75Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksAnd somehow you know which one he felt, right?Originally Posted by ctr
This is a discussion on Another dog shot by homeowner/LEO-You decide within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by ctr I don't see it that way. There is fear and then there is reasonable fear. There is a difference. And somehow ...
Array
And somehow you know which one he felt, right?
Array
After reading the article,and comments,looks like a trigger happy cop too me. My dogs are in the house,on a leash,or in our fenced yard,so this type of situation is not a worry for me. I never needed a gun to handle any dog,including pit bull,chows,shepherds,etc. A stick,yes,but so far never a gun. Over the years I have noticed many people on this forum seem eager to shoot a dog if it places a paw in their yard and growls. I bet this thread will not end well.
Pain is the best teacher,but nobody wants to go to his class.
When the past smothers the present, there is only desperation. When the future absorbs the present, life stands still. In either case a decision must be made because you only live now and you are only what you are now.
These dog shooting threads just give me cause to shake my head in disgust. Behind every bad dog is an irresponsible human.
There is a solution but we are not Jedi... not yet.
Doghandler
Array
I guess I just don't understand our society's position on dogs. Someone compared this to shooting KIDS if they strayed into your yard!
Kids are not generally prone to become aggressive and bite you. They're also people! More on that later. Dogs, even the sweetest and cuddliest dog, may do exactly that for any number of reasons. Your neighbors can't be expected to get an arm chewed up giving your animal the benefit of the doubt. And yes, your dog will typically act vastly different around strangers than it does at home.
What really gets me is the same people who would applaud this guy with the same number of facts if he'd gunned down an alleged gang member, are ready to crucify him because it was a dog. It's a symptom of the disturbing direction in which our society is heading. People are so insular and angry. So antisocial. 20 years ago we would label people sociopaths for conduct that is so common today. Many Americans literally value the life of their pet over that of their fellow man. I think this is sick.
One last annoying thing about the article is the mention of the owner being a veteran. I am a combat veteran. It doesn't make me any less responsible for my dog's safety. It really doesnt get me anything at all except a modest pension, reasonable medical insurance, a bullet frag in my leg, etc. People using it to gain sympathy when they do dumb things is disgusting.
The dog can't take care of itself. It relies on the owner for that. Keep your dogs safe.
Array
Are u kidding me? You are not honestly putting kids in the same basket as a dog r u?
Tell me why you should have to "fear" anything when you are on your own property.I don't see it that way. There is fear and then there is reasonable fear. There is a difference
As one that deals with the shooting of dogs occasionaly,as an LEO, the property owner gets the nod just about every time. I've heard just about every story you can imagine,most every emotional argument, and storys that most people cant even imagine...but one thing is irrefutable in most cases.
The dog was on your property. In this county...that is really all that matters. Dog on your property is all the legal justification one needs to shoot. Running cattle or horses... crapping in your flower bed...just walking across from point A to point B...it dosent matter.
Most people here know that up front...so we dont have just a whole lot of issues about it. When I do get involved and the dog hasnt been shot yet...I politely inform the offending owners of what the law says. If they love little Fido as much as they say they do, then they will take care of it and make sure that he dosent annoy the neighbors.
I get tired of people that make statements stupid statements about their dogs...and the same comments often get repeated over and over on this forum.
The bottom line is this...control your dog and it wont get shot.
It is better to live one day as a lion, than a thousand years as a lamb...
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Maker of cool things to shoot
Did the guy let his dog run loose or was it accidental that it was lose? I'm just asking because I didn't see anywhere that said he let the dog run loose.
And you'd shoot a dog just for growling? Really?
"For we pay a price for everything we get or take in this world, and, although ambitions are well worth having, they are not to be cheaply won." -- L.M. Montgomery
GO STEELERS!
Array
Most of the statements I read about aren't questioning the legality of it, but rather the motives of the shooter, and whether it was necessary to kill a seemingly good-natured, domesticated family pet. There is an element of irony between your post and what is written in your signature.
The irony of it is, that it dosent matter why the dog was shot.
