• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

What would you do/ have done if you where in my shoes?

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
On the first part, you think it IS a hard task, again, you fail to comprehend the whole sentence applies. See the first acronym? IMHO means In My Humble Opinion and it has not changed. You aparently think it is a hard task, if so, then say so instead of trying to pick an argument like you so often do.
1) I am well aware of what "IMHO" means.
2) I have a rational respect for the vigor with which a full-sized dog can wield its jaws in an actual attack, which is completely separate from how my full-sized dog goes limp when I dominate it with one hand, with poor shoulders.

LMTD said:
Here is another position I have for you to play with, it is not real hard to discourage a dog from attacking or discontinuing an attack, though in the case of a trained police dog, they tend to be trained to a level that requires serious injury or death before they back off,not the case with the "regular" dog short of health issues.

Instead of trying to pick a fuss with me, why don't you just address the OP's question and answer that you feel however it is that you feel?

You seem to be focused upon a claim that an average healthy adult male can fend off an actual dog attack with bare hands. Do you have any actual data to back that up, other than your 'humble' opinion?



Do you think an actual attacking dog will back off at some level that doesn't involve serious injury or death? If so, what DO you base that upon? If you feel it is "not real hard to discourage a dog from attacking," how do YOU do that, and how often have you actually tested this against an attacking dog?
 

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
1) Do you think an actual attacking dog will back off at some level that doesn't involve serious injury or death? If so, what DO you base that upon? If you feel it is "not real hard to discourage a dog from attacking," how do YOU do that, and how often have you actually tested this against an attacking dog?

1. Do you think an actual attacking dog will back off at some level that doesn't involve serious injury or death?
2. If so, what DO you base that upon?
3. If you feel it is "not real hard to discourage a dog from attacking," how do YOU do that, and how often have you actually tested this against an attacking dog?

Lets be sure we clarify this a little first. There is a significant difference in a trained attack dog and pets, I will do pets first.

To number 1, absolutely and without any doubt at all. A dog will typically only attack within a very few circumstances. If its territory is violated and yes, the dog decides its territory, if it gets to roam the whole block, it owns it all, if it gets six blocks it owns all that, if it is restricted to its yard, it typically owns only that. This alone is a good reason not to let your own dog roam, they can easily mistake folks for threats. The other and common action for a dog, particularly weak dogs is to bluff an attack. They learn by doing so they will indeed be left alone. They are very used to humans retreating in fear from said actions, a simple loud “no” and an aggressive step at them will cause these dogs to bolt. Dogs will not hunt or attack prey larger than themselves if not in a pack, if it is not trained to do so, it will not be posturing with an adult human unless it has a very weak temperament.

It is also notable that an untrained dog has limits and if they miss in the attack mode the third time, they tend to abandon the attack, simply standing your ground and making the dog miss in its attacks will deter them from continuing. Knowing you are in a fight and paying attention to that simple fact instead of panicking which in reality is what most do.

Trained attack dog on the other hand, you are going to have to injure it, you are likely to be injured as well and may even employ that as part of your attack. That’s right, to use a cliché’ from Josey Whales “plumb mad dog mean” in other words and what you seem to be missing is simply that you must ATTACK the dog, not defend yourself.

Its not Karate or nija stuff, it is flat out attacking the dog. There are methods to better increase your success times and decrease your injuries.

Number 2, I base it upon raising and training attack dogs for the Sheriff’s department years ago with my father. Raising and training show dogs as well and learning and knowing breeds.

Number 3, every situation is different so it is indeed hard to answer your question without defining it a little, again trained vs untrained. Untrained, it is not very likely I would be attacked by such a dog, however if I was, as stated I would punt its butt in a large way. That part is about timing and the attack needs to be in progress, meaning the dog coming at you not the other way around, they are too quick for that at all.

Trained, your getting bit, the end,. You need to know it, understand it, and pick it. Your best choice is if you have time, cover your left forearm, if not it goes uncovered and when the dog bites down on it, you take the dogs back, pull that forearm into its mouth so it may not release and with your right you come under the throat and choke the dog to death.

