Nevermind...
Nevermind...
Last edited by Mitch; 10-19-2015 at 11:34 PM. Reason: Saving it for PFestivus 2016
People (other tan the owner) should not be required to understand dog psychology, evaluate animal behaviour, and guess what the animal intentions are.
Overreacting to a noisy/intruding/possibly agressive dog would be eliminated if the owner did his work, so stop guessing and blaming any other but the owner. Perhaps your big dog deep inside is a softie, loves children and is just being playful, I don't know and don't care. It's YOURS and should be your problema, not mine.
I think all dogs should be on a leash in public space, to make this responsability more patent, and this should be STRONGLY enforced.
Last edited by TiroFijo; 10-20-2015 at 06:59 AM.
I would agree, but life doesn't necessarily work like that. I shouldn't have to be an expert in reading crack heads or muggers too but it sure doesn't hurt to know a few tips and tricks.
Semper Gumby, Always Flexible
I love dogs. I cried like a baby when I had t have my dog put down. Much like Nytei I honestly think I like dogs better than most people.
However, much like with the 2 legged predators among us, I won't hesitate to put one in the dirt if a situation deteriorates to the point where I feel the threat for serious injury or death is present. IMO animal situations are much worse for most folks cause they just don't interact with strange dogs often enough to develop a good sense or feel for the situation. Heck, we interact with people almost every day and we still loose the handle very often on when a situation is about to go tits up. To expect that folks be able to accurately discern the intent of a strange animal is silly. Its kind of like expecting LEO to be able to accurately diagnose a crazy person waving knives about and decide they really aren't a threat. Not a soul here would argue that we should put that limit out there on LEO or CCW person dealing with the situation. So why are we expecting that here? Biker dealing with crazy entity waving sharp knives around and supposedly trying to get near him. If you think about it that way instead of the veteran, loving, puppy the situation is much more clear.
As for the shot in the back side. How many times have we discussed the dynamics of a shooting. We accept that in human on human shootings the relative positions are ever changing and bullets can impact the body at goofy angles due to posture changes and movement. Anyone remember the Mike Brown argument for the supposed top of the head hits. Guy bent over charging Wilson just might take a round to the top of the noggin and we all concluded that the hands up don't shoot, executed in cold blood crap was just that. What prevents us from taking the same approach with the shot in the back side? Cause the victim was cute and cuddly?
I am sorry the owner lost his dog and possibly his very good companion. But maybe he should have done a better job of making sure his dog didn't go roaming the surrounding areas unescorted and unleashed.
From my experience with a situation very similar, I would keep cool. The dog owners are almost always worse than the dogs. You can quickly find yourself in a major melee over a dispute about a dog.
In my situation I told the dog owner to keep their dog leashed up in no uncertain terms. I was super irritated because I was 1) jogging and 2) the previous month had actually been full-on attacked by another loose dog in the area.
The situation escalated, no, exploded, into me being chased down and cut off by a woman in a dodge charger, and a teenaged kid and a tatted-up thug threatening me apocalyptic amounts of harm.
From that point, I carry a less lethal item and a phone programmed with the sheriff. I will not get bit before I act. I will not go 'hands-on' a dog. I will not discuss anything with the dog owner--the Sheriff can do that.