What is your view on Dogs?

Status
Not open for further replies.
jhenry it depends on the state. In Virginia a police animal is considered the same as a police officer and if you killed one the charge could easily be the same as if you killed a human police officer. In my home town the local city police had horses for certain activities. One night a drunk got smart with an officer and punched the horse. The drunk could not be charged with anything but being drunk in public and cruelty to animals at that time. That was taken care of in the General Assembly the following session. At home we now have dogs and cats. If someone were to try to physically harm any of them it would not be a good idea on their part. Our cats and dogs are family; they want and give love, they give their support when we are sick or not feeling well, they make great early warning systems. Have you ever seen a cat in a window when there is something there that should not be?
 
I completely understand the emotional attachment to a good dog. But in the eyes of the law a dog is not a person. If the bar is high to justify shooting a person who threatens your own life, the bar to justify shooting a person who threatens your dog's life is astronomically high.

I know there are some who would like to elevate dogs (or even all animals) to the same level as man but I fundamentally believe that doing so debases man.

Just my .02USD...
 
My dog passed away just two months ago but any person who would have ever harmed or tried to kill her may not live to regret it if I were anywhere close by at the time. That is just the way I feel (legally wrong or not)and if anyone feels different, that is fine. Dogs are better companions and friends than most people by far.
 
If someone was harming one of my dogs without good reason, I don't think I'd shoot to kill, but I'd send them away limping.

On second thought, if someone was big and bad enough to attack my DOGS they'd be a pretty large threat, because my DOGS aren't what you'd call lap dogs. They've got at least 150 lbs between the 2 of them, so I probably wouldn't have to shoot at all, maybe just go pull the DOGS off. :D
 
My wife and kids are my family. The dogs are animals we own.
They're higher up the ladder than the animals we raise for food, and they're higher than the cats we own to kill mice. But, when they die I'll feel sad for a couple days then I'll just buy new ones. These are not my first dogs, nor will they be my last.
I like them well enough, and I'd be very upset, but I don't think upset enough to kill a person over it.
That being said, I can't really think of a realistic situation where someone would be killing my dogs and I wouldn't feel that they were an immediate threat to me or my family.
 
A human is a human, . . . and a dog is a dog.

Someone harming my dog would get a serious warning, . . . but I could not kill a human being just for the sake of a dog.

Should that human turn on me or my human family, . . . he will be met with deadly force to stop the attack.

Many will disagree with that scenario, . . . but that is the one that will allow me to avoid prosecution, jail time, stiff fines, and the loss of just about all my finances and property in the state of Ohio.

A dog is not worth the rest of my life, . . . and the hearthache it would bring to my family.

May God bless,
Dwight
 
My dog has saved my wife on numerous occasions when she sleep walks, she warns us when anything out of the ordinary is going on outside. If someone has made entry to my home she will be on the attacker after having warned me. If she is outside she is with me on a leash, an attack on her out of my home would be an assault that I would retaliate against, an attack against her inside of my place means that someone has broken in. I wouldn't tolerate either.

 
My beagle is a family member. He would gladly go down fighting off hoards of invading rabbits or zombie steaks. He's useless for any other guard duties.
 
If someone was harming one of my dogs without good reason, I don't think I'd shoot to kill, but I'd send them away limping.
Click to expand...
When you shoot someone, it's using deadly force. Shooting someone in the leg can kill them just as quickly as a shot through the lung if the femoral artery is hit. If you shoot a person for harming one of your pets (in the absence of further justification) you will likely go to jail.
...would be an assault that I would retaliate against...
Click to expand...
The use of deadly force to "retaliate" is never legally justifed.
 
Yes, that was a poor choice of words. I would defend my dog and myself should a situation arise where I was forced to do so.

If criminals are doing 20 years for killing a police K9, why is it that I am not allowed to defend my own dog from said criminals?
 
If criminals are doing 20 years for killing a police K9, why is it that I am not allowed to defend my own dog from said criminals?
Click to expand...
There may be criminal penalties that can be assessed against a person who kills or injures your dog, but you are not authorized to administer them. Deadly force is not authorized as punishment for crimes, it is only authorized to prevent certain very serious violent crimes in limited circumstances.

You can defend your dog up to the point (using the resources) that the law in your area allows. I know of only one area in the U.S. where it MIGHT be justifiable to use deadly force to protect property (including pets) under very specific circumstances and it's not in CO.

I'm not picking on you, I just chose a couple of statements that seemed to stand out to respond to from amongst those that were clearly inconsistent with the law.
 
I know you weren't picking on me, but you have definitely highlighted the fact that laws and opinions certainly do not agree on this topic, and it certainly can be a sensitive topic at that.
 
If someone was willing to use lethal force against this particular dog, then he'd be willing to use lethal force against me. Everything else is just details.
Click to expand...

If someone draws a gun outside while my dog is on a leash being walked, I too am in eminent danger of being shot and will react with like force. If in my home, dog or no dog any attacker with a gun will be met with lethal force.

Hope that clears up the situation.
Jim
 
If someone was willing to use lethal force against this particular dog, then he'd be willing to use lethal force against me.
Click to expand...
To justify deadly force, you'd have to be able to convince a jury that a reasonable person in your place would legitimately be in fear of imminent danger of death or bodily injury.

If, as in one of Jim243's example, you were in your house and someone broke in and attacked/killed your dog, the combination of illegal entry to your house and aggressive action would probably make it reasonable to assume that once they disposed of the dog, you'd be next. If you could articulate that and the jury/grand jury/police agreed with you (which I suspect they would) then your actions would be upheld as legal.

On the other hand, if the dog is out in your back yard while you're in the house, and a neighbor kills it for barking, the use of deadly force to retaliate or punish the neighbor would be a felony crime.

What it comes down to is that killing or attacking the dog, in and of itself, would not be sufficient legal justification for the dog's owner to use deadly force against the dog's assailant.

That would be true nearly everywhere. There may be one area in the U.S. where a person (unwisely) might be able to legally justify shooting to protect the dog using property protection rules assuming all the criteria of the law is met.

So additional circumstances of the situation may combine with the attack on the dog to warrant a deadly force response, but in my opinion, a critical component for any such set of circumstances would be that you or a family member were in very close proximity to the dog when the attack took place. So close that a reasonable person would assume that the attack was not just directed at the dog but was an attack against both the dog and the person.

Or, if you want to look at it from the other side--if the circumstances warrant the use of deadly force in defense of you or a family member then deadly force would be justified. In other words, for the most part, the fact that the dog was attacked or killed would be incidental to an imminent attack on you or a family member and it would be an imminent attack on a human (you or a family member) that would actually provide justification for a deadly force response.
 
Family member, with out a doubt. They are there to warn the bad guys to not break in :) They would protect me and my wife with their lives;), I would do the same for them.
 
Responsible firearms ownership does, in most cases, mean following the law. We don't always like the law, but here on TFL, we do advocate for obeying it.

Just a reminder for those who may have forgotten. I think it may be getting time toward closing the thread.

pax
 
My dogs have been "family members", that being said, I think I'm done. I had to put my 16 year old Lab down on 9-11-13 to avoid her dying a slow painful death.

Regardless of what the law is, I would have a very difficult time restraining myself from doing bodily harm to anyone who was attacking/hurting my dog. not that I would shoot anyone over it, but I certainly would use equal force to protect my dog.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top