# Who would shoot a dog? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 1, 2003, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661 "2003-04-01T07:14:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Fin\_man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@Fin\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fin_man)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/61 "2003-04-02T15:17:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\*I see you don’t fucking know what you’re talking about. To use one of your examples, saying tha farm women stand a good chance at getting cancer doesn’t place that chance at greater than 50%; it is equally valid to say that they stand a good chance at not getting cancer. > > I also see that, rather than address my points, you continue to harp on your misunderstanding of the English language. Is that because you substantively agree with what I’m saying, but are too hardheaded to admit it? > > Daniel \*\* Are you really that much of a fucking idiot?? Do you still think that there could be a “good chance” of both abuse occurring and abuse not occurrring? I guess you will never learn. As for your points, what point did you try and make in the post I quoted? If your point was that abuse **MAY** have occurred and that abuse **MAY NOT** have occurred, then yes, I agree - that is true. If your point is that there is a **GOOD CHANCE** that abuse occurred, then no, I do not agree since you (nor anybody else other than the shooter) can determine the probability of abuse. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > **Okay, you cretins. If it’s that important to you that “a good chance”= \>50% probability, then I’ll fucking concede that point for this thread, and revise my previous statement to “there’s a significant chance that felony-level animal abuse occurred here.” Happy now? Can you quit your fucking hairsplitting and deal with the actual point?** You don’t get it, do you? Now you use the word “significant”. Do you know what that word means??? Synonyms for significant include “big, consequential, considerable, material, meaningful, momentous, substantial, weighty”. Your emotion is getting the better of you. Abuse **MAY** have occurred. That is all we know. Simplistically (so you can understand), here is the point you have made: 1. A dog was shot - fact 2. Three dogs were running loose and not within sight of their owners - fact. 3. A crime occurred. We must punish the shooter - your high-horsed erroneous conjecture. Am I wrong? If abuse did occur, the cops should find the shooter and string him up by his under-sized testicles. If abuse did not occur, the shooter should receive an apology from the dog owners since their actions (or lack thereof) put him in a situation where he feared for his life/health. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/62 "2003-04-02T15:24:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Fin\_man \* > \*\*Simplistically (so you can understand), here is the point you have made: > > 1. A dog was shot - fact > 2. Three dogs were running loose and not within sight of their owners - fact. > 3. A crime occurred. We must punish the shooter - your high-horsed erroneous conjecture. > > Am I wrong? > \*\* Yes. See point #3. I’m not fucking quibbling with you over the meaning of “significant”: in addition to my work in animal control database management, I worked for several years as a writing tutor and know this language better than you do. See point #3 – you pulled it out of your ass. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Fin\_man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@Fin\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fin_man)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/63 "2003-04-02T15:31:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\*Yes. See point #3. I’m not fucking quibbling with you over the meaning of “significant”: in addition to my work in animal control database management, I worked for several years as a writing tutor and know this language better than you do. > > See point #3 – you pulled it out of your ass. > > Daniel \*\* If you were a writing tutor, I feel immensely sorry for your students. And as for knowing this language better than I, another high-horsed bad assumption. You have no respect for logic; I have no respect for people who have no respect for logic. ---
**Author:** ![SwimmingwithChickens](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@SwimmingwithChickens](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SwimmingwithChickens)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/64 "2003-04-02T15:49:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\*Yes. See point #3. I’m not fucking quibbling with you over the meaning of “significant”: in addition to my work in animal control database management, I worked for several years as a writing tutor and know this language better than you do. > > See point #3 – you pulled it out of your ass. > > Daniel \*\* I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make. You said “See point #3” where Fin\_man challenges your knee-jerk reaction of “assume man is always evil” but then you don’t offer to contradict it. Instead you question the validity of his statement. It is obvious that you have a bias from your work with animal control. That’s fine, you’re entitled. You have probably seen some heinous abuses and have seen the lowest scum of society. That said, it is not a fair assumption that abuse must have been present in this case. I don’t want to mence words or argue about language, but unless there is definitive proof of abuse, I don’t think it’s fair to suggest it. To assume without facts is tactless and crass. Oh, and I’d rather not see point #3 if it was pulled out of someone’s ass. ---
**Author:** ![skankweirdall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c6cbf5/32.png) [@skankweirdall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/skankweirdall)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/65 "2003-04-02T15:49:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MelCthefirst \* > \*\*“Having said all this I must also say that this is but a small part of