June 8, 2005, 10:58 AM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2005
Location: VA
Posts: 1,294
|
Serious highjacking here
Gentlemen,
I believe we are losing the true spirit of this thread. While these arguments would make a fine thread of their own - in the legal political section - lets stay with the poster's original question: Primary reaction would be to attempt to get the boy to safety - if the dog was clamped on him, I would approach, weapon drawn and probaby either break the rear legs of the animal with a kick or shoot the animal if the backstop was clear - away from the boy - if not no fire. Probably the distract and shoot tactic would be the best one. If animal had released the victim, and was a danger to others, I would open fire (again only if backstop was clear). But if street was clear, then I would let it go. Being a dog owner, (English Bulldog) and great dog lover, I would not want to take out someone's pet. But if human life were threatened, I dont think there is a choice to make. |
June 8, 2005, 11:57 AM | #52 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 21, 2005
Posts: 2,181
|
Quote:
No hard feelings stephen426. And your right, we could probably debate this for eternity. It was a pleasure hearing your opinion, and arguments. I had a good time considering your points, and formulating my retort. I think it's best for me to step out of this thread for the time being, Duxman is right, this went a completely different route from what the original poster intended - I might add, one that I tried to avoid with my first few posts: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
June 8, 2005, 12:16 PM | #53 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 14, 2005
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 2,723
|
Quote:
Quote:
As I mentioned earlier, I'm all for tougher punishments. If a dog mauls somebody I don't see any reason why the owner can't be charged criminally for assault, or if the dog actually kills some body I wouldn't bat an eyelash at the idea of charging the homeowner with murder. That still won't mean that your kids will never have to worry about being mauled by a dog, but those kinds of laws would punish the guilty negligent dog owners and not the innocent, responsable ones. |
||
June 8, 2005, 12:28 PM | #54 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 23, 2005
Posts: 160
|
Reply to Pamick
Of course there are referendums to have laws changed or enacted, it happens frequently in my state. I will never again live in California because of laws enacted by referendum. Members of both houses and the chief executive are elected representatives. Please don't even bring up the complexities of the electoral college. Can't we just let this thread "go back to the dogs"?
I sure do find TFL entertaining!! "In a world devoid of semiautomatics, a properly set-up Webley is the ultimate full-size self-defense handgun." |
June 8, 2005, 03:26 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 23, 2005
Posts: 126
|
Webleywielder, I wasn't trying to flame you. There are few things that push my button, but the democracy/ republic issue is one of them. No personal offense intended. I'm familiar with the chaotic referendum concept and it's as dangerous to the intent of the Founders as is the activist judges who "legislate" from the bench.
Now then, back to dogs. stephen426 appears to be of the mindset that government should be used to enforce what he determines is proper and/or acceptable. Based on stephen426: " owners will be forced to know how to properly contain the animal. Likewise, certain training classes or certifications will allow examiners to ensure that the dog is being properly trained and socialized." He's clearly very comfortable with GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRATS. Perhaps stephen426 would also be comfortable with the government regulating what we eat. I mean based on his line of thinking it would be for "the greater good." |
June 8, 2005, 05:20 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 24, 2004
Posts: 394
|
dogs
I tend to agree that I do not want somebody telling me what I can and can't do. But the reality of the world is that there are plenty of dog owners that are not responsible with their pets period. I work outside everyday all over town and it just amazes me how irresponsible most pet owners are. They drive all over town with their dog in the front seat hanging out their side of the window. They walk their dogs without any lease or restraint. They put their dogs out on a chain and never go out to play or socialize with them (just feed and water them). they never have any proper way of containing their dog in their yard. I could go on and on. What is worse is that the police do not enforce their rules on animals. They think it is a nusience for them to come out and deal with the problem. I see this on a daily basis and I am suprized there are not more people hurt. Most of the time they will not do anything about the animal until it has already hurt someone. Shame Shame Shame or these type of animal owners. This observation came from 25 years of walking the streets doing my job.
steve the mailman |
June 8, 2005, 05:46 PM | #57 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 23, 2005
Posts: 160
|
Pamrick, no offense taken.
I like the fact that a forum like this allows people to communicate without the inhibitions normally found in discourse. I like unfiltered sincerity. It is entertaining and informative. While working at NSA I learned that sometimes more is learned from the noise than the signal. Are you listening TFL?
