TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/07/nyreg ... d=all&_r=0

The above link is a New Yort Times article dated 10/7/2013.

It discusses the issue as to whether a dog is a weapon or not.

There's a variety of articles out there on this subject, but I just picked this one to
start the discussion.

SIA

I can see under extraordinary circumstances. I knew of a case where a man in Europe used a trained hyena to commit murders in the middle ages. Now police chasing a suspect through a yard and the dogs get riled up.......I don't see that.

IANAL but if I were looking at the case simply from a situation of common sense I would have to say what was the intent of the person who owned the dog? Where did the attack occur?

If the owner took the dog to a person's who they wanted to injure and said "sick-em Bruno". Yep Two people running through the dogs yard......Nope. If the owner drug a person they did not like to their yard and said "eat-em up Beast". Yep. A person break into another person's house and gets dog bit.......Nope

Gangs used Pit Bulls and Rottweilers extensively as weapons in the 90's. Throughout history, many different breeds of dogs have been used as weapons. Many of us here have often referred to our guns as tools. The same can be said of several different breeds of dogs. It just depends on how the tool is used. Some tools are more dangerous or effective or efficient than others.

I think that most logical people would reason that a dog can be used as a weapon. In the case of this article, officers were chasing a suspect, who turned his dog on them to slow them down. In this case, the dog was used as a weapon by the owner. A dog barking at someone through a fence should not be considered threatening with a deadly weapon, but in our Bizzaro world, I guess we are moving in that direction.

My dogs are part of my family, but they have a job also, to guard the property and look after the rest of the family. Anyone looking over my fence and complaining that I have dangerous weapons simply because I have guard dogs would have been ridiculed only a few years ago.

Prosecutors, it seems, sniff high and low for any way to aggravate the charges, and trying to reason that you had a deadly weapon because your dog woofed at someone is just another way to do that. Tack on the deadly weapon business when they go down to pick you up for whatever they came to get you for. The law is being manipulated and written to make it broader and broader with a giant swath of gray area that prosecutors and defense lawyers alike can exploit. I noticed these are New York cases, so just one more reason to avoid NY and pray common sense survives in Texas.

My ancient wiener dog's "emissions" could definitely be considered WMDs, or at least bunker busters able to clear a room in seven seconds.

To me, a weapon is an inanimate object or tool. I don't think a dog fits that mold the same. If it did, then we could accuse thousands of people daily of Open Carry of dogs.

MechAg94 wrote:To me, a weapon is an inanimate object or tool. I don't think a dog fits that mold the same. If it did, then we could accuse thousands of people daily of Open Carry of dogs.

Well, like I said, some dogs are more effective and efficient than others. It might be analogous to say that some dogs would be the equivalent of carrying an unloaded gun or just a part of a gun. Or even a bb-gun or cap gun in some cases. That could be the case for my sister's pugs, but not so much for my German Shepherd Dogs.

When I was very young, my uncle had a Rottweiler. My uncle was an undercover Houston PD officer in the auto-theft division, and he loved to race/work on all types of cars. He decided to open a junk yard to have a business that would last throughout the years. His Rottweiler's name was Timex - that dog could take a lickin and keep on tickin. He made that dog into a weapon to protect the junkyard at night. He never tortured the dog, but he trained him completely, to guard completely. If he told Timex 'on guard', there was no one who would escape an encounter with that dog. I think a dog can be trained to be a weapon. Just as they can be trained to open a door for the impaired, or become eyes for the blind. A dog trained to be a weapon will become just that.

TBM

Most people wear a belt everyday and I would not consider that a weapon. If they take if off and try to choke someone with it that all changes. Now it is being used as a weapon. I see a dog the same way. Just walking with your dog is fine but if you command it to attack someone it now can be considered a weapon.

I guess to me a dog is a pet, not a weapon. You are responsible for the actions of your pet, but a pet can run off and do stuff without your knowledge. Your gun isn't going to go tear down the fence and chew up your neighbor's flowers. A dog can do stuff like that. A dog might decide to attack someone without your knowledge or despite your trying to stop them. A gun or knife will not hurt someone without your purposeful action or negligence.

DocV wrote:[ Image ]

Isn't he holding thing backwards?

jmra wrote:

DocV wrote:[ Image ]

Isn't he holding thing backwards?

That would change the caption's spelling.

nightmare wrote:

jmra wrote:

DocV wrote:[ Image ]

Isn't he holding thing backwards?

That would change the caption's spelling.

Oh! Now I understand the caption!