her personality. The rest of the time she is such a sweet dog that you just can’t believe the incongruity of the situation.” > Even so, Skankweirdall, I think the dog should be put down if this behaviour has been observed. Like children, there will always be that odd moment when you don’t have them in your sights or under control. > I love dogs and have had them all my life but this arguement is constantly used by the owners of dogs who have destroyed a child’s face or limb. I would destroy my own dog should I ever witness this behaviour, however hard this action may be. \*\* Maybe so, but let me add that she has never attacked another human, she generally shys away from strange people. She also has only engaged in this behaviour while protecting something she felt was hers. I’ve been told these dogs are extremely protective. If these dogs are raised with a child no harm would come to that child without the dog doing everything it could to prevent it. It is their nature to be this way, why would you destroy a dog for that? We have a 6 foot privacy fenced yard for her to run and play in. She is never in the yard unsurpervised. When she is left at home alone she is in a cage, inside the house. If someone comes to the house, regardless of whether they are adults or children she is caged. She never leaves the house or backyard unless she is leashed and muzzled, and then only with me. It’s not that she is a viscious dog, just that I’ve seen what damage she can do and would never take the chance of that happening to someone or their animal. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/66 "2003-04-02T15:55:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SwimmingwithChickens \* > \*\*I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make. You said “See point #3” where Fin\_man challenges your knee-jerk reaction of “assume man is always evil” but then you don’t offer to contradict it. Instead you question the validity of his statement. > \*\* Exactly. Just so I’m clear on this, have you also missed every single time in this thread when I’ve said that there may or may not have been abuse, where there may or may not have been a legal shooting? Please reread the thread – I don’t know how I could possibly be more explicit on this point. As near as I can tell, the two of you are misinterpreting phrases (now down to individual words) in order to create the erroneous impression that i’m assuming there was abuse here. Please reread what I actually wrote. Now. Scroll back up and reread my posts. I’ve made the points a good half-dozen or more times by now. Read them. An apology for the misinterpretation will be graciously accepted. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![SwimmingwithChickens](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@SwimmingwithChickens](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SwimmingwithChickens)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/67 "2003-04-02T16:00:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\*Please reread the thread – I don’t know how I could possibly be more explicit on this point. > \*\* Perhaps a chart or graph will help… ---
**Author:** ![Fin\_man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@Fin\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fin_man)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/68 "2003-04-02T16:12:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\*Exactly. Just so I’m clear on this, have you also missed every single time in this thread when I’ve said that there may or may not have been abuse, where there may or may not have been a legal shooting? Please reread the thread – I don’t know how I could possibly be more explicit on this point. > > As near as I can tell, the two of you are misinterpreting phrases (now down to individual words) in order to create the erroneous impression that i’m assuming there was abuse here. Please reread what I actually wrote. > > Now. Scroll back up and reread my posts. I’ve made the points a good half-dozen or more times by now. > > Read them. > > An apology for the misinterpretation will be graciously accepted. > > Daniel \*\* The issue is your use (or lack thereof) of **MAY** when talking about abuse or legal shooting. Most times you said there was a **GOOD CHANCE** or now a **SIGNIFICANT CHANCE** of abuse. Let’s make it simple for you. CTRL+F, type “may” and hit ENTER. See how many times the word “MAY” comes up in your posts (which aren’t quotes from others). Do the same with “GOOD CHANCE”. MAY = POSSIBILY GOOD CHANCE = PROBABLY If any apology should occur, it should be you apologizing for your lack of understanding of the English language. ---
**Author:** ![DaddyTimesTwo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f07891/32.png) [@DaddyTimesTwo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaddyTimesTwo)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/69 "2003-04-02T16:25:11Z")
I see that the OP has kind of gotten hijacked, but in answer to who would actually shoot a dog, I think you’ll see an answer [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=173176). ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/70 "2003-04-02T16:32:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SwimmingwithChickens \* > \*\*Perhaps a chart or graph will help… \*\* 😃 I’ll take that as an apology, and I hope that y’all can address the real issue rather than getting bogged down in unsubstantiated definitions of various words I’ve used. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/71 "2003-04-02T17:24:24Z")
We live on 15 acres in rural Ohio. We have two daughters, ages 3 and 5. They (obliviously) like to play outdoors. I’ve shot and killed plenty of dogs, primarily for the safety of our children. I have two criteria: 1. There must be two or more dogs together. 2. The dogs must be on our property. I’ve also shot at (but missed) a “lone” dog I judged to be a threat. ---
**Author:** ![SwimmingwithChickens](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@SwimmingwithChickens](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SwimmingwithChickens)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/72 "2003-04-02T18:01:50Z")
Crafter\_Man, how do you judge a dog to be a threat? I’m keenly interested in your response as you’ve had plenty of experience in this situation. How do you go about assessing the danger level? ---