To that last part of number 3, I have been the “dummy” involved in training dogs 5-10 times and even with huge pads that my dad punched me while wearing to “prove them” it was scary as can be the first time, not much better the second but somewhere after 4 or 5 it was almost fun. Outside of training the animals, fewer than 10 have gotten close enough to bother with at all, none were trained animals and only one got its teeth on me. A sweeping motion with my fist catching it in the rib cage discouraged it enough to run off. All of the other strange dogs never came close to closing the distance, they simply fell where they stood from a bullet wound, a hazard of farming and city folks dumping their pets.

There is a lot more to it than I have time to discuss, but defeating a dog is not a hard task IMHO, you do have to think about it and you do have to decide to do it and not think about defending yourself but actually decide to kill the animal and I suppose that is the more likely part that causes a lot of folks to fail, they just want the dog to quit, it does not work that way. If you do as described and you choke it out but decide to “let it live” you are going to find that as far as doggie is concerned the fight is still on and you better be committed to putting it down once you start as it is committed to doing the same thing to you. I suppose one other item to mention particular to the fight, doggies want your back, never give it to them, you can not kick or hit very hard backwards.
 

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
You seem to be focused upon a claim that an average healthy adult male can fend off an actual dog attack with bare hands. Do you have any actual data to back that up, other than your 'humble' opinion?

Now it is my turn for questions.

How come police dogs can indeed take down even firearm brandishing suspects? What about the ones with knives? How can a dog do such things with a fair amount of ease? FYI the answer lies within your own thoughts and comments.

Next, how many healthy adult humans have you heard of being killed by a dog?

Ever see the doggies on cops?

Ever notice how they clamp down and hang on, almost never letting go?
Know why?

There is a really cool one of a biker dude in a leather jacket that is holding the dog in the air clamped on his forearm shaking it trying to get it off, but the doggie won't let go, cool and educational stuff really.

There are very specific reasons to use dogs in police work, none of them have to do with how tough a dog is or how well it will do in a fight with a human.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
To number 1, absolutely and without any doubt at all. A dog will typically only attack within a very few circumstances. If its territory is violated and yes, the dog decides its territory, if it gets to roam the whole block, it owns it all, if it gets six blocks it owns all that, if it is restricted to its yard, it typically owns only that. This alone is a good reason not to let your own dog roam, they can easily mistake folks for threats. The other and common action for a dog, particularly weak dogs is to bluff an attack. They learn by doing so they will indeed be left alone. They are very used to humans retreating in fear from said actions, a simple loud “no” and an aggressive step at them will cause these dogs to bolt. Dogs will not hunt or attack prey larger than themselves if not in a pack, if it is not trained to do so, it will not be posturing with an adult human unless it has a very weak temperament.
The OP called the 'bluff.' And the dog advanced.



LMTD said:
Its not Karate or nija stuff, it is flat out attacking the dog. There are methods to better increase your success times and decrease your injuries.
Maybe not karate or ninja stuff, but it IS 'stuff' that isn't arrived at without forethought and planning.
LMTD said:
Number 3, every situation is different so it is indeed hard to answer your question without defining it a little, again trained vs untrained. Untrained, it is not very likely I would be attacked by such a dog, however if I was, as stated I would punt its butt in a large way. That part is about timing and the attack needs to be in progress, meaning the dog coming at you not the other way around, they are too quick for that at all.
I highlighted the most relevant portion. Every situation is different. Yet your statement was crafted as a cover-all.

LMTD said:
There is a lot more to it than I have time to discuss, but defeating a dog is not a hard task IMHO, you do have to think about it and you do have to decide to do it and not think about defending yourself but actually decide to kill the animal and I suppose that is the more likely part that causes a lot of folks to fail, they just want the dog to quit, it does not work that way. If you do as described and you choke it out but decide to “let it live” you are going to find that as far as doggie is concerned the fight is still on and you better be committed to putting it down once you start as it is committed to doing the same thing to you. I suppose one other item to mention particular to the fight, doggies want your back, never give it to them, you can not kick or hit very hard backwards.
Given your vast experience working with dogs (not sarcasm, just recognizing the depth of your experience), I can understand WHY you view it as you do. Yet the part you seem to be forgetting is that MOST healthy adult males do NOT have that understanding of dogs. The cover-all fails in the real world application of exerience...or lack thereof on the part of those who do not have your experience.

For the rest of us regular guys, healthy or not, it is a bit more than "not a hard task."
 