"In a world devoid of semiautomatics, a properly set-up Webley is the ultimate full-size self-defense handgun". |
June 8, 2005, 05:57 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 26, 2005
Location: TX
Posts: 411
|
i would put blame on the owner for not having dog tied up. i have been bit by a rotterler (spelling) i was just riding my bike. the owner did not have it tied up. it bit me. on the arm i punched on the nose broke the nose of the dog, dog bit me on the leg and then the owner came to get the dog off.
i blame the owner!! i love dogs ,but in had to be put down. once a bitter always a bitter. missed a week of work, hospital bills, the owner paid for the bills and my payed 80% of what i missed of work. and the dog got put down. in Michigan(i could be wrong) but if a dog bites human it is put down. |
June 8, 2005, 06:21 PM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Posts: 2,686
|
Webleywielder
Quote:
In a democracy, everyone gets to cast a vote on every issue. Wayne is right. The USA is a Republic... Now back to the Dogs, uuhhh, Guns! |
|
June 8, 2005, 06:28 PM | #60 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2004
Posts: 2,745
|
Quote:
|
|
June 8, 2005, 06:33 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Posts: 2,686
|
One nation, under God, with liberty, and justic for all, including several Scottie Terriers I know...
|
June 8, 2005, 06:44 PM | #62 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 23, 2005
Posts: 160
|
Bullrock you are not receiving 5x5
I never said the USA is a democracy. I don't think I am living in ancient Athens. BTW Athens was a very limited democracy due to restrictions on who could vote (kind of like Florida). Just kidding.
Some laws get enacted by referendum in the USA. There are different types of Republics. The Republic we live in is very different from Plato's fictional republic and the Ancient Roman Republic. In our republic all adults with few exceptions vote on referendums and to elect representatives. Plato and the Romans only allowed a narrowly defined aristocracy to vote. Now if anyone else disagrees with me could you please start a new thread so we can get back to the dogs and guns. "In a world devoid of semiautomatic, a properly set-up Webley is the ultimate full-size self-defense handgun". |
June 8, 2005, 07:44 PM | #63 |
Member
Join Date: April 16, 2005
Posts: 78
|
coolridelude
quote} once a bitter always a bitter {quote first off its "biter". and second where do you get your facts??? thats entirely unture. its just like saying that once a dog, wolf, bear, or whatever gets a taste for human blood they will be a man eater for life. its 100 times easier to train a viscious dog to be friendly and safe than it is to train a friendly safe dog to be viscious. |
June 9, 2005, 08:11 AM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 5, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,531
|
i read maybe 1/50th of this thread.
i wish we were a pure republic. too many uninformed people voting - hence restrictive but impotent gun laws, for example. on the dog thing, i gotta say, if you're moving in close enough to whack it or stab it, why not just take a contact shot? through its back or side, into the ground, away from the kid. that's what i'd do - i think the potential for shock is a lot higher with a gunshot. wrestling or inflicting wounds similar to what the the dog might get in an actual dogfight could only encourage it to stay clamped, but i would think a temporary disruption that gets up into double-digit centimeter size in cross-section is probably going to make the dog at least back off momentarily to try a new angle of attack. heck though, i'd just fight him with my hands for fun. maybe even tie the thing up, throw it in a cage with some snakes, a moose and myself and see who comes out. i love rasslin' with my 130 pound bernese, i could see if that "training" has done me any good |
June 9, 2005, 09:04 PM | #65 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 24, 2004
Posts: 394
|
dogs
I tend to agree once a biter always a biter, because most people will not train or act any differently once their dogs bite someone. They just go in denial mode (my poor doggy wouldn't bite no one!!!) Like I stated in an above post there is a lot of losey irresponsible dog owners out there. There are a few good ones, but they are beat out mostly by the bad ones.
steve |
June 9, 2005, 09:59 PM | #66 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
|
Let me see, I think I can sum up.
In spite of any evidence to the contrary... 1. It's never the dog's fault. 2. The dog's breed has nothing to do with it. 3. It's always the owner's fault except when the victim brought it on himself/herself. 4. MY dog would never do anything like that. 5. A well-trained dog would never do anything like that. 6. If you KNOW dogs, you'll never have to shoot them or injure them to prevent them attacking or stop them attacking. Just raise your voice and say "Bad Dog". [In extreme cases, you might have to smack their nose lightly.] 7. Anyway, I'd rather not talk about dogs, let's argue politics instead. 8. Why is everyone so upset? It's not like the kid actually DIED! can anyone tell this is sarcasm?
