can u shoot a man for killing your dog?

JoeSparky · May 7, 2010

imported post

Glock17 wrote:

This is what the event might look like. Its disturbing to view.

Refering to the pic on the previous post....

With the LITTLE squirrel... someone might STILL get 2 for 1 EVEN WITH HOLLOWPOINT DEFENSE AMMO!

Citizen · May 7, 2010

imported post

New Scenario:

You are browsing one of your favorite gun rights forums and somebody starts a thread asking abouta pet shooting. Then, not oneperson cites a statute or court opinion in their replies.

1. Question: What happens to the thread. Answer: Read the preceding posts.

2. Question: Can you shoot the posters for yakking around without actually answering the question with a legal cite?

3. Question: Can you shoot the OPer for not recognizing nobody answered his question with a legal cite?

For the person who directly answered the OPer's question without providing a cite:

Forum Rule #7

7) If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

BigDave · May 7, 2010

imported post

Tony Santiago wrote:

does washington law allow you to shoot a man for killing your dog right in front of you? the dog thread reminded me of this question. if you are out walking your dog, or are at a dog park, and a man just randomly but purposely shoots your dog, or kills him by whatever other method, can you legally shoot him?

Only if your life or a life of another is in immediate threat of life or limb or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.

Look at the related RCW's, but first a reminder at the Definitions of Necessary for a better understanding on the use of deadly force.

RCW 9A.16.010 Definitions.
In this chapter, unless a different meaning is plainly required:

(1) "Necessary" means that no reasonably effective alternative to the use of force appeared to exist and that the amount of force used was reasonable to effect the lawful purpose intended.

(2) "Deadly force" means the intentional application of force through the use of firearms or any other means reasonably likely to cause death or serious physical injury.

As we read the following defenses they are all talking about people not our pets.

RCW 9A.16.020 Use of force — When lawful.

The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:

(1) Whenever necessarily used by a public officer in the performance of a legal duty, or a person assisting the officer and acting under the officer's direction;

(2) Whenever necessarily used by a person arresting one who has committed a felony and delivering him or her to a public officer competent to receive him or her into custody;

(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;

(4) Whenever reasonably used by a person to detain someone who enters or remains unlawfully in a building or on real property lawfully in the possession of such person, so long as such detention is reasonable in duration and manner to investigate the reason for the detained person's presence on the premises, and so long as the premises in question did not reasonably appear to be intended to be open to members of the public;

(5) Whenever used by a carrier of passengers or the carrier's authorized agent or servant, or other person assisting them at their request in expelling from a carriage, railway car, vessel, or other vehicle, a passenger who refuses to obey a lawful and reasonable regulation prescribed for the conduct of passengers, if such vehicle has first been stopped and the force used is not more than is necessary to expel the offender with reasonable regard to the offender's personal safety;

(6) Whenever used by any person to prevent a mentally ill, mentally incompetent, or mentally disabled person from committing an act dangerous to any person, or in enforcing necessary restraint for the protection or restoration to health of the person, during such period only as is necessary to obtain legal authority for the restraint or custody of the person.

RCW 9A.16.050 Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.

I have a Shih Tzu and the thought of someone harming him would bring a harsh reaction from me as there would no way he could present a danger, all 10 lbs of him, knowing this they had to be shooting at me! or my gun went off accidentally trying to beat the dog off of him. :uhoh:

He barks but his Owner BITES :cuss:

TechnoWeenie · May 7, 2010

imported post

Dogs don't have 'rights'..

I believe it would fall under firearm discharge, reckless endangerment, and civil matters (vet bills, traumatic situation,etc)

I vaguely remember reading an RCW, but I believe it was about animal cruelty....

Tomas · May 8, 2010

imported post

Big Dave made the cites, so I won't repeat them, but if someone shot, or shot at, my dog while I was walking him, that means they have fired a weapon aimed in my direction, and I would be afraid I'd be next, or in other words, I'd be in fear for my life or serious bodily injury.

My initial response would be to try to take the immediate threat out (he has already fired in my direction!) if I could, and I wouldn't be giving any warnings to see if he was going to drop his weapon or change his aim by a few degrees and take me out.

Let's face it, with the assailant already having his weapon drawn, aimed in your direction, and having already fired at least once, you are coming late to the gunfight - you haven't even reached for your weapon yet.

