I read somewhere that the Jersey bull was the most dangerous domesticated animal in the US of A. ( RE: deaths and injury )
What if I’m out walking my Holstein bull and someone gets scared and shoots it? Everyone with any smarts at all knows that this is a nice bull and not a dangerous one. So, what is the consensus about defense from Holstein bulls being walked without a leash?
*:: Maybe I have that backwards and it is the Holstein that is the dangerous one… Hmmmmmmm :: *
And did any of these attacks occur when the dog was not either a) part of a pack or b) on its own home territory?
I’ve had a lot of experience with a lot of different dogs, and I have never seen a lab that would become aggressive with a human when the lab was away from its home territory. For that matter, I grew up in the country where a lot of dogs roamed freely, and I never saw any such dog become aggressive with a human unless it was on its own home territory or part of a pack of dogs. I’ve never known any dog to wander into some person’s yard and attack that person.
Dogs who are entering someone else’s territory tend to be cautious and/or deferential.
But if anyone has a contrary example, I’ll listen.
With the exception of one time when it was 2 dogs, all of the animal maulings and deaths on my farm have been from single dogs. I have the collars to prove ownership, they were not feral just left to roam. Of 9 dead dogs, 1 was verifiable feral and was probably dumped by its owners.
The key word beinganimal maulings. Sure, a single dog will attack a chicken or a small animal. Predator’s instinct. I’m asking about aggression toward humans.
And nine dead dogs? Did you catch them all in the act of attacking your animals, or are you making pre-emptive strikes? (Not being snarky.)
Sounds like your neighbor wanted to get himself a free monitoring service to insure that he obeys every jot and tittle of all local HOA (if any), city, county, state, and federal laws and regulations. Feel free to oblige him, if you like.
Yes. You just did. As have other posters into this thread. This is a much larger issue than whether or not some whelp deserved a bb pellet in the rump.
The difference between a baby and a dog? Simple. Show me, cite me, babies that are bred killers or bred to attack with lethal or disabling results. A baby by definition has A) a miniscule amount of physical strength, B) the incapacity to react violently and with force, C) no taste for blood, and last and surely not least D) Human DNA.
A dog is a dog is a dog. A dog is a stick of furniture. I like my sofa. It’s comforting. On a cold night I snooze against it and it makes me warm.
It is not my son or my daughter. Any rational adult who is incapable of differentiating between a human infant and a canine is frightening to behold. Deeply frightening. In our society, one does not put the theoretical rights of an animal before the health and safety of a human being of any age or cognitive ability.
If, in the United States at least, you can provide cite where the rights of a canine supercede that of a human being, I am most eager to read said cite.
Otherwise, the taking of this position by any person is thoroughly amoral.
Cartooniverse
Sure. You want 'em in chronological order or what?
Age 5. German shepard . I am over 40 yards from its domicile. I am on a sidewalk in a normal street environment, not a gated or private community. It is let loose to run repeatedly. Snarls, growls, chases me down. I eventually escape by running up the hood of a car onto it’s roof. Dog jumps, growls and snarls nonstop until pulled away. Deep gores in paint job prove such. Not to mention the attack itself. Not on it’s own property or “territory”. Apparently, all sidewalk everywhere is dog territory? News to me.
Age 18. Attacked by lab/shepard mix. Both in it’s house, and outside on neutral territory.
The Pit Bull attack when I was about 25 was clearly on it’s territory- one of many used to guard a junk yard where I went to try to purchase something. Apparently, entering the Office to make a purchase constituted a clear violation of said animal’s territory, and so by the logic being offered around here, I had that one coming my way. ( Warning shot, tore through thick leather sleeve, sweatshirt, shirt, skin, into bone but did not rip arm off. Yeah, I know, poor poor Pit Bulls. Always with the bad rap… )
So, 2 out of 3. Not counting near misses that did not involve a bite mark. In each case, the dogs were not in a pack, but were alone.
I suppose you will demand cite for these or call me a liar, mmm? You asked. I answered. Attacks happen that fall outside of the parameters of " tend to be cautious or deferential ".