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
1. The OP called the 'bluff.' And the dog advanced.



2.Maybe not karate or ninja stuff, but it IS 'stuff' that isn't arrived at without forethought and planning.

3.I highlighted the most relevant portion. Every situation is different. Yet your statement was crafted as a cover-all.

4.The cover-all fails in the real world application of exerience...or lack thereof on the part of those who do not have your experience.

5.For the rest of us regular guys, healthy or not, it is a bit more than "not a hard task."

Hmm where to start,

Numbering again for clarity only.

1. I am not sure he called its bluff convincingly, I have little doubt he did his best, it is safe to say the dog was unconvinced, fair enough?

2. Well, I guess you have a point there, but when I consider personal protection, it does not include only human aggressors, we can write that off to living on a farm. We may not have malaria here but I still pack OFF for camping. In today’s world urban, suburban or rural if you have not planned or thought out the possibility of being attacked by a dog with all the press and commentary about that very thing, you are failing in your plans.

3. From my perspective, it remains a coverall. I said, and yes I am only speaking to the first part of the sentence “IMHO no dog is a competitive factor for s full grown healthy man,” and we can argue semantics if you choose or you can take me at my word to say “A full grown healthy man is capable of killing a dog with his bare hands” and understand I stand by that 100% and it takes no specialized training. It takes even less to significantly de-motivate the animal and cause retreat.

4. Imho it requires no experience at all, however it certainly requires your second point, you have to plan for it, if you do not, you are going to have a much much bigger problem.

5. I was actually hoping you would come to the understanding without having to point it out. I have found that to be a much more convincing method in gaining mutual understanding over disagreements.

Police dogs are employed because they smell real well, that has ALWAYS been the reason, they do not need to see the suspect to find him over long distances like we do. They also choose GS’s because they are LOUD, have BIG teeth that they can bare very well, and they are heavy.

Most folks FEAR big mean dogs, dogs sense fear and humans show it in a big way. When a suspect is in a house or building, you send the dog in because the dog will sniff them out and begin acting aggressive. If the suspect stands PERFECTLY still, they will not get bit without a command to do so, they will however continue to bark and maintain close proximity to the suspect. If the suspect moves, depending upon training methods, they will bite and hang on or will bite once and then bite again and hang on, this is where the heavy part comes in, loud already announced find and location, the hold reduces the ability of the suspect to travel.

I offer to you sir, the final reason dogs are so effective, they instill fear in many and fear most often leads to panic and panic lends itself to disorganized thinking and a loss of effective process. If a man grabs a hold of you, it may or may not start panic, but a man squaring off and getting loud likely heightens your sense of awareness and you likely prepare in your mind for actions of either flight or fight. But a dog for whatever reason puts most folks over the edge, despite the simple fact that the animal is not that likely to kill you, it sure may hurt you, but death is nowhere near automatic from a dog attack. They will think about flight, but few think about fight at all because they are panicked and do not know what to do.

Even the most aggressive pitbull around has a real problem if you grab its back leg and flip it onto its back into the submissive position, you can not only drag it where ever you want, one quick flip of the wrist, you will find a doggie with a dislocated hip and about 0 motivation to lunge at you again and you do not have to feel the guilt for killing it.

As with anything, opinions vary, if you would have preferred “capable” instead, someone else would have argued knowledge required does not exist, I personally consider the human critter a much more capable foe even unarmed than a vast majority of the other critters out there.
 
Last edited:

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Hmm where to start,

Numbering again for clarity only.

1. I am not sure he called its bluff convincingly, I have little doubt he did his best, it is safe to say the dog was unconvinced, fair enough?
Yes, the dog was unconvinced. It is valid to say that it might have been attack and not bluff.
LMTD said:
2. Well, I guess you have a point there, but when I consider personal protection, it does not include only human aggressors, we can write that off to living on a farm. We may not have malaria here but I still pack OFF for camping. In today’s world urban, suburban or rural if you have not planned or thought out the possibility of being attacked by a dog with all the press and commentary about that very thing, you are failing in your plans.
And goodness, a firearm is a good tool for the job, with the benefit of maybe avoiding teeth in body.