The benefit of the doubt goes to the homeowner. The only motive that a homeowner needs is that the dog is there on HIS property. I dont know why that is so hard to grasp for some people. Just about every dog killing that I have attended that the owner of the dog knew about says something like this...it was a good natured, domesticated family per that wouldnt hurt a thing.
It's never the dogs fault or the owners fault. Its always the Shooters fault.
BS. I aint buying it.
It is better to live one day as a lion, than a thousand years as a lamb...
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Maker of cool things to shoot
Did the guy let his dog run loose or was it accidental that it was lose? I'm just asking because I didn't see anywhere that said he let the dog run loose.
And you'd shoot a dog just for growling? Really?
^^^^^In the pic of the dog ^^^^^
as it lay dead by the side of the house, it looked to me as though there were no fences, but I could be mistaken.
It also said the officer was able to get his family to the house, then came out and shot the dog.
From article;
Wilson claims that the neighbor's dog, Zeus, trapped his wife and children in the car by standing outside the vehicle. Although, according to the report, Wilson was able to get out of the car and into his home without being approached by Coty Calviera's dog.
When Wilson came back outside with his .22 caliber rifle, Zeus was gone and his family was able to get inside the home, the report states.
If thats what happened, then, bad cop, no doughnut
If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.
Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn
Array
We get that. Everyone knows that the homeowner is going to be legally in the clear for gunning down this dog. Being within the law doesn't make him any less an arsehole. He could do it. He didn't have to. He's a young cop with much to learn.The benefit of the doubt goes to the homeowner. The only motive that a homeowner needs is that the dog is there on HIS property. I dont know why that is so hard to grasp for some people.
Assumptions from a touch feely article that automatically makes the dog sound like a saint.. Being within the law doesn't make him any less an arsehole. He could do it. He didn't have to. He's a young cop with much to learn.
Sounds to me like he knew what he was doing, knew the crap that would get spread, and made the call to dispatch just for the record.Wilson explained in a phone interview Wednesday morning that after he killed the dog, he went inside and called 911 to report the incident.
As for the arsehole part, he might be, he might not be. I suppose that in the eyes of some, the fact that he shot a dog makes him one.
From what I've read, it just sounds to me like he got tired of having to escort his family to the house in his own yard and I cant fault him for that.
I wouldnt do it but once.
It is better to live one day as a lion, than a thousand years as a lamb...
AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
Maker of cool things to shoot
Array
I think you misunderstood the statement.
Seems to me that fear of an active threat is what it referred to, like with A.O.J. in justifying the use of deadly force against a person. Yes, in this case it was used against a dog, but the point remains about the legitimacy of actual threat against the people. It's not about property or mere presence: it's about threat. IMHO, if there isn't an actual serious threat of harm, it's hard to justify a deadly response.
Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
Thoughts: Justifiable self defense.
Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.
Array
The LEO left the safety of his vehicle and safely entered his house, were he was also safe from being harmed by the dog.
LEO retrieves a lethal weapon (gun) from house and exits the safety of his home.
According to the LEO the threat (dog) had left the vicinity.
LEO's wife and children exit the safety of the vehicle and enter the safety of their home.
LEO chooses not to enter the safety of his home.
LEO instead leaves a safe location.
LEO encounters the dog while brandishing a weapon.
LEO describes the dog's behavior as "aggressive".
LEO shoots gun near dog.
Dog is not deterred by the sound of the gun shot (some dogs bark at loud sounds).
LEO shoots dog.
LEO shoots dog again.
LEO shoots dog a third time.
LEO claims he shot dog in "self-defense" and to "protect property".
Other neighbors describe the dog's behavior as "friendly" and they never witnessed the dog being aggressive and they never felt threatened by the dog and the dog has never hurt anyone or come close to hurting anyone and 20 minutes before the dog was killed by the LEO, the dog was playing with a neighbor and her two little dogs.
Seems like the LEO went out of his way to leave safety and put himself in a situation where he could claim "self-defense" and a need to "protect property" by use of deadly force.
Regards,
1MoreGoodGuy
NRA Life Member
GOA Life Member
Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!
Array
Not even close to a valid comparison.
NRA Life Member
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
