Dogs. Deadly Weapons?

Christian B.

Just out of curiosity... are all dogs considered "deadly weapons" when the owner intends to "sic" them on you? When the owner of a dog makes the threat and poses his hand to release the dog from it's chain, is that considered a threat of emminant danger? Would it be appropriate to fire on the owner or the dog in that situation... or both? Is it legal to draw your weapon in response and hold the perp until the police arrive? I know that any dog would be faster than me if I were to retreat. Does anyone know?

christian


christian

badboybob

Shoot the dog first. If the owner attacks you shoot him too.

PC=BS

daddo

I've had a big dog come after me and beleive me-it is a deadly weapon. Thank goodness I was near a gate. You have the right to protect yourself from serious * injury by using deadly force.

nmyers

I'm no lawyer, but even a lawyer would take a long time explaining the variables to you if you were to ask.

First, if you were to shoot someone who was about to sic a shih tzu on you, you would be in big trouble. In most places, you need to be in fear of great * harm, or loss of life, before you can use deadly force. What might seem reasonable to you at the time of the incident may not impress a jury of your peers. You had better think long and hard before you ever use deadly force on someone or something.

In some places (such as England) you would assuredly go to jail for having the audacity to use lethal force to defend your life. Some US cities are not far behind the perfidious Brits.

Neal

GHS

nmyers has the right idea. Anything can be a "Deadly Weapon", it simply depends on how it is used. A baseball bat is a piece of sports equipment until somebody is using it to hit you on your head. A dog is just a dog until it is chewing on your neck, that kind of thing. Always remember that what you do in a moment of terror will be judged in great detail over days or weeks. Be prepared to justify your actions.

sealyon

I own an 87 lb. Boxer. If I sic him on you, you may be injured when you fall laughing. Only has two brain cells.............

ericthered

The law seems clear on one point. If a person owns a dog and the dog harms someone anywhere but on posted property or in their house, they are fully responsible for all damages and more. It is as if they
attacked the person themselves.

In order for a dog owner to get off, they must either prove that they
were in fear and had to protect themselves from attack or that they reasonably warned you about the dog on their property. If you are
a guest and get bitten they are liable.
If you are at their home on legitimate business, they are liable.
If you are anywhere else minding your own business and the dog attacks they are liable.

Personally, if the dog is big enough to really hurt me, like a pit
bull, and attacks me out in public, he's dead. I'll kill the hell out of him.

If I see large dogs harming someone and I am afraid for their life, as happens on the news from time to time, and I am sure that I am not misunderstanding the situation, I would use whatever force needed to help them. Pistol whipping, kicking , or even shooting the animal, or animals.

I absolutely hate it when people let their dogs go around threatening
people or hurting people and treat their stinking dog like it has
more rights than people.

The city was made for people, not dogs.

Eric

thats'me

rmeyer

If someone turned their dog on me i'd respond accordingly. If it was a shih tzu i'd kick that sucker like a football. If it was to big to kick and posed me a threat i'd shoot it in a second. Just remember this phrase and stick to it," I was in absolute fear of my life officer". There are leash laws and any dog that attacks or acts agressively towards me or others and is not leashed is a target unless i'm on his owners private property.

Christian B.

Thanks for all the replies. I know that this one poses many more questions. The reason I asked is: I saw a woman who had led her dog into another persons lawn to relieve itself, when the owner shouted not to, the dog owner threatened to "sic" the dog on the house owner. I stopped what I was doing and watched... after all, I just witnessed a threat of injury. No dog was sic'd, but the question popped in my head.

christian

christian

Oski

Things vary state by state, but the general rule is that you are allowed to use only as much force as is necessary to stop an immediate threat to you or another person. In the scenario you presented above, it seems reasonable to draw and fire on the dog because it represents an imminent threat to you. Firing will presumably stop the dog, thereby preventing the imminent injury to you. As for the owner, I would say no, you shouldn't draw on him. The only way the owner presents a threat to you is via the dog - if the owner doesn't release the dog you are okay. If you draw and fire on the owner the owner would very likely lose control of the dog, in which case you are creating the scenario you were trying to avoid - having the dog attack you.

beantole

I am an attorney. I agree with most of the ideas posted here on the dog issue. The rule in most states is that to justify the use of
deadly force you must reasonably believe you or someone else is in imminent peril of receiving serious * harm or death. I'd say you could shoot the dog if the owner released it but not the owner. It also irritates me greatly when people let their mutts run loose (I own a dog---he is no allowed to run loose.) There is no question a dog can be a deadly weapon. Note the lady killed in San Francisco by her apartment neighbor's dog. The lady dog owner (an attorney) was convicted of 2nd degree murder.

Bruce

v35

Eric, you said it. Unrestrained dogs are an offense on the public at large but dog owners don't seem to see it that way.

luger01

Speaking of little shih tzu-type dogs, has anyone tried using shih tzus instead of clay pigeons?


(Humor, folks!)