I don't believe there is time for the niceties of politely asking that he not fire in your direction again... :?

BigDave · May 8, 2010

imported post

Tomas you are very clear in your response ie the dog was next to you, and may I add this would be an issue of shooting at you not your dog, if the dog was hit it was done in error.
If your dog was off leash and running around then sadly that is a different story.

This topic concerns me at some level as it is asking "can u shoot a man for killing your dog?" the clear answer here is NO!

While some will argue that there is no stupid questions and I am glad someone asked instead of acting.

Aaron1124 · May 8, 2010

imported post

BigDave wrote:

Tomas you are very clear in your response ie the dog was next to you, and may I add this would be an issue of shooting at you not your dog, if the dog was hit it was done in error.
If your dog was off leash and running around then sadly that is a different story.

This topic concerns me at some level as it is asking "can u shoot a man for killing your dog?" the clear answer here is NO!

While some will argue that there is no stupid questions and I am glad someone asked instead of acting.

Agreed. However, I bet there are many that would shoot a man who blatantly shot their dog for no reason.

Tomas · May 8, 2010

imported post

BigDave wrote:

Tomas you are very clear in your response ie the dog was next to you, and may I add this would be an issue of shooting at you not your dog, if the dog was hit it was done in error.
If your dog was off leash and running around then sadly that is a different story.

This topic concerns me at some level as it is asking "can u shoot a man for killing your dog?" the clear answer here is NO!

While some will argue that there is no stupid questions and I am glad someone asked instead of acting.

You are clearly correct, that if the dog and master are physically separated by an appreciable distance, the question is different, as the person has not necessarily fired in the master's direction.

However, where I have lived here in Washington State, "Leash Laws" have applied, and my dogs are on lead when being "walked," hence my narrowed answer.

While camping or in other situations where my dogs would be off-lead and free to run, rather than being "walked," the equation is, of course, different. If there were no reason for the shooting, I might still feel the shooting of my dog was just the start of a sequence that would include me, and in that case, I might still respond defensively.

(As much as it might feel "right" or "justified" to shoot the shooter simply in retribution for shooting my dog, that would not be appropriate - or legal...) :X

Aaron1124 · May 8, 2010

imported post

Here's a question:

How about if you and your buddy are out hiking. You're a good distance apart (say, 50 feet), and a man jumps out, and shoots your friend on the spot, and kills him. Can you legally shoot back at him if he isn't firing at your direction, and he's already killed your friend?

Tomas · May 8, 2010

imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:

Here's a question:

How about if you and your buddy are out hiking. You're a good distance apart (say, 50 feet), and a man jumps out, and shoots your friend on the spot, and kills him. Can you legally shoot back at him if he isn't firing at your direction, and he's already killed your friend?

I'm afraid at that point I would simply drop back into my military training and attempt to take out the enemy threat. If it were in my power (and with luck), the attacker would be dead by the side of the trail.

After that, it would be time for the system to sort it out, and I have no assurance which way it would go. :?

ETA: The reason I'm not certain of any legal outcome is that while I would have witnessed the felony murder of my hiking companion, but by killing his attacker in turn I would NOT be preventing the felony nor coming to my buddy's aid as he is already dead. At the most I would be protecting possibly myself or others, but of the attacker had already dropped his weapon, even that might not apply... Very sticky.

BigDave · May 8, 2010

imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:

Here's a question:

How about if you and your buddy are out hiking. You're a good distance apart (say, 50 feet), and a man jumps out, and shoots your friend on the spot, and kills him. Can you legally shoot back at him if he isn't firing at your direction, and he's already killed your friend?

Aaron are you carrying yet? This concerns me, I hope these questions are being asked ahead of time not after the fact.

The RCW's provide for the defense of yourself and others in your presence.

Get to know these RCW's http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?Cite=9A

[line]RCW 9A.16.020 Use of force — When lawful.The use, attempt, or offer to use force upon or toward the person of another is not unlawful in the following cases:

(3) Whenever used by a party about to be injured, or by another lawfully aiding him or her, in preventing or attempting to prevent an offense against his or her person, or a malicious trespass, or other malicious interference with real or personal property lawfully in his or her possession, in case the force is not more than is necessary;

[line]RCW 9A.16.050 Homicide — By other person — When justifiable.Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.
[line]

There are many components to any defensive act and what I have posted here is only a fraction of the full story sort of speak.

