TexasCHLforum.com

jnichols2 wrote: My dog is not property, she's family.

According to the state of Texas, she's property and is valued as such, unfortunately. Texas is a crappy state to be a pet.

I'm with you though. I've reached into 3 fights. Two of those resulted in emergency room visits. I used to think that it was cheaper out of pocket to stitch me up than it was to stitch the dog up, but the last incident had me convinced that I might loose a finger.. I'll get in the middle now *before* it starts. After it's started, that's going to be the next tough call.

cb100rider wrote: According to the state of Texas, she's property and is valued as such, unfortunately. Texas is a crappy state to be a pet.

My reply was in the spirit of answering a moral question. But legal questions have answers too.

In a home attack, Texas does allow me to protect my property.

I made an animal attack report on the pit bull. I correctly stated the pit bull first attempted to attack my dog, but turned to attack me when I tried to prevent it. The policeman I discussed it with urged me to get a CHL for protection. Then he told me that if I ever had to fire my gun during a dog attack off my property to remember if the dog attacked ME it was self defense.

Luckily, in my case, there was no "fight" to reach into, or any injuries. When he started the attack on me, I snarled and rushed at him instead of backing up. I'm not sure exactly what he thought I was, but he stopped and backed off. He followed me for two blocks, but kept his distance. I guess I bluffed him good. Had I backed up or ran, it would have been different. Had I been armed, it would have been a justified shoot.

By the way, my dad taught me to never put my hands into a dog fight. A well placed kick is much safer and effective. I have done that, it works.

I voted no due to the simple fact that since I'm just a blue-collar type, I cannot afford to fight a legal system that would attempt its best to incarcerate me for defending my property. The sociopolitical system in this nation places a higher value on the life of a thief than it does on the hours of my life that the thief would take away from me if they mis-appropriate my property. Even though I turned hours of my life into a monetary value by working to acquire said property, hours that I will never get back, those hours are deemed less valuable than the hours of life of a thief. That galls me to no end, but it is what it is.

jnichols2 wrote: My reply was in the spirit of answering a moral question. But legal questions have answers too.

I know.. It's more a commentary on the crappy "legal" situation of being a pet in Texas than a commentary on your post.

jnichols2 wrote: In a home attack, Texas does allow me to protect my property.

That brings up an interesting point. What rights do we have to protect our property away from the castle?
The closest I've come to displaying and possibly using a firearm is a pitbull on a public road walking with my dog. Luckily he wasn't people aggressive, just dog aggressive and getting between them shut it down.

jnichols2 wrote: I made an animal attack report on the pit bull. I correctly stated the pit bull first attempted to attack my dog, but turned to attack me when I tried to prevent it. The policeman I discussed it with urged me to get a CHL for protection. Then he told me that if I ever had to fire my gun during a dog attack off my property to remember if the dog attacked ME it was self defense.

I had a similar situation. My dog was leashed, I was in my yard, and my dog got into it was a roaming pit bull. My dog definitely bit first.
I reached in to break it up and it didn't go so well for me. It did get broken up though.
I leashed the pitbull, walked around the neighborhood (bleeding) until someone recognized it and I dropped it off. Apparently the kids let the dog out.
I didn't report it for two reasons:
1) My dog started it. (even though he was leashed on my property)
2) I know what would happen to the pitbull, that seemed to be an otherwise well mannered dog in terms of people interaction.

jnichols2 wrote: By the way, my dad taught me to never put my hands into a dog fight. A well placed kick is much safer and effective. I have done that, it works.

I was taught the same thing, but with softer mouthed dogs. I have not found kicking to be effective with German Shepherds. I'm rethinking my strategy.

I had a similar situation. My dog was leashed, I was in my yard, and my dog got into it was a roaming pit bull. My dog definitely bit first.
I reached in to break it up and it didn't go so well for me. It did get broken up though.
I leashed the pitbull, walked around the neighborhood (bleeding) until someone recognized it and I dropped it off. Apparently the kids let the dog out.
I didn't report it for two reasons:
1) My dog started it. (even though he was leashed on my property)
2) I know what would happen to the pitbull, that seemed to be an otherwise well mannered dog in terms of people interaction.

The one I dealt with was quite different. He weighed 90-100 pounds. Built like a fire plug with no neck.
He attacked silently from behind. When I blocked him he whirled and rushed me without a sound.
His intent was to kill, not merely fight. (including me) My Yorkie weighs 6.5 pounds.
A neighbor said someone about a mile away has three PBs raised for fighting.

We have several "rowdy" dogs in the neighborhood. It's easy to settle them down.
This one was dangerous.

That's a scary one...

What's scary is that the 5 largest cities in Texas are liberal.....Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, El Paso and of course Austin all voted for Obama.
Demographics plays a huge part when it comes to defending your rights against a rabid district attorney and a gun hating jury.
If you want to shoot someone without impunity...become a cop.

Otto wrote:What's scary is that the 5 largest cities in Texas are liberal.....Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, El Paso and of course Austin all voted for Obama.
Demographics plays a huge part when it comes to defending your rights against a rabid district attorney and a gun hating jury.
If you want to shoot someone without impunity...become a cop.

I have already posted my answer but I need to add to that. I am fortunate enough to be able to afford legal assistance if I ever had to shoot someone and again would only do so if myself or my family were in danger.