LMTD said:
3. From my perspective, it remains a coverall. I said, and yes I am only speaking to the first part of the sentence “IMHO no dog is a competitive factor for s full grown healthy man,” and we can argue semantics if you choose or you can take me at my word to say “A full grown healthy man is capable of killing a dog with his bare hands” and understand I stand by that 100% and it takes no specialized training. It takes even less to significantly de-motivate the animal and cause retreat.
"full grown healthy man with training and knowledge of how to do such." IMHO, that is a SMALL segment of the healthy adult male population. Maybe your farm-raised friends, but city-raised?

LMTD said:
4. Imho it requires no experience at all, however it certainly requires your second point, you have to plan for it, if you do not, you are going to have a much much bigger problem.
IMHO, once again, planning to place lead in center mass is better than attempting to grapple.
And, that is likely to be the better choice for the large segment of the population, whether healthy adult male or otherwise.

LMTD said:
5. I was actually hoping you would come to the understanding without having to point it out. I have found that to be a much more convincing method in gaining mutual understanding over disagreements.
I "understood" what I said in 5 already. Your coverall does not account for actual average citizens, but just that subset that is healthy adult male, trained and understanding of how to strangle a dog with bare hands.........
That is a lot of stretch to avoid pointing out.
 
Last edited:

Firedawg314

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2011
Messages
227
Location
Florissant, Mo
Hmm where to start,

Numbering again for clarity only.

1. I am not sure he called its bluff convincingly, I have little doubt he did his best, it is safe to say the dog was unconvinced, fair enough?

2. Well, I guess you have a point there, but when I consider personal protection, it does not include only human aggressors, we can write that off to living on a farm. We may not have malaria here but I still pack OFF for camping. In today’s world urban, suburban or rural if you have not planned or thought out the possibility of being attacked by a dog with all the press and commentary about that very thing, you are failing in your plans.

3. From my perspective, it remains a coverall. I said, and yes I am only speaking to the first part of the sentence “IMHO no dog is a competitive factor for s full grown healthy man,” and we can argue semantics if you choose or you can take me at my word to say “A full grown healthy man is capable of killing a dog with his bare hands” and understand I stand by that 100% and it takes no specialized training. It takes even less to significantly de-motivate the animal and cause retreat.

4. Imho it requires no experience at all, however it certainly requires your second point, you have to plan for it, if you do not, you are going to have a much much bigger problem.

5. I was actually hoping you would come to the understanding without having to point it out. I have found that to be a much more convincing method in gaining mutual understanding over disagreements.

Police dogs are employed because they smell real well, that has ALWAYS been the reason, they do not need to see the suspect to find him over long distances like we do. They also choose GS’s because they are LOUD, have BIG teeth that they can bare very well, and they are heavy.

Most folks FEAR big mean dogs, dogs sense fear and humans show it in a big way. When a suspect is in a house or building, you send the dog in because the dog will sniff them out and begin acting aggressive. If the suspect stands PERFECTLY still, they will not get bit without a command to do so, they will however continue to bark and maintain close proximity to the suspect. If the suspect moves, depending upon training methods, they will bite and hang on or will bite once and then bite again and hang on, this is where the heavy part comes in, loud already announced find and location, the hold reduces the ability of the suspect to travel.

I offer to you sir, the final reason dogs are so effective, they instill fear in many and fear most often leads to panic and panic lends itself to disorganized thinking and a loss of effective process. If a man grabs a hold of you, it may or may not start panic, but a man squaring off and getting loud likely heightens your sense of awareness and you likely prepare in your mind for actions of either flight or fight. But a dog for whatever reason puts most folks over the edge, despite the simple fact that the animal is not that likely to kill you, it sure may hurt you, but death is nowhere near automatic from a dog attack. They will think about flight, but few think about fight at all because they are panicked and do not know what to do.

Even the most aggressive pitbull around has a real problem if you grab its back leg and flip it onto its back into the submissive position, you can not only drag it where ever you want, one quick flip of the wrist, you will find a doggie with a dislocated hip and about 0 motivation to lunge at you again and you do not have to feel the guilt for killing it.

As with anything, opinions vary, if you would have preferred “capable” instead, someone else would have argued knowledge required does not exist, I personally consider the human critter a much more capable foe even unarmed than a vast majority of the other critters out there.

