Legal?

[45pro]

Can you legally shoot a dog thats on your property that is known to be vicous but is not currently acting this way? The reason I ask is because I have a 6 year old son that plays outdoors a lot and im concerned he will get attacked. The dog is a neighbors that always gets loose and has attacked one of my other neighbors. The dog has also attacked a guy going door to door selling steaks. He got many stiches in his thigh and the dog tore his pants off of him. I dont know why the owner has never got into trouble for this. I called animal control about it last time it got loose and they wouldnt get it since it shows signs of aggression. What am I suppose to do? My son cant play outside unless im armed and outside with him. So can I just shoot the dog next time he steps on my property so I dont have to worry about it anymore? can I get introuble for this?
Thanx

 

[zebov]

Do you have a fence around your yard? If so, I would think your backyard would be part of your "castle." If not, I know at least for people you can't legally shoot someone for stepping on your lawn simply because you don't like them and nor should you.

I'd seek other means to resolve this conflict if at all possible before resorting to shooting the dog (unless of course it is an immediate threat). A call to your local police department explaining the situation (NOT the idea of shooting it), that you're scared for your children's lives every time the dog is around, and asking what you can do to make sure your children are safe couldn't hurt.

Ackward situation... I assume you've already tried just talking to the neighbor?

 

[tuoder]

Send you neighbors a link to this post.

 

[45pro]

I have no fence. I have talked to the neighbor about it and all he says is that he will chain it back up and kinda brushes it off. The dog is loose about 3 times a week. I talked to a leo about it and he just said to do wats nessasary to protect yourself. He didnt really give me a direct answer. This dog is about 125lbs or so. Its half black lab/pitbull.

 

[zebov]

Well, if the LEO told you to "do wats nessasary to protect yourself" then I would "do wats nessasary to protect yourself"

 

[tuoder]

Take some pictures of the dog on your property on various occasions. You might need them later. I'd inform my neighbor that the dog may get shot if he endangers the safety of your loved ones, and that the owner of the dog will he held responsible in criminal and civil court.

 

[45pro]

Yea I told the owner that next time its on my property that I will shoot it. His reply 'ok ill chain it back up' then he walks off. Im not afraid of proving my case in civil court if I do shoot it. I have proof its vicous(my neighbor got mauled but didnt report it to police). Im
More afraid of getting arrested for animal cruety or something along those lines.

 

[Fargo]

Call the cops/animal control every time it is loose. Take pictures, lots of pictures. Mention that it has bit before every time you call them. Document everything you do. That way if you ever have to shoot it, it is real easy to show justification. It is a lot easier than having to collect the evidence after the fact. File a complaint with animal control and tell them about the previous incidents. Ask the guy who got bit for a copy of his medical stuff from the incident. There is probably a legal process for getting the dog taken but I don't know what it is off the top of my head. You may want to consult an attorney or talk to animal control and see if they can help.

Best,

Joe

 

[XtremeVel]

Might call and ask the animal control in your area if they would come and take it away if you had it trapped like in your garage. We had similiar situation with some awful neighbors, and animal control told us the only way they would respond would be if we called and had the animal on our property locked and ensured them it would be here when they arrived. I can see that they don't want to repond to all the calls like this to just get there and the animal has vanished.. Good luck !

 

[buffalo-springfield40]

if a cop told you to take care of the situation...he aint much of a cop......call animal control ..they will pick up the dog....i believe if they have to pick up the dog so many times that the owners will be fined..heavily ..then loose the dog....with that said...if the dog has a past of biting ...they will loose the dog the 1st time called...

 

[VERT]

I know that I am out of line, but I would not hesitate to shoot a dog. Especially if I already had the conversation with the neighbor. Now I would not ever discharge a firearm if I lived within city limits or it was otherwise unsafe. I live in a subdivision and shooting a dog could result in my conducting unsafe or negligent behavior.

I recently had a dog that kept getting loose myself. The dog was friendly but would not come home when called. Since I don't think it is right for people to let their dogs run the neighborhood, I moved the dog to my wife's uncle's farm. If a person can not control their dog they should not own it. Also, chaining up a large, aggressive dog is just asking for trouble.