You know, I don’t think there’s a dog person here on these boards that has that problem. Yes, there are people who treat their dogs like their children; with the amount of responsibility and money involved in owning a dog, this is certainly understandable. You obviously have a problem with that, or are otherwise incapable of dealing with such an idea.
Nope Cartooniverse. Still don’t see an example of a dog running onto someone else’s property to attack them.
And for the record, I did not say that dogs are entitled to attack anyone who enters their territory (as you seem to imply I did).
What I did say (and still maintain) is that it’s an irrational fear for someone to think that a dog (and particularly an aging lab) is going to come running onto their property to attack them.
In reviewing your post, I’d guess your experiences with dogs may have instilled in you a deep and abiding dread of the animals, which may go beyond the norm and beyond what is reasonable. But that’s just a hunch.
Jeep’s Phoenix wrote
So, are you saying that when people say “a baby is the same as a dog”, their words should be ignored?
Are you saying that when people make parallels of shooting a dog to “shooting someone who comes to your door selling something” or to “shooting a teenager in his back yard”, that their words are to be ignored?
Words have meaning. When someone says “a dog is the same as a baby,” that means, well it means that a dog is the same as a baby. Which it’s not, in any rational persons mind.
If you say “the sky is green,” don’t be surprised when people with eyes dispute it.
Now, if those that made the dog=human connections want to retract their statements, that’s fine. But your retraction in their stead doesn’t count.
I just think you’re reading way too much into it, that’s all. Dispute it all you like.
Why not a cite for your argument that all dogs are “bred to kill or attack?”
I am sorry for your experience. But it is not an adequate representation of dogs in general. I have known dogs that were nasty, and I have known dogs that couldn’t even bite through my skin.
I wouldn’t pay too much attention to Cartooniverse raving “all dogs are killers”. Like he admits himself, he’s been singing those blues here for over 5 years.
Cartooniverse, I’m sorry that you’ve been attacked by dogs. The rest of us understand that your experience represents a tiny minority of abberent dogs.
Ok, we just interpret it differently. I understand ‘reasonable’ to mean
‘immanent and damn obvious’ and ‘bodily injury’ to mean much more than just a scratch.
I wonder if the law applies ‘innocent until proven guilty’ to animals. As in, I wouldn’t have to prove that Nick has always been a good dog. It would be up to him to prove that Nick has caused problems in the past.
Some people take things very literally. You have to be careful to say exactly what you mean very clearly and slowly. It can get exhausting. That’s why I’m not up to GD very often.
That’s definitely a plan. 
[momentary sidebar] Thanks, Cartooniverse! Hers was a great character in one of my all-time favorite movies. I just wish we could use avatars here. [/momentary sidebar]
I second that.
I am a dog lover. I think of them as my babies.
Unfortunately, the law makes a distinction between humans and dogs, so arguments along those lines are moot.
I think it’s despicable that someone (probably a teen or a loon, as someone has already said) shot your dog instead of just talking to you about whatever the problem was. You yourself said that you didn’t know whether the dog had been a problem for that neighbor before. That was telling.
I don’t think anyone here is saying that they think the dog deserved to be shot, but I don’t think it would have occured at all if the dog had not been on the neighbor’s lawn in the first place.
My mother was attacked by a dog as a child. To this day, she’s terrified of them. She doesn’t know much about dogs, either, because she has avoided them most of her life. So when a person like that sees a strange dog coming at them, they don’t know that your dog is friendly. They don’t know that it wouldn’t hurt a fly. They don’t know that it loves everyone. They just see a big scary dog coming at them and no one is doing anything to control/stop it. It’s not on a leash. That is a terrifying thing for a person who has been hurt by a dog. Just because you know the dog is friendly doesn’t mean it’s apparent to everyone else.
That said, I don’t think the person who shot your dog did it to protect him or herself from attack. It’s more likely that they are sick and tired of picking other people’s dog turds out of their yard. Incredibly inconsiderate of dog owners, city or country, but NOT a reason to shoot a dog. Ever.
It’s true, pets don’t get much respect in law.
The way to make the gunfuck really suffer is harp on to some law enforcement about your close proximity to the dog when the weapon was fired.
