03Lightningrocks wrote:I have two questions.
1) Why do the dogs have to be Rottweilers ? If they were poodles, would we make a point of the breed? I suppose Rottweiler or pit bull sounds more threatening. Unfortunately this stereo typing is causing dog discrimination. Yeah, I know, everyone is a dog expert and can spot a rotty from a mile away.
2) My second question is real simple and one that relates to many of the questions I see asked in this forum. What if it were illegal to shoot two dogs attacking your dog? Would you stand by and watch little scruffy get eaten?
I find questions of legality a humorous topic when it comes to self defense. Who gives a good Charlie's darn what the law says? If you are sure you are in danger and will lose your life or the life of your loved one or even your pet, would you let it happen because you are searching for the section of the law that says you can defend yourself or others?
Seriously folks! How about some common sense? Are you gonna watch a person get raped and just stand there while you search the code? Good lord almighty! When is someone going to finally say it in here. When under attack. You will KNOW IT! What you do about it decides whether or not you and yours survives another day. The technicalities of the law be darned!
Defend yourself and yours or pay the price! If you aren't sure what "technical legal" grounds you stand on, this likely means you are not under threat, or even worse, did something to create the situation yourself. THIS MEANS ITS TIME TO BACK OFF!
Instincts are natural for human survival. Why is it in modern society we are always being told to ignore our instincts in favor of intellect?
I said two rottweilers because well......... they WERE two rottweilers. Good god you sound like a liberal looking for a discrimination fight.