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
Last edited by JohnKSa; June 9, 2005 at 10:48 PM. |
June 10, 2005, 05:29 PM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Posts: 2,686
|
JohnKSa
Quote:
|
|
June 10, 2005, 07:12 PM | #68 |
Member
Join Date: August 25, 2004
Location: Abilene, TX
Posts: 33
|
My Lab an I were the victims of a PB attack about a year ago so my opinions, right or wrong are based upon a personal experience.
"Would you run to the dog and shoot it? Or would you try to distract it and then shoot it? If it had released the victim and started to back off, would you still shoot it? Like a fool, I had no means of self-defense other than my hands and feet when we were attacked (that will never happen again), but it is my opinion that since the attack occured in a residential neighborhood, and the ferocity of the attack it would have been extremely difficult to shoot the dog while attacking. Running up to the dog and shooting him while attacking would be extremely difficult, PB's latch on and don't let go. Distract a PB, not likely, I kicked and beat the PB as hard as I could (I am not a little guy) and it never slowed him down, he was intent on killing my Lab, and my Lab was intent on protecting me. It took a baseball bat and two round house hits to the top of his head before he released. Would I have shot him once he relaeased? No! As much as I would like to have, that was animal control's job. If I had of been armed and he tried to attack again, I would have shot him. |
June 10, 2005, 09:23 PM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 24, 2004
Posts: 394
|
horse pucky
1. It's never the dog's fault.
Bs, it is still the dogs fault if it bites you and you did nothing to provoke it. You can get bad dogs just like you have bad people. 2. The dog's breed has nothing to do with it. Another misconception. If the dog is bred with high aggressive tendacies than it is more likely to be easier to be provoked 3. It's always the owner's fault except when the victim brought it on himself/herself. I agree wholeheartedly 4. MY dog would never do anything like that. That is the biggest crock of all. I have heard that line while the dog is trying to bite my head off...... 5. A well-trained dog would never do anything like that. I agree, but 95% of dogs are not trained. 6. If you KNOW dogs, you'll never have to shoot them or injure them to prevent them attacking or stop them attacking. Just raise your voice and say "Bad Dog". [In extreme cases, you might have to smack their nose lightly.] I really don't know who you are trying to fool with that one. Apparently you have not had to deal with dogs on a daily basis. Over 3000 mailmen are bitten every year. I have hardly every got a dog to stop because I raised my voice and say BAD DOG. (you must be joking) Somebody is definatly living in kansas with toto and alice if you believe even half of this junk. steve |
June 10, 2005, 11:09 PM | #70 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
|
steve,
Read the last line of the post. The one in small letters.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
June 11, 2005, 04:31 PM | #71 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 24, 2004
Posts: 394
|
Sorry johnksa
Sorry, I had a bad day with dogs. Mostly pitt bull mix. The owners just can't seem to figure out why they have not recieved any mail for last 30 days.
steve |
June 11, 2005, 09:46 PM | #72 |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,910
|
steve,
You have my sympathy, hope things turn out all right.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
June 12, 2005, 06:30 PM | #73 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2004
Posts: 2,686
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
June 13, 2005, 11:53 AM | #74 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: March 11, 2005
Posts: 3,840
|
ATW525,
I hate to perpetuate this off-topic thread jack but... Quote:
Quote:
People are effectively controlled on a daily basis by the laws that are put in place due to the penalties they have to face. These laws are highly effective as most people abide by them. Those that do not are penalized if and when they get caught. If you don't believe me, make sure you speed every time you get in your car. You will be controlled! As for your last 2 lines, what will charging a home owner with murder do to bring your child back from the grave? How will a scarred child lead a normal life? Can you count on people to be responsible for their own actions? That is not the norm in todays society. People must be controlled to some extent and we are blessed to live in a country where we have a say in who controls us and what laws we allow to control us.
__________________
The ATF should be a convenience store instead of a government agency! |
||
June 13, 2005, 12:57 PM | #75 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 14, 2005
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 2,723
|
stephen426 -
Not sure what to tell you, you seem to have countered your own points and answered your own questions better than I could. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|