 

[XtremeVel]

Animal control will work with you... Just need to ask what it will take to get them out there. Like I said above, for us it took calling them and telling them we had the stray dog secured in our garage then they were right out. As an additional bonus, when they drove off with the dog, the bad neighbor 5 houses down stood on his driveway and just watched. It gave me much more pleasure waving to him with the middle finger than shooting the dog ever would.

 

[VERT]

Agreed that animal control is the way to go. The problem is that where I live animal control only services the city. Even the county humane society is no help since they will not accept dogs. The OP asked a great question and I hope that he finds an answer other then shooting the neighbors dog. But an aggressive 125 lb mutt is not something I would want around my young children.

 

[45pro]

Thanks for the responses guys, I have contacted animal control and the humane society and they said they will not come get a dog if it shows signs of aggression. I am not going to waste tons of money to buy a trap for someone elses dog. I have warned him several times that I will shoot it if I find it in my yard again( I live in the country at the end of a dead end street). I think it may be time to make good on this. Taking a dogs life to maybe save my childs life is worth the risk of being taken to court over a dead dog. if the judge has any heart at all he will understand. please dont mistake me for being cold hearted towards animals but they have been warned multiple times and the risk far outweighs this paticular dogs life. I'll let yall know what happens.

 

[nalees]

shoot the neighbor and give the dog to someone else...

 

[finity]

This dog is about 125lbs or so. Its half black lab/pitbull.

Then obviously you are mistaken because anything with any amount of pitbull in it is just as lovable & friendly as can be. I think everybody is just assuming he's dangerous because of a pit's bad rep. I think he probably just wanted to play with the steak guy. Besides he had STEAKS! It was his fault.

On a more serious note:

I think as others have said. You can call the police & then sue the guy for damages. If he is not a threat to you or a "real" family member then I don't think you can shoot him. That would be like using deadly force to protect property which we all know isn't legal.

 

[Six Shooter Steve]

I have been in your situation before. We have no animal control in the little city I live in, and a house 3 down from me had a very agressive pitbull who was terrorizing the neighborhood. I have a fenced in yard, so my kids were safe, but neighbors two little ones not so lucky. I came outside one afternoon to see that the dog had the little girl cornered and was growling agressivly. That time I was able to scare the dog off. This kept on with various calls to the town and local police. So unfortunatly( for the dog ) one afternoon it growled at me while I was carrying, and it was put down to save the neighborhood. This dog never bit anyone, but the way I look at it, I cant wait and see if it hurts or kills a little kid. If the dog is showing agressiveness, dispose of it. If no one is there, no one can prove if it tried to attack you when you shot it. A dog is not worth a childs endagement!

 

[Nutz]

The 3"s" system.

An Animal Control officer recently told me of a system to deal with dangerous animals on my property. The 3"s" system. 1. Shoot 2. Shovel 3. Shut up.

 

[Bill of Rights]

IC 35-46-3-12
Torture or mutilation of a vertebrate animal; killing a domestic animal
Sec. 12. (a) This section does not apply to a person who euthanizes an injured, a sick, a homeless, or an unwanted domestic animal if:
(1) the person is employed by a humane society, an animal control agency, or a governmental entity operating an animal shelter or other animal impounding facility; and
(2) the person euthanizes the domestic animal in accordance with guidelines adopted by the humane society, animal control agency, or governmental entity operating the animal shelter or other animal impounding facility.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally beats a vertebrate animal commits cruelty to an animal, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if:
(1) the person has a previous, unrelated conviction under this section; or
(2) the person committed the offense with the intent to threaten, intimidate, coerce, harass, or terrorize a family or household member.
(c) A person who knowingly or intentionally tortures or mutilates a vertebrate animal commits torturing or mutilating a vertebrate animal, a Class D felony.
(d) As used in this subsection, "domestic animal" means an animal that is not wild. The term is limited to:
(1) cattle, calves, horses, mules, swine, sheep, goats, dogs, cats, poultry, ostriches, rhea, and emus; and
(2) an animal of the bovine, equine, ovine, caprine, porcine, canine, feline, camelid, cervidae, or bison species.
A person who knowingly or intentionally kills a domestic animal without the consent of the owner of the domestic animal commits killing a domestic animal, a Class D felony.
(e) It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that the accused person:
(1) reasonably believes the conduct was necessary to:
(A) prevent injury to the accused person or another person;
(B) protect the property of the accused person from destruction or substantial damage; or
(C) prevent a seriously injured vertebrate animal from prolonged suffering; or (2) engaged in a reasonable and recognized act of training, handling, or disciplining the vertebrate animal.
(f) When a court imposes a sentence or enters a dispositional decree under this section, the court:
(1) shall consider requiring:
(A) a person convicted of an offense under this section; or
(B) a child adjudicated a delinquent child for committing an act that would be a crime under this section if committed by an adult;
to receive psychological, behavioral, or other counseling as a part of the sentence or dispositional decree; and
(2) may order an individual described in subdivision (1) to receive psychological, behavioral, or other counseling as a part of the sentence or dispositional decree.
As added by P.L.193-1987, SEC.15. Amended by P.L.41-1998, SEC.2; P.L.132-2002, SEC.1; P.L.7-2007, SEC.1; P.L.171-2007, SEC.10; P.L.111-2009, SEC.14.

