TexasCHLforum.com

AEA wrote:I fired one shot at a pit in my yard on Saturday. He was stalking my GSD while she was on her chain doing her business.
He is known (to neighbors and Police) as a dangerous dog who has already attacked other pets and people in the neighborhood.

I called the Sheriff and informed them of the incident and even stated that I fired a shot to scare the dog away (which it did). No one even responded or contacted me.

Wienerdogtroy wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:You know these are dogs, not people, and I will state that if a dog poses a lethal threat to me or my family I will stop the threat by whatever means I have. That is not premeditation, it is a promise. I love dogs I really really do and it would break my heart to have to kill one because the owners did not keep it put away or train it well, but I would not have my children put in mortal peril. American Staffordshire Terriers (the proper name for pit bulls I think) have incredible bite strength and can be exceedingly territorial. When not trained properly they can be very dangerous dogs.

The only time I've drawn was when walking the dogs with the wife. Some loser had two pits off the leash and they came running up.

RoyGBiv wrote:

VoiceofReason wrote:I think the next time they show up, the problem may be solved permanently.

Keith B wrote: I wouldn't call it premeditated, I would call it being prepared.

I don't want to argue semantics here, but if I was a juror and you came to me with the first statement posted to an internet forum by Mr. Reason, it would give serious weight to the argument that Mr. Reason planned to kill the dogs the next time he saw them, regardless of whether the dogs, at the time of the shooting, posed an immediate threat to anyone.

We here all know that it is very unlikely that Mr. Reason actually intended to infer this, but I could make an easy argument against him if he's gonna give me this as ammunition.

Let me take it one small step further... Let's replace "dog" with "annoying neighbor".
Just changing a noun.... The quote would then become...

"I think the next time that annoying neighbor shows up, the problem may be solved permanently."

If that neighbor showed up, and was subsequently shot and killed by Mr. Reason, what would a jury say about that statement?

Just my read... I understand many would disagree. No problem with that. Peace.

Apologies for the offtopic...

Jumping Frog wrote:

mamabearCali wrote:You know these are dogs, not people, and I will state that if a dog poses a lethal threat to me or my family I will stop the threat by whatever means I have. That is not premeditation, it is a promise. I love dogs I really really do and it would break my heart to have to kill one because the owners did not keep it put away or train it well, but I would not have my children put in mortal peril. American Staffordshire Terriers (the proper name for pit bulls I think) have incredible bite strength and can be exceedingly territorial. When not trained properly they can be very dangerous dogs.

Mama, I agree with everything you said, except I see no need to qualify that as posing a "lethal threat". Any threat of harm is enough for me to put it down. There is no requirement for me to "take a bite" before defending myself. I do not need to waste time trying to evaluate whether the threat is deadly, serious, or merely minor. The OODA loop is quick with dogs and hesitating can get you bitten.

I also love dogs and am a long time dog owner. I used to show dogs in obedience trials many years ago. But I never confuse a dog with a human being when it comes to the value of a life.