Last I checked, dogs don't carry knifes or guns... But I guess in your world anything is possible.

Who cares if that person thinks their dog is their child. It's not what that persons perception is. It's what the court recognizes as a person that matters. I would love to see you try to explain to a judge how you negligently fired your handgun in a populated area, at a dog that was attacking your puppy. I'm pretty sure you can say bye bye to your guns because 1st degree reckless endangerment is a felony.

I'm not sure where you get that you can't defend yourself from a non-person.  And it's not what the court thinks, but what a JURY thinks.

It's not the defending your self that's the issue. It's the discharge of the firearm in public that's the issue. Also last I checked, the jury sits in the court room with the judge, therefor the COURT decides your fate when the JURY returns your verdict and the judge implements your sentence.

It's not the defending your self that's the issue. It's the discharge of the firearm in public that's the issue. Also last I checked, the jury sits in the court room with the judge, therefor the COURT decides your fate when the JURY returns your verdict and the judge implements your sentence.

Hunter's discharge firearms in public places all the time, so it's not about discharing in a public place.  If people are going to defend themselves against a threat, it could be in a public place as well.  So, to me, it's not about a public place or not.


If you truly want the answer to your view on the matter, I suggest talking to the Attorney General.

It's not the defending your self that's the issue. It's the discharge of the firearm in public that's the issue. Also last I checked, the jury sits in the court room with the judge, therefor the COURT decides your fate when the JURY returns your verdict and the judge implements your sentence.

According to you it is....you say that wading into a dog fight to save your animal is akin to purposefully putting yourself into a dangerous situation without due consideration and therefore you can't then claim self defense. Shall I find that post for you?

Hunter's discharge firearms in public places all the time, so it's not about discharing in a public place.  If people are going to defend themselves against a threat, it could be in a public place as well.  So, to me, it's not about a public place or not.


If you truly want the answer to your view on the matter, I suggest talking to the Attorney General.

Hunters discharge firearms in authorized hunting areas during authorized hunting periods. You are not allowed by law to have you gun loaded when you step outside of that hunting area. Maybe you should sign up for a hunters Ed class so you can be a little better informed.

According to you it is....you say that wading into a dog fight to save your animal is akin to purposefully putting yourself into a dangerous situation without due consideration and therefore you can't then claim self defense. Shall I find that post for you?

No need here it is. Shall I quote everything so you can read it in the right context?

Wrong, you cannot claim self-defense when you put yourself in danger. Remember the court makes judgements based on the reasonable person test. What would a reasonable person of average intelligence do when faced with the same situation. A reasonable person would not get a gun and start pumping lead into the dogs. A reasonable person would not put themselves in grave danger to protect a puppy.

You can reasonably defend yourself. But running into the house (out of danger) to get your gun, than running back outside ( putting yourself back into danger) now shooting your gun at a dog (reckless endangerment), assuming its in your yard, that is running around when there is other options available. Ie: water hose, broom, bat, shoes, etc...

So lets see the possible charges (just for fun)
Place to keep
Reckless endangerment
Cruelty to animals

Then again I'm just another guy presenting his opinion on the matter. People do dumb shit all the time, that's how we get case law. People will do what they THINK is right, and we can let the court decide their fate.

Discharging a firearm in a residential area is illegal, is it not?

While I'm not really all that worried about self defense where I live now, I have and have always had a variety of ways to defend the members of the household and our property. I have a degree of skill with them, as well. Handy, really. In college my roommates and I stopped what appeared to be an attempted rape or something happening next door outside. The sound of a terrified woman is unmistakeable and the 3 of us leaped out of our chairs and rushed outside to help. The shotgun was right beside the door. So was the staff. I grabbed the staff knowing that the mossy would be more liability than asset.

(Perp was dragging her towards his car by arm and hair. Perp saw us and let the girl go. She ran like a rabbit - probably didn't even know we were there. Perp then got in his car drove away. Having no right to detain him there was nothing else we could do. This was in the days before ubiquitous digital cameras, unfortunately.)

Funny thing is that a dog will probably register a person armed with a bat, staff or machete as a clear threat and might run. Not necessarily so with a firearm.

Hunters discharge firearms in authorized hunting areas during authorized hunting periods. You are not allowed by law to have you gun loaded when you step outside of that hunting area. Maybe you should sign up for a hunters Ed class so you can be a little better informed.

I have my Hunters Ed cert thank you very much.  Also I don't believe I said that the hunters were hunting outside of a designated hunting area did I?  If so please post it up.

No need here it is. Shall I quote everything so you can read it in the right context?

Quote

Quote from: Dblnaknak on April 04, 2013, 02:45:24 PM

    Wrong, you cannot claim self-defense when you put yourself in danger. Remember the court makes judgements based on the reasonable person test. What would a reasonable person of average intelligence do when faced with the same situation. A reasonable person would not get a gun and start pumping lead into the dogs. A reasonable person would not put themselves in grave danger to protect a puppy.

You can reasonably defend yourself. But running into the house (out of danger) to get your gun, than running back outside ( putting yourself back into danger) now shooting your gun at a dog (reckless endangerment), assuming its in your yard, that is running around when there is other options available. Ie: water hose, broom, bat, shoes, etc...

So lets see the possible charges (just for fun)
Place to keep
Reckless endangerment
Cruelty to animals

Then again I'm just another guy presenting his opinion on the matter. People do dumb shit all the time, that's how we get case law. People will do what they THINK is right, and we can let the court decide their fate.

So wait let me get this straight.............your gf/wife/child has a knife at their throat in your bedroom and you cannot retrieve your firearm by the door to defend them because by coming back you are placing yourself in danger............check I gotcha.

No need here it is. Shall I quote everything so you can read it in the right context?

You can reasonably defend yourself. But running into the house (out of danger) to get your gun, than running back outside ( putting yourself back into danger) now shooting your gun at a dog (reckless endangerment), assuming its in your yard, that is running around when there is other options available. Ie: water hose, broom, bat, shoes, etc...

So lets see the possible charges (just for fun)
Place to keep
Reckless endangerment
Cruelty to animals

Then again I'm just another guy presenting his opinion on the matter. People do dumb shit all the time, that's how we get case law. People will do what they THINK is right, and we can let the court decide their fate.

Except in the scenario given, the dog came into the house and attacked the puppy. So retrieving your gun, especially if already carrying or if it were kept close enough as if it were carried, shouldn't require you to go anywhere.....so place to keep charge is not an issue.

As for cruelty to animals, I do not believe using force, including deadly force to stop an animal from attacking, would be considered cruelty. And more to the point, I doubt any trier of fact, judge or jury, would see it as such. As a matter of fact, I doubt any prosecutor would even consider bring those charges.

As for reckless endangerment, you can be charged with that even after a completely justified self-defense shooting. So should we just forgo any use of a firearm for self-defense because you MAY be charged with reckless endangerment?

I get slightly annoyed when someone tells me I can only deal with an attacking dog with a stick or water hose. This isn't the first time I've heard that, so I'm not rebutting anyone here, just the general idea.

That's underestimating the power of some dogs. If it was a small dog or nice dog, sure. But if it's a strong and mean dog, I'll want to use whatever I can manage to get. Depending on the circumstances of the incident I might indeed have to make do with just a stick or my foot, but if events allowed me to get something better then I should take that precaution. Folks have probably died from the water hose mentality.