The aspect that I have not seen here is the mental factor. Could you live with yourself for killing a 14 year old kid for stealing your hubcaps or a piece of yard art. I don't think I could. There are grown men that have come back from almost every war we have been in that are having mental anguish over someone they had to kill, even though they were defending themselves. I know a couple of LEO's that have had to shoot someone in the line of duty and they had a hard time dealing with it. It is a traumatic experience to kill someone, even if it is justified. There are some that it does not affect, but I would offer to say those people are not "programmed" the way most of us are.

But, as a father and a grandfather, don't put my family in harms way or you will not like the outcome.

RPBrown wrote:I have already posted my answer but I need to add to that. I am fortunate enough to be able to afford legal assistance if I ever had to shoot someone and again would only do so if myself or my family were in danger.

The aspect that I have not seen here is the mental factor. Could you live with yourself for killing a 14 year old kid for stealing your hubcaps or a piece of yard art. I don't think I could. There are grown men that have come back from almost every war we have been in that are having mental anguish over someone they had to kill, even though they were defending themselves. I know a couple of LEO's that have had to shoot someone in the line of duty and they had a hard time dealing with it. It is a traumatic experience to kill someone, even if it is justified. There are some that it does not affect, but I would offer to say those people are not "programmed" the way most of us are.

But, as a father and a grandfather, don't put my family in harms way or you will not like the outcome.

Well said RPBrown!

RPBrown wrote:I have already posted my answer but I need to add to that. I am fortunate enough to be able to afford legal assistance if I ever had to shoot someone and again would only do so if myself or my family were in danger.

The aspect that I have not seen here is the mental factor. Could you live with yourself for killing a 14 year old kid for stealing your hubcaps or a piece of yard art. I don't think I could. There are grown men that have come back from almost every war we have been in that are having mental anguish over someone they had to kill, even though they were defending themselves. I know a couple of LEO's that have had to shoot someone in the line of duty and they had a hard time dealing with it. It is a traumatic experience to kill someone, even if it is justified. There are some that it does not affect, but I would offer to say those people are not "programmed" the way most of us are.

But, as a father and a grandfather, don't put my family in harms way or you will not like the outcome.

Is it the issue of the criminals age or the crime itself? If a 14 year old was trying to kill you would that be OK? I hope nobody would use their weapon against anyone for a minor crime but certainly a teenager can kill you just like an adult can. Ask the Australian college student in Oklahoma ( ask his family) what teenagers can do just because they were bored. I personally could live with it vs the alternative of being dead.

I don't think many people on this forum, even the more liberal ones are indicating that they'd lay down arms with someone actively trying to kill them.
I see a lot of "a thief is a thief" and "they get what they deserve" if they're killed stealing...
Then I think back to quite a few people that I've known that did stupid things between being a kid and an adult. None of which went on to be career criminals.
Everyone gets to make their own decision. Clearly it's not black and white.

cb1000rider wrote:I don't think many people on this forum, even the more liberal ones are indicating that they'd lay down arms with someone actively trying to kill them.
I see a lot of "a thief is a thief" and "they get what they deserve" if they're killed stealing...
Then I think back to quite a few people that I've known that did stupid things between being a kid and an adult. None of which went on to be career criminals.
Everyone gets to make their own decision. Clearly it's not black and white.

There is a world of difference between someone stealing something to feed their family and someone stealing something because they want money to buy new b-ball shoes, or an X-Box, or some other non-essential item. I'd guess that of the theft we see in the USA, very little of it falls in the first category.

K.Mooneyham wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:I don't think many people on this forum, even the more liberal ones are indicating that they'd lay down arms with someone actively trying to kill them.
I see a lot of "a thief is a thief" and "they get what they deserve" if they're killed stealing...
Then I think back to quite a few people that I've known that did stupid things between being a kid and an adult. None of which went on to be career criminals.
Everyone gets to make their own decision. Clearly it's not black and white.

There is a world of difference between someone stealing something to feed their family and someone stealing something because they want money to buy new b-ball shoes, or an X-Box, or some other non-essential item. I'd guess that of the theft we see in the USA, very little of it falls in the first category.

I have offered to buy food for many people who claimed to be hungry only to be turned down. Speaking from experience working with inner city ministries in New Orleans in the late 70's and early 80s, people living in the projects on food stamps ate better than my family did.
We would give them rides to the grocery store and they would come out with steaks. If we were lucky they would give us one or two for the ride. In this day and age of government cheese (I mean steak) and the work done by the local churches, the only way families go hungry is if the parents are trading everything they get their hands on for drugs or they are simply neglecting their children.

rotor wrote:

RPBrown wrote:I have already posted my answer but I need to add to that. I am fortunate enough to be able to afford legal assistance if I ever had to shoot someone and again would only do so if myself or my family were in danger.

The aspect that I have not seen here is the mental factor. Could you live with yourself for killing a 14 year old kid for stealing your hubcaps or a piece of yard art. I don't think I could. There are grown men that have come back from almost every war we have been in that are having mental anguish over someone they had to kill, even though they were defending themselves. I know a couple of LEO's that have had to shoot someone in the line of duty and they had a hard time dealing with it. It is a traumatic experience to kill someone, even if it is justified. There are some that it does not affect, but I would offer to say those people are not "programmed" the way most of us are.

But, as a father and a grandfather, don't put my family in harms way or you will not like the outcome.

Is it the issue of the criminals age or the crime itself? If a 14 year old was trying to kill you would that be OK? I hope nobody would use their weapon against anyone for a minor crime but certainly a teenager can kill you just like an adult can. Ask the Australian college student in Oklahoma ( ask his family) what teenagers can do just because they were bored. I personally could live with it vs the alternative of being dead.

Then obviously you did not read my first post nor the first and last lines of this post.