I just want to say... good points.... here's another true story about dog attacks. I am an active fire firefighter here in the county. About two years ago, my captian responded with us to a call, nothing special, shortness of breath. For this day, he decided to wear the bunker pants. The family invited us in the house, as soon as we walked in the owner's pitbull rush and lock on to the courch area of his pants!!!!! Thank God, he was wearing that... his teeh penitrated the thick bunker pants, his own pants, underware, and broke his skin on the inner leg!!!! Of course the owners claim the dog is friendly and never bit anyone before. Dog almost lost its life, because right in front of me was a cop and he pulled his gun out and about to put on into the dog's head. Luckly the owner grab the dog's collar and forced the dog to let go.

Now maybe, the dog was terrority about its home and see all of us coming in there, maybe the dog didn't like him (we don't either...LOL). But the fact is NO ONE knows what will truly make an animal attack. Heck, Look on Animal Planet Channel, "when animals attack" Or "when animals go bad". If wondering... the pitbull looked young probably a year old.

So yeah, I have a healthy fear of dogs, but I love them... but FOR ME.... I will not think twice to put one down if something like that happens again. Same goes for a robber, etc. If they use a gun/ knife or anything in a threating manner, and its forcused on me... I will not think twice to pull the trigger. Meaning of course, if they left me no means to leave the area. Like they say...if a guy wants to fight you, just walk away, if two guys want to fight you... leave now.... if three or more want to fight...its a mob and they mean to end your life.
 

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
And goodness, a firearm is a good tool for the job, with the benefit of maybe avoiding teeth in body.

IMHO, once again, planning to place lead in center mass is better than attempting to grapple.
And, that is likely to be the better choice for the large segment of the population, whether healthy adult male or otherwise.

I "understood" what I said in 5 already. Your coverall does not account for actual average citizens, but just that subset that is healthy adult male, trained and understanding of how to strangle a dog with bare hands.........
That is a lot of stretch to avoid pointing out.

A firearm is a great tool for it on the farm with a very limited concern on the backstop and it is a tool I used often for the protection of cattle, as I said earlier, a hazard of city folks dropping their unwanted critters assuming they will be welcome guest getting plenty to eat. I am not so sure it is a great choice within the city, noting that it is fairly rare within the residential areas of st louis metro of being much more than 25 yards from a home in any direction and often times even if firing directly in line with the street you are less than 100 yards from one. Shotgun is a great choice, rifled cartridges not so much.

"Planning center of mass" I am not so sure we are going to agree that if one has not considered being attacked by a dog that they have indeed planned on shooting one, let alone practiced it. I am not going to bother with this argument much at all, seeing the targets and some of the CCW shooters, marksmanship and shooting in an unusual angle from hanging paper, not to mention a quickly darting around target, sir I offer that more could NOT complete that task than could!

Average citizens are far more likely to die driving to and from work tomorrow than they are to be attacked by a dog, let alone be killed by one ever in their lifetime. No statistical data to give you on this one either, but I would offer that situational awareness and defense are a way of life for some, but according to my own observation of the folks, reading, texting, talking on the phone, applying make up, dodging spilled coffee and trying to smack the screaming kids in the back seat, a vast majority of folks plan NOTHING including one of the most dangerous things they do, drive.

I would have to offer that IMHO use of a firearm without thought and planning for a situation has great implications that stretch the center of mass assumption on a much smaller moving target way beyond what you have implied.

Once you are done with that, we can begin discussing how few become even remotely safe with off handed shooting if the dog were to indeed bite the shooting hand before the person killed the dog. Lol I would even place a wager on the number of folks who could even manage to DRAW the weapon on strong side from the weak side WITHOUT panic and a doggie circling them!

arguable points will continue to exist and no matter our positions or opinions, very few will consider planning and practicing, some of the folks who are reading this thread will likely never bother with it and you nor I will fix that.
 

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
The family invited us in the house, as soon as we walked in the owner's pitbull rush and lock on to the courch area of his pants!!!!!

I have to say, I am besides myself on this one. I can not believe that the fire department, as prepared and drilled as they are, have not trained their personnel on this topic!

I do not know the political situation in the firehouse but I would suggest that you forward the recommendation to the head of training! By entering houses, you are absolutely violating ALL DOGS territories and YES, even dogs that would roll onto their backs and let you scratch their bellies in the yard will become hyper-aggressive when they are defending, including highly trained dogs.

