Dogs off leash in the East End: The saga continues (legally, castle)

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by MeinGlanzendMotorrad

It does in fact confer a credible threat upon my person if you're attacking my dog which would 99.99% likely be right next to me.

To defend my dog, I might consider a gun, though I don't have a dog at the moment.

[Aqua Teen Carl]

Originally Posted by jay5835

Would you go to jail for that? Does the "self-defense" concept extend to one's canine companion?

The disparity of force between a dog mace and a handgun is huge and he'd do many many years if that was the case.

[jay5835]

Originally Posted by Aqua Teen Carl

The disparity of force between a dog mace and a handgun is huge and he'd do many many years if that was the case.

That's what I was afraid of. There always seems to be a better reason not to carry a gun. I'd probably shoot someone, thinking I had the right, and I'd be the one to end up in jail. I think I'll stick with gun-free.

[gg]

Originally Posted by jay5835

That's what I was afraid of. There always seems to be a better reason not to carry a gun. I'd probably shoot someone, thinking I had the right, and I'd be the one to end up in jail. I think I'll stick with gun-free.

You would only be in for 20 years, give or take. I mean it isn't that long.

[ML North]

Originally Posted by MeinGlanzendMotorrad

You mace my dog, I put a bullet in you.

I realize that you like to talk about carrying (and potentially using) a gun because it makes you feel good, but:

(1) It's incredibly unlikely that anyone is going to be at all interested in macing your dog unless it's attacking them.

(2) This would land you a murder charge probably.

(3) Even if the person was macing you, you would still, almost without question, be charged with manslaughter or murder.

(4) If you think that your dog's or even your own eyes burning for a few minutes is worth shooting someone, perhaps you should reconsider your choice to carry around a gun. Loose cannon?

(5) I don't see why someone that "wouldn't be at all uncomfortable walking around Homewood at 3AM" would feel the need to carry a gun.

Honestly, the empty gun threats assine and childish.

[MeinGlanzendMotorrad]

Originally Posted by Aqua Teen Carl

The disparity of force between a dog mace and a handgun is huge and he'd do many many years if that was the case.

Fortunately there's no such thing as your magical little disparity of force that automatically gauges whether it was justified!

[MeinGlanzendMotorrad]

Originally Posted by ML North

I realize that you like to talk about carrying (and potentially using) a gun because it makes you feel good, but:

(1) It's incredibly unlikely that anyone is going to be at all interested in macing your dog unless it's attacking them.

(2) This would land you a murder charge probably.

(3) Even if the person was macing you, you would still, almost without question, be charged with manslaughter or murder.

(4) If you think that your dog's or even your own eyes burning for a few minutes is worth shooting someone, perhaps you should reconsider your choice to carry around a gun. Loose cannon?

(5) I don't see why someone that "wouldn't be at all uncomfortable walking around Homewood at 3AM" would feel the need to carry a gun.

Honestly, the empty gun threats assine and childish.

1) And thus incredibly unlikely I'd have to shoot someone for doing it.
2) Probably not, no.
3) Likely not, no.
4) If you don't think it's valid to defend yourself against someone using a chemical weapon against you which can incapacitate you to the point of being unable to defend yourself, perhaps you should reconsider your choice to live in a society where your options are more than just "Frown and take what the bad man decides to do to you."
5) I don't see how that's relevant.

[MeinGlanzendMotorrad]

Originally Posted by ML North

Honestly, the empty gun threats assine and childish.

And lastly, I don't think you understand what a threat is. I simply voiced my stance of "If you attack me or my dog, I will defend with justified force."

[ML North]

Originally Posted by MeinGlanzendMotorrad

And lastly, I don't think you understand what a threat is. I simply voiced my stance of "If you attack me or my dog, I will defend with justified force."

I think "I put a bullet in you," which is in fact exactly what you said, is a threat, regardless of whether or not it is conditional upon some other action.

[ML North]

Originally Posted by MeinGlanzendMotorrad

2) Probably not, no.
3) Likely not, no.

So there are a lot of qualifiers regarding when it is appropriate for using deadly force, and admittedly there is a ton of case law that I don't know. But, a principal factor in deciding whether or not to use deadly force is whether your agressor has a perceived intent of harming you. I think if a person carrying mace points it away from you and towards your dog, it's perfectly clear that the intent was not to harm you.

And I'm not at all advocating that anyone should be running around macing animals, but the idea that you're going to kill someone over your dog's burning eyes is so messed up.