View Single Post
Old September 27, 2013, 11:25 AM   #9
Frank Ettin
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,266
Originally Posted by PawPaw
...If someone was willing to use lethal force against this particular dog, then he'd be willing to use lethal force against me. Everything else is just details.
But those details matter.

As much as we love our animals, they are considered by the law to be property. An imminent lethal threat to your dog is not the same as an imminent lethal threat to you or another person. And a person's willingness to use lethal force against you does not justify your use of lethal force against him unless that willingness is manifest by (1) the present ability to kill of cripple you; and (2) the ability to immediately deploy lethal force against you; and (3) the manifest intent to immediately kill or cripple you.
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Page generated in 0.02901 seconds with 8 queries