If they do not do so, I would recommend you do so yourself as dogs will do exactly what you described, even warm and fuzzy ones having never been aggressive before.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Average citizens are far more likely to die driving to and from work tomorrow than they are to be attacked by a dog, let alone be killed by one ever in their lifetime.
Yep. If the choice is made to carry a firearm, and it is possible to defend against the rare eventuality of a dog attack with it, it makes more sense to plan for that, than to attempt to plan an equally chancy physical takedown.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
I would have to offer that IMHO use of a firearm without thought and planning for a situation has great implications that stretch the center of mass assumption on a much smaller moving target way beyond what you have implied.

Once you are done with that, we can begin discussing how few become even remotely safe with off handed shooting if the dog were to indeed bite the shooting hand before the person killed the dog. Lol I would even place a wager on the number of folks who could even manage to DRAW the weapon on strong side from the weak side WITHOUT panic and a doggie circling them!

The same difficulties a person would encounter when unarmed.

You can await direct contact to get your hands near the toothy end if you like. I will do my best to NOT wait.
 
Last edited:

peterarthur

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2010
Messages
613
Location
Phoenix, AZ
You guys can argue semantics all day long. Bottom line: dog in my yard growling at me, does not run away while I yell or motion at it, ears down, teeth bared...


BANG! (Chest) BANG! (head), drag dog to curb, call city to pick up.

Wrestle with the dog if you want to. Show off your superior strength and training. I am under no legal obligation to do so. Scary dog=dead dog in my yard. End of story.
Cops come, see dead dog, I tell story of being threatened, cops pat my back and leave.

Why complicate it? I am uninjured, bad doggy is dead, neighborhood is safer. Win Win Win :)

Sorry Target, we barely knew ye...
 
Last edited:

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
The same difficulties a person would encounter when unarmed.

You can await direct contact to get your hands near the toothy end if you like. I will do my best to NOT wait.


Uhm, well lets be clear here. I am NOT saying it would be wrong to shoot the dog.

If you look at the entire situation as a whole, the dog was scared off SOMEWHAT by the noise of the firearm shot into the ground. My position is simply that if fear had not been shown to the dog and extremely aggressive commands and body language were employed, the dog likely would have scampered away. If not, the end of the world is not happening. Sure you can shoot the dog, but my point which is likely not to clear after this many pages is simply that if the dog does attack, you HAVE TO DECIDE TO KILL IT. The OP indicates the dog was within 3 feet when he fired and the dog looked at him afterwards before running off. If one is going to use the firearm, it should have died before the lunge or during it. Frankly if the noise had not worked and the dog had been a trained one, we would be talking a lot more about off handed shooting as within three feet the second shot would likely not come from the hand with the weapon.

All in all, interesting and good discussion and hopefully more than a few at least are now considering planning and training for it as it is a very real possibility one may face in their future.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
Uhm, well lets be clear here. I am NOT saying it would be wrong to shoot the dog.
Good, that is clear. Did anyone imply that you were saying it would be wrong to shoot the dog? It simply seemed that you felt it was unnecessary to shoot the dog, because either the average healthy adult male could either get it to stand down, or could strangle it.


So, we can agree that it is valid to shoot the dog, and also that a healthy adult male, who understands dogs, and has practiced for hand-to-tooth combat with one might be able to kill it without weapons.

LMTD said:
If you look at the entire situation as a whole, the dog was scared off SOMEWHAT by the noise of the firearm shot into the ground. My position is simply that if fear had not been shown to the dog and extremely aggressive commands and body language were employed, the dog likely would have scampered away. If not, the end of the world is not happening. Sure you can shoot the dog, but my point which is likely not to clear after this many pages is simply that if the dog does attack, you HAVE TO DECIDE TO KILL IT. The OP indicates the dog was within 3 feet when he fired and the dog looked at him afterwards before running off. If one is going to use the firearm, it should have died before the lunge or during it. Frankly if the noise had not worked and the dog had been a trained one, we would be talking a lot more about off handed shooting as within three feet the second shot would likely not come from the hand with the weapon.
Hmmm.....
I guess you could have simply used that as your first response post in this thread, eh.