**Author:** ![j.c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@j.c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j.c)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/73 "2003-04-02T18:24:25Z")
Oops, I just remember something. Not a fun fact, so I buried it. In may state and national parks, one duty of park rangers and other staff is to shoot stray dogs. (They have to find and pick up the bodies, though, and they have various rules about how much of an effort they must make to capture a dog with a collar.) I doubt this is what happened here, this is just a warning to dog owners about another danger for free-roaming dogs. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/74 "2003-04-02T18:32:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SwimmingwithChickens \* > \*\*Crafter\_Man, how do you judge a dog to be a threat? > > I’m keenly interested in your response as you’ve had plenty of experience in this situation. How do you go about assessing the danger level? \*\* If it’s two or more dogs (together) I automatically judge it to be a threat. A .308 from a scoped bolt action is a proven tool in this situation. A lone dog is a somewhat different story. If doesn’t immediate run away I’ll usually not pursue the matter further. Otherwise I get the rifle and shovel… ---
**Author:** ![SwimmingwithChickens](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@SwimmingwithChickens](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SwimmingwithChickens)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/75 "2003-04-02T18:40:08Z")
Why two or more? Is it because of the pack mentality or because the numbers are stacked against you? ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/76 "2003-04-02T19:23:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SwimmingwithChickens \* > \*\*Why two or more? Is it because of the pack mentality or because the numbers are stacked against you? \*\* The former. It’s been my experience that two or more dogs roaming around the countryside are Bad News[sup]TM[/sup], especially when young children are in the vicinity. It would be irresponsible _not_ to shoot them… ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/77 "2003-04-02T19:27:57Z")
BTW: Because I’m not yet an “accomplished shot” I have never succeeded in shooting more than one dog in a pack; the others run off when they hear the shot. But they usually come back. It’s just a matter of picking them off one at a time whenever they show up. ---
**Author:** ![stevephillips](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ab097/32.png) [@stevephillips](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stevephillips)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/78 "2003-04-02T19:49:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\*Your list leaves off one specific less-lethal solution: > > - Call Animal Control. > Daniel \*\* There is no animal control officer in most rural areas. At least around here, the sheriff can’t do much until after a dog actually attacks you. I’ve shot a dog that was chasing my livestock and then turned on me when I tried to chase it off. On two other occassions I was chased by dogs on my own property when I didn’t have a gun to shoot them. I barely made it to my truck on one occassion. The neighbor later insisted the Rotweiller was harmless. While I don’t know about what happened in the original post, people in rural areas are fed up with dogs running loose. It’s almost an every day problem. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/79 "2003-04-02T20:22:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by stevephillips \* > \*\*I’ve shot a dog that was chasing my livestock and then turned on me when I tried to chase it off. On two other occassions I was chased by dogs on my own property when I didn’t have a gun to shoot them. I barely made it to my truck on one occassion. The neighbor later insisted the Rotweiller was harmless. > > While I don’t know about what happened in the original post, people in rural areas are fed up with dogs running loose. It’s almost an every day problem. \*\* Sure – and that’s why I said that an investigation might find that the shooting was legal. If there’s no animal control, of course, there’s not likely to be an investigation. I do wonder, however, how true it is that most rural areas don’t have even a single officer dedicated to animal control. You may be right, but our fairly rural county has got four officers just for the unincorporated areas of the county. And while rural people are fed up with roaming dogs, there are laws that govern the shooting of dogs; I always recommend that folks know what these laws are before they get the gun out. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![stevephillips](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ab097/32.png) [@stevephillips](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stevephillips)\ **Post date:** [April 2, 2003, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661/80 "2003-04-02T23:57:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by DanielWithrow \* > \*\* > > I do wonder, however, how true it is that most rural areas don’t have even a single officer dedicated to animal control. You may be right, but our fairly rural county has got four officers just for the unincorporated areas of the county. > > Daniel \*\* I can only speak to Kansas. Our county has none, nor does any other county here that I’m familiar with, although I would not be surprised if some of the counties with bigger cities did. The problem here is that it does not violate any state criminal statute to allow a dog to run loose, even if it goes on someone else’s land. (Counties and cities can change that by resolution. Most cities have changed it, but few counties have.) That’s the reason few counties here bother to have animal control officers; they can’t prosecute and get fines. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-would-shoot-a-dog/165661.md?page=5)