(begin threadjack)

Actually, the law does not prevent the use of deadly force to protect property, Jeff.

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
(end excerpt)

It says "...force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry into...the other person's dwelling..."

They do not have to be a threat to your person or that of another human. Even if they clearly state (like this would happen) that they only want stuff, the fact is that it's YOUR stuff and you are within your rights to defend it with deadly force if you reasonably believe that's the only way to do so.

Is it the best way? No. Is it recommended? No. Would I do it? I don't know. Thank God I've never had to make that decision.

(end threadjack)

The breed of the animal is illustrative to us to indicate the size, however it is unrelated to the tendency of the animal to attack or not. Not all pits are lovable and friendly, nor are they all vicious killing machines devoid of any redeeming value. Dogs are just like people in that they are all individuals. To say (hypothetically, since no one has said this in this thread) that you would shoot any pit just because he's a pit is akin to saying that you would shoot any Black or Hispanic person solely because of that lineage.

Yes, I am a dog lover, and yes, I do have a pit bull terrier as a member of my family. If I had to, yes, I would shoot him... however, I've never seen him bare a tooth in anger. Ever. I would trust him in the room with human babies, without hesitation. (come to think of it, I trust him one hell of a lot more than I trust some humans!)

The worst I'd be worried about with the aforementioned babies is that they might drown from him licking them.



Blessings,
Bill

 

[finity]

(begin threadjack)

Actually, the law does not prevent the use of deadly force to protect property, Jeff.

IC 35-41-3-2
Use of force to protect person or property
Sec. 2. (a) A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person:
(1) is justified in using deadly force; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person or the commission of a forcible felony. No person in this state shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting the person or a third person by reasonable means necessary.
(b) A person:
(1) is justified in using reasonable force, including deadly force, against another person; and
(2) does not have a duty to retreat;
if the person reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle.
(end excerpt)

It says "...force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's unlawful entry into...the other person's dwelling..."

They do not have to be a threat to your person or that of another human. Even if they clearly state (like this would happen) that they only want stuff, the fact is that it's YOUR stuff and you are within your rights to defend it with deadly force if you reasonably believe that's the only way to do so.

Is it the best way? No. Is it recommended? No. Would I do it? I don't know. Thank God I've never had to make that decision.

(end threadjack)

(continue threadjack )

The exception for using deadly force for your home is because of the assumption that anyone who is breaking into your occupied home is there to do you harm & is therefore not a property crime but a personal crime. If it was assuming a property crime then the law would give a third person the permission to use deadly force to protect your home (the way Texas does - no this is not K1L, I'm saying IN law is NOT LIKE Texas) the way they are allowed to use DF to protect a third person from any other personal crime. Also the reference to only an "occupied" motor vehicle is telling, too. That tells me that even if you considered the exception for your home & curtilage to be a property exception (which I don't), it by no means means that you can use DF to protect any "generic" property & I would think a dog would fall under the generic property category, seeing as they aren't a person or your home or curtilage.

(end threadjack - for now)

See the other 2 threads about pits going on right now. Not all are bad & other breeds have bad ones too but it seems that they are more of a danger than there numbers in the population would warrant if they were all equally prone (or not) to violence.