Quality Training is imperative and research as there are many factors involved.

http://www.firearmsacademy.com/

amzbrady · May 8, 2010

imported post

Aaron1124 wrote:

BigDave wrote:

Tomas you are very clear in your response ie the dog was next to you, and may I add this would be an issue of shooting at you not your dog, if the dog was hit it was done in error.
If your dog was off leash and running around then sadly that is a different story.

This topic concerns me at some level as it is asking "can u shoot a man for killing your dog?" the clear answer here is NO!

While some will argue that there is no stupid questions and I am glad someone asked instead of acting.

Click to expand...

Agreed. However, I bet there are many that would shoot a man who blatantly shot their dog for no reason.

So if you are in a field you are at one end, your dog is at the other, a shooter walks between you and your dog, then shoots your dog. You have to wait till the shooter turns and points his firearm in your direction before you can shoot them? They are not an immediate threat even though they have discharged a firearm in your vicinety, and have killed an animal?

BigDave · May 8, 2010

imported post

RCW 16.08.020 Dogs injuring stock may be killed.

It shall be lawful for any person who shall see any dog or dogs chasing, biting, injuring or killing any sheep, swine or other domestic animal, including poultry, belonging to such person, on any real property owned or leased by, or under the control of, such person, or on any public highway, to kill such dog or dogs, and it shall be the duty of the owner or keeper of any dog or dogs so found chasing, biting or injuring any domestic animal, including poultry, upon being notified of that fact by the owner of such domestic animals or poultry, to thereafter keep such dog or dogs in leash or confined upon the premises of the owner or keeper thereof, and in case any such owner or keeper of a dog or dogs shall fail or neglect to comply with the provisions of this section, it shall be lawful for the owner of such domestic animals or poultry to kill such dog or dogs found running at large.
[1929 c 198 § 6; RRS § 3107. Prior: 1919 c 6 § 6; 1917 c 161 § 6; RCS § 3107.]

Definition of domestic animals include pets, ie your dog.

If I read this correctly if your dog is being attacked by a dog or dogs you can dispatch the animal.

Any other takes on this law?

amzbrady · May 8, 2010

imported post

BigDave wrote:

RCW 16.08.020 Dogs injuring stock may be killed.

It shall be lawful for any person who shall see any dog or dogs chasing, biting, injuring or killing any sheep, swine or other domestic animal, including poultry, belonging to such person, on any real property owned or leased by, or under the control of, such person, or on any public highway, to kill such dog or dogs, and it shall be the duty of the owner or keeper of any dog or dogs so found chasing, biting or injuring any domestic animal, including poultry, upon being notified of that fact by the owner of such domestic animals or poultry, to thereafter keep such dog or dogs in leash or confined upon the premises of the owner or keeper thereof, and in case any such owner or keeper of a dog or dogs shall fail or neglect to comply with the provisions of this section, it shall be lawful for the owner of such domestic animals or poultry to kill such dog or dogs found running at large.
[1929 c 198 § 6; RRS § 3107. Prior: 1919 c 6 § 6; 1917 c 161 § 6; RCS § 3107.]

Definition of domestic animals include pets, ie your dog.

If I read this correctly if your dog is being attacked by a dog or dogs you can dispatch the animal.

Any other takes on this law?

You seem to be correct. I wonder why they didnt include humans in the list. Seems that you can not shoot if it is attacking your children...

Edited to include: Looks like YOU have to be the owner of said domestic animal, you can not be the friend who is taking said attacked animal for a walk.

BigDave · May 8, 2010

imported post

amzbrady wrote:

So if you are in a field you are at one end, your dog is at the other, a shooter walks between you and your dog, then shoots your dog.
You have to wait till the shooter turns and points his firearm in your direction before you can shoot them?

They are not an immediate threat even though they have discharged a firearm in your vicinity, and have killed an animal?

A human life will supersede an animals life regardless of personal feelings.

amzbrady what law do you feel that would support your position? Have you read the appropriate RCW's?

Is this becoming an epidemic, one should know these answers before they start carrying.

amzbrady are you carrying now? If you are Stop and Seek out Professional Training.

BigDave · May 8, 2010

imported post

amzbrady wrote:

BigDave wrote:

RCW 16.08.020 Dogs injuring stock may be killed.

