," or with intruders per se.
 
(a)"Mutt", (b)$30000 property, or (c) "LEO" dog, compare

the effects upon YOU, if you kill dog (a), prob. nada. Dog (b), you pay replacement cost as set by a judge. Dog (c), you mighty get shot in
response, because "the dog is a sworn officer of the law in pursuit of its duty". It happens.
 
Defend yourself legally while your dog is near you

You generally cannot use deadly force to protect objects or animals but if your dog is near you then defend yourself legally.
 
Shoot the intruder, defending my dog? Of course not. I'd shoot him while defending against a guy who seems to be trying to remove the last barrier (the dog) between himself and me and my lady.

Of course, if the dog ended up not getting knifed as a result of my defense against the intruder, so much the better.

And since I train to shoot to stop, the sooner the BG dropped the knife, the higher his survival odds would be. (As would the dog's.)

Although I can't say I disagree with WA's statement as far as the law goes, I can't say I agree with it as far as morality goes. Morally, child molesters and people who torture dogs deserve the same plane in hell, IMO.
 
I was thinking "what would Walker do?" Shoot the knife outta the guy's hand with a quick draw, hip shot, from his 1911?

I do not think shooting a person over a dog is good idea, and will land you in deep doo doo; shooting an intruder in your home is, under most every circumstance, within your rights.
 
We can't fairly take the dog out of the equation, because the entire question of this thread is about the dog.

In my house, by the time I get out there, he’ll probably have my dog hanging off his forearm. He can’t very well run at me with a dog on his arm, but what if he pulls a knife? Do I have to watch him kill my dog to get free before I can assume that my own life is at risk? Can I use deadly force to protect my dog inside my own house? I realize states can vary (I’m in Arkansas), but I’d like to figure this one out as part of my mental preparedness (and because I like my dog).
Click to expand...

We can have another discussion about an intruder in a house that doesn't have a dog, but that's for a separate discussion. This one IS about the dog.
 
OK so let me get this straight - many of you do think that in the event of an intruder flashing a knife, we are within legal (and moral) bounds to fire upon them - even if they are getting attacked by the family dog?
Because it is still a simple "intruder with a weapon" issue, and the presence of the dog does not legally change that.....would you agree?
 
Theophilus said:
OK so let me get this straight - many of you do think that in the event of an intruder flashing a knife, we are within legal (and moral) bounds to fire upon them - even if they are getting attacked by the family dog?
Because it is still a simple "intruder with a weapon" issue, and the presence of the dog does not legally change that.....would you agree?
Click to expand...
I agree -- legal to shoot an armed intruder. The dog does not change that.

Point: The dog may be hanging off the intruder's arm, but you do NOT know if the dog or the intruder will prevail. The intruder is an active, armed threat.

Point: Suppose you don't have a dog. Suppose your wife is standing beside you, and you are both armed with handguns. Would you propose that you should NOT shoot because your wife can take care of it?

My arguments in this discussion have been more oriented toward the original post. The question that was asked is if it's legal to shoot to protect the dog. My answer to the original question remains "No." A dog is property. Unless you live in Texas, you cannot legally use lethal force to protect property. To protect yourself against an active threat inside your own home? Yes.
 
What it amounts to I think is that even if in your heart you do protect your dog...you certainly do not speak of it as such. If an intruder is battling with your dog, if he wins it is reasonable to assume he would continue to be violent with the humans who are present so you do what you have to do without regard to the dog, but the humans. Officially speaking at least.
 
A long time ago - before I was a mod, I posted about a scenario where someone was setting fire to dogs. Happened in TX - some nut was tying poor dogs to fence posts and torching then. So I asked would you shoot and was it justified. It had some controversy.

The trick in it that was that setting anything on fire was arson and that might be a legit shoot. Capt. Charlie shut it down, IIRC. :D
 
There are a surprising number of threads here about dogs; either defending yourself from dogs (feral or otherwise), using dogs to defend yourself and now, defending the dog.
 
I agree with many. Intruder in my house with knife....heck with the dog -- he does not count. Just shoot straight so you don't hurt your dog.

Cops come...forget the dog. Intruder was after you. Dog just got in on the action....who cares?

Oh yeah....shoot the intruder good and make sure it sticks. That way only you and the dog are witnesses and the dog ain't talkin'. :D
 
OK so let me get this straight - many of you do think that in the event of an intruder flashing a knife, we are within legal (and moral) bounds to fire upon them - even if they are getting attacked by the family dog?
Because it is still a simple "intruder with a weapon" issue, and the presence of the dog does not legally change that.....would you agree?
Click to expand...

Yes, and in AZ, an intruder in my home is likely guilty of Burglary in the 1st or 2nd degree, being Armed Burglary or Burglary of an occupied structure, both of which are under the justifiable statute. Also we have Castle Doctrine, and a clarifying bill almost all the may through that spells it out in so many words -anyone in the home illegally is presumed to be a deadly threat. So, yes, what you are saying is perfectly correct, even if you didn't MEAN it that way.:p

Here is the left's version of what you should do in face of a knife carrier in your home...


911x4.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top