LMTD said:
All in all, interesting and good discussion and hopefully more than a few at least are now considering planning and training for it as it is a very real possibility one may face in their future.
??? Yet, you have also identified a dog attack as a rare occurrence. Is it really one that would be 'time well spent' preparing for?
 
Last edited:

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
??? Yet, you have also identified a dog attack as a rare occurrence. Is it really one that would be 'time well spent' preparing for?

No one within my family or extended family has ever reported an armed robbery, it is actually fairly rare, should I prepare for it?

Sir, personal security and survival are of significant interest to me. I see our country and the shape it is in and I have legitimate concerns, I prepare for those concerns and while animal attacks are indeed some what rare at this time, as more continue to have less, more pets will roam. I tend to think a little outside the box and while employing a firearm to defend ones self from any predator, there is great wisdom in knowing ones limitations if that tool becomes unavailable.

So yes, I can make my own power, make my own water, deal with any weather conditions, and defend myself in many ways, anytime, anywhere I am and I actively choose to live in that manner.

IMHO, one needs to put a LOT of thought into any situation they may face, prepare for it so as they may live as they see fit and not be at the mercy of others when a situation presents itself. Not to be critical of the OP, but that is indeed basically what happened, no prep for the situation left him panicked and hopeful mom or dad would open the door aka at the mercy of their response time which never came. I simply would not have had the same responses, nor likely would you as we are all different.

My point of a grown man being able to kill a dog bare handed is not one of criticism, it is one of fact and knowing one can do that and being prepared to indeed do so, eliminates panic and dependance on others for security. Simply imagine the firearm not working, if you have not got other options, you will be prone to flight and that gives up your back, a REAL bad choice. Preventing panic through preperation increases the clarity of mind in an emergency and he indeed was faced with one.
 

LMTD

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
1,919
Location
, ,
Interesting news account, surprised the paper did not skew it like they so often do.

I would give you extra points, but pokin the trolls with a stick is not an effective method.

:)
 

carracer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
1,108
Location
Nampa, Idaho, USA
First thing, Authorities should have been called by the op immediately for 2 reasons. Discharging the firearm and aggressive animal.

As Wrightme mentioned, I would shoot my own dog if it unjustly attacked someone.
 

Baked on Grease

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
629
Location
Sterling, Va.
There was a recent court case (no cite sorry, on my phone) where the court ruled that if you had time for a warning shot than there was no 'imminent" danger and therefore could be charged for the discharge. But I am not sure what appealet court it was... :(

Me personally, if I pull my sidearm, something is going to get hurt and I don't believe in Gaia (mother nature) so the ground won't feel it.

Sent using tapatalk
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Baked on Grease said:
There was a recent court case (no cite sorry, on my phone) where the court ruled that if you had time for a warning shot than there was no 'imminent" danger and therefore could be charged for the discharge.
I have been told that over & over by various trainers, including some who are also lawyers, even though I've never seen cites to cases where judges actually said that.
Shooting is always deadly force.
If you're shooting, it's because you're afraid for your life (or great bodily harm).
If you deliberately don't shoot the thing threatening you, obviously you didn't think you were in danger.
(Or it was a miss... even police miss many of their shots.) :rolleyes:

BOG said:
Me personally, if I pull my sidearm, something is going to get hurt
:banghead:
Placing a hand on the holstered pistol, or even drawing it,
are actions on the escalation of force continuum which starts with being aware of your surroundings & can end in an attacker losing hydraulic pressure.

If someone is stopped by showing the pistol, great!
If it takes putting your hand on it before they run away, at least they ran away.
If they stop or run away once it's drawn, again - they stopped attacking.
Maybe once it's pointed at them they'll remember a pressing appointment elsewhere.
If it's drawn & pointed at them & they keep advancing, they're obviously a serious threat.
THEN you shoot until the threat is gone.
That whole sequence might only take a few seconds.

All the way along, of course, you should be shouting things like "STAY AWAY!" "BACK OFF!" "DON'T HURT ME!" to:
1) get the message across to the attacker,
2) overcome auditory exclusion under stress
3) be intimidating (not an easy victim),
4) break your own shock/inaction
AND 5) to attract attention...
good attention for you, because (IMO) if people hear you shouting victim-type messages they're more likely to make the connection that you are indeed the victim, even if the attacker is messily assuming ambient temperature by the time they actually see you/him.
 
Last edited:
Top