It shall be lawful for any person who shall see any dog or dogs chasing, biting, injuring or killing any sheep, swine or other domestic animal, including poultry, belonging to such person, on any real property owned or leased by, or under the control of, such person, or on any public highway, to kill such dog or dogs, and it shall be the duty of the owner or keeper of any dog or dogs so found chasing, biting or injuring any domestic animal, including poultry, upon being notified of that fact by the owner of such domestic animals or poultry, to thereafter keep such dog or dogs in leash or confined upon the premises of the owner or keeper thereof, and in case any such owner or keeper of a dog or dogs shall fail or neglect to comply with the provisions of this section, it shall be lawful for the owner of such domestic animals or poultry to kill such dog or dogs found running at large.
[1929 c 198 § 6; RRS § 3107. Prior: 1919 c 6 § 6; 1917 c 161 § 6; RCS § 3107.]

Definition of domestic animals include pets, ie your dog.

If I read this correctly if your dog is being attacked by a dog or dogs you can dispatch the animal.

Any other takes on this law?

Click to expand...

You seem to be correct. I wonder why they didnt include humans in the list. Seems that you can not shoot if it is attacking your children...

It is really time you start studying and reading the RCW's 9A.16 "can not shoot if it is attacking your children" now that so far off base :banghead::banghead::banghead:

amzbrady · May 8, 2010

imported post

BigDave wrote:

amzbrady wrote:

So if you are in a field you are at one end, your dog is at the other, a shooter walks between you and your dog, then shoots your dog.
You have to wait till the shooter turns and points his firearm in your direction before you can shoot them?

They are not an immediate threat even though they have discharged a firearm in your vicinity, and have killed an animal?

Click to expand...

A human life will supersede an animals life regardless of personal feelings.

amzbrady what law do you feel that would support your position? Have you read the appropriate RCW's?

Is this becoming an epidemic, one should know these answers before they start carrying.

amzbrady are you carrying now? If you are Stop and Seek out Professional Training.

Dave same RCW you quoted right here.

Posted: Saturday May 8th, 2010 14:41

Tomas you are very clear in your response ie the dog was next to you, and may I add this would be an issue of shooting at you not your dog, if the dog was hit it was done in error.
If your dog was off leash and running around then sadly that is a different story.

This topic concerns me at some level as it is asking "can u shoot a man for killing your dog?" the clear answer here is NO!

While some will argue that there is no stupid questions and I am glad someone asked instead of acting.

BigDave · May 8, 2010

imported post

amzbrady wrote;

So if you are in a field you are at one end, your dog is at the other, a shooter walks between you and your dog, then shoots your dog.

You have to wait till the shooter turns and points his firearm in your direction before you can shoot them?

They are not an immediate threat even though they have discharged a firearm in your vicinety, and have killed an animal?

Is there a missed placed punctuation in your sentence " You have to wait till the shooter turns and points his firearm in your direction before you can shoot them?" ie (?) for a (.) as it appears you are asking a question and the other way you would be making a statement.

If it is a question then you should have known the answer already but if you did not then it is good you asked but concern still looms as to being ready to carry.

If you are making a statement supporting one would not be able to shoot then you would be accurate.

amzbrady · May 8, 2010

imported post

BigDave wrote:

amzbrady wrote;

So if you are in a field you are at one end, your dog is at the other, a shooter walks between you and your dog, then shoots your dog. [shadow=red]This is the scenerio...[/shadow]

Click to expand...

You have to wait till the shooter turns and points his firearm in your direction before you can shoot them? [shadow=red]This is part 1 of the question...[/shadow]

Click to expand...

They are not an immediate threat even though they have discharged a firearm in your vicinety, and have killed an animal? [shadow=red]This is part 2[/shadow]

Click to expand...

Is there a missed placed punctuation in your sentence " You have to wait till the shooter turns and points his firearm in your direction before you can shoot them?" ie (?) for a (.) as it appears you are asking a question and the other way you would be making a statement.

If it is a question then you should have known the answer already but if you did not then it is good you asked but concern still looms as to being ready to carry.

If you are making a statement supporting one would not be able to shoot then you would be accurate.

killchain · May 8, 2010

imported post

*sniff sniff*

I smell a Troll.

can u shoot a man for killing your dog?

Centurion

Founder's Club Member

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Opt-Out Members

Regular Member

Regular Member