The recklessness discharge of a firearm in the vicinity of 2 people, one of whom was an infant.
There are tight controls on when you may discharge a firearm. Super tight when you are in the vicinity of other people. Narrow and clear when you can discharge it in the general direction of people.
This idiot yokel isn’t close to lawful. With a mild cajole the law will come down on his sorry ass like a ton of bricks. And a half.
Take photos, it’ll be fun. If you want to, or you might be satsified with things as they are. But it’s good to know what is within your reach, isn’t it now?
When a person says “a dog is a weapon” should he be ignored? Still kinda waiting around for the explanation for that.
It’s amazing how the general tone of this thread shifted so rapidly from “Someone shot your dog? That’s horrible!” to “Damn right yer dog got himself shot up and if ‘e ever gits near my prop’ty, I’ll blast a hole ‘im so wide I kin’ drive my pickup through it!”
I grew up in the suburbs and we always kept our dogs leashed when walking them—mainly for fear of them running into traffic, not because our neighbors were standing by cocking their pellet guns.
I just find it difficult to believe that if a dog wanders into your yard it’s okay to shoot. I’m not saying I don’t believe it, after reading this thread… I guess I just don’t want to believe it. I think that reasonable is a legal term, and that there’s a difference between a crazed slathering pit bull and a 12-year-old black Lab. (I seem to recall a thread on this site in which many Labrador retriever owners agreed that their dogs were so gentle and friendly that they made poor watchdogs—or at least were not cut out for confronting burglars in a hostile fashion.)
Also, I’ve known people whose pets managed to get out of the house or out of their own fenced in yard. It shouldn’t happen, but it does. Imagine that, instead of your neighbors calling to say they have your dog or they’ve spotted your dog, they call to say you’d better come pick up the dogs body ‘cause we shot it. Come on, that ain’t right. (Again, if you have a pit bull or a Doberman and you’ve trained them to be vicious, that’s different, but the typical family dog tends to be threatening only if it is threatened or sick or protecting its owners.)
And is it okay to shoot a dog because you don’t want him crapping on your property? I don’t think so, but I’m clearly in the minority if this thread is any indication. Seriously, how hard is it to just ask the dog’s owner to keep the animal off your property? You ask, and the owner either
A. Agrees and keeps the dog away, in which case you’re all done.
B. Agrees, but fails to keep the dog away.
C. Disagrees
If B or C happen, you can take further steps. Ask again, complain to the proper authorities, et cetera. Shooting (even an animal you deem worthless) ought to be an extreme last resort.
Of course, if the animal is threatening you and/or yours, and you can’t get safely away, and you’re armed, well that sort of accelerates everything. In Mdm. President’s case, I get the impression that the shooter felt he was in the wrong because he wouldn’t communicate and because he took off when the authorities showed up. The Lab should have been leashed, and should not have been allowed to roam in a stranger’s yard, but I don’t believe the stranger was threatened or that the dog should have been shot. People shouldn’t allow their children to wander off either, but if it happens and a child wanders onto someone’s property, that someone doesn’t have the right to shoot at the kid. Okay, bad example, because you can’t compare a person to a dog. How about my MP3 player? If it falls out of my pocket onto a neighbor’s yard, is it reasonable for the neighbor to whip out a pellet gun and put a round through it?
By the way, BB and pellet guns can do a lot of damage to people and animals. A friend almost crippled me with one back in college. We’d discovered that if you emptied BB guns and pulled the trigger, an almost painful blast of air still erupted from the barrel. One day I heard a loud “pop” behind me and turned to see my friend staring wide-eyed at a solid oak door in which a BB was embedded. He thought the gun was unloaded and was about to hit me with the air blast. Fortunately for me, he thought better of it and first tested it on the door, thus discovering that a single BB was still hiding in the gun.
Oh yeah, and for what it’s worth, a policeman once told me that pulling a pellet/BB gun on someone is considered assault, even if the gun is a “toy” or unloaded. Even out in the country a pellet gun doesn’t seem like something a guy should be brandishing around within ten yards of a street.