I was walking my little Scottie one day and a golden retriever came bounding across the street, of course not fenced or on a leash, and nearly killed my little guy. Owner was drunk and blabbered about how his dog had never done anything like that before...
After that I carried my Glock .40 on walks. Past the offending dog's house, since my dog and I were entitled to use public sidewalks. I would have shot without any hesitation. I suppose a jury would have thought I was provoking the dog by exercising my liberty.
This still infuriates me to this day.
Leash or not he was off his property and after someone in the street. Didnt flee, continued his walk home.(Do you think he could have been shaken after nearly getting bit). Can neighbors talk any more or have we been reduced to needing mediators(Police). Went back to protect others, his loved ones and even looking out for the dog owner interest. After knocking and no response... his retreat was cut off by the dog, in the street at the door of his vehicle.so he knew the dog was on a leash, fled, then RETURNED to the known situation, and intentionally put himself in a position where he KNEW me might get harmed, then instead of reatreating to a KNOWN safe distance, he fired.
doesnt sound like a clean cut self defense to me. probably got what he deserved.
Leash or not he was off his property and after someone in the street. Didnt flee, continued his walk home.(Do you think he could have been shaken after nearly getting bit). Can neighbors talk any more or have we been reduced to needing mediators(Police). Went back to protect others, his loved ones and even looking out for the dog owner interest. After knocking and no response... his retreat was cut off by the dog, in the street at the door of his vehicle.
Hindsight: Good response, but is this the only reasonable response? Could op also be reasonable?Back on the original topic... the guy should have gone home, stayed there and called the cops. Tell the cops that the neighbors dog is on a leash but the leash allows it to go in the street, not allowing people to use the sidewalk. The cops can then go to the house to inform the neighbors.
I hate to see a gun owner be convicted of a shooting, but he should have never gone back. He was already home. He had already removed himself from the threat. Why go back?
Hindsight: Good response, but is this the only reasonable response? Could op also be reasonable?
He went back. He has earned his punishment. I don't even believe the story about him going back to confront the owner. If the gentleman knew how far the leash extended into the street and if we assume he parked outside of the arc he was in no immediate danger because he knew how far the dog could advance, unless the dog was off the leash, which hasn't been stated. I'm more inclined to think the guy went back to make a statement to the owner, he did, and now he is going to jail for his poor decisions.
He's right the guy didn't have to go back. He simply could have called animal control or the police.
seems to imply that those who would rather not put themselves in a dangerous situation, unnecessarily, are less "manly" than the rest of you. That is a dangerous assumption, especially when it seems clear to me the the man in question likely wanted to teach his neighbor a lesson, and is paying the price for his poor decision. Possibly he will feel better though, after ruining his life, knowing that you feel his actions were manly. I imagine though, he wishes he would have thought with the head on his shoulders, instead of the head in his...well, you get it.don't handle it like a man, have your big brother(double entendre intended) come in and force things to go your way
Bill, the comment you have made here...
seems to imply that those who would rather not put themselves in a dangerous situation, unnecessarily, are less "manly" than the rest of you. That is a dangerous assumption, especially when it seems clear to me the the man in question likely wanted to teach his neighbor a lesson, and is paying the price for his poor decision. Possibly he will feel better though, after ruining his life, knowing that you feel his actions were manly. I imagine though, he wishes he would have thought with the head on his shoulders, instead of the head in his...well, you get it.
I agree. But I must say that at the moment the dog attacked him (and we can agree that it was an attack) this was no longer a non-violent situation. Unless the animal was positively restrained on the owners property the area in which the dog could run free was still classified as dangerous, and the man should have known that, and avoided entrance to the area. As well, I would not consider the homeowner either reasonable or rational, if he has so far failed to notice his dog is roaming in front of his house attacking people, especially if the man in the OP did not know the homeowner personally. If he knew the homeowner, he certainly should have been able to call him and make him aware of the dog attack, given him an opportunity to control the animal, and then decided based on the homeowners actions whether or not he was either reasonable or rational and what course to take after this.More to the point, what right have we to send someone else to do something we aren't willing to go and do ourselves? (obviously, I'm speaking of non-violent situations, where one expects simply to talk, reasonably and rationally, to another mature adult.)