Defense of Dog?

[VMI77]

You feel that someone who committed assault or home invasion has a life less valuable than a dog, and that you would rather your dog live than them. None of these are even crimes that you could be executed for under the justice system. Though we did try to add child rape in Texas, and the SC made a terrible decisions, but that's irrelevant.

And to address this other irrelevant part of your argument......yes, I would rather my dog live than a home invader: my dog is innocent of any crime and isn't a threat to anyone --however, nowhere in this thread did I say I would kill anyone who isn't attacking me or someone else. My dog doesn't run around free, anyone attacking him would either be attacking him when he's with me, leashed (and in such a case I'd have no reason to believe the attack would be limited to my dog, or even know that it was my dog he intended to attack), inside my fenced yard under my observation (and someone trespassing in my fenced yard with a weapon is a threat to me), or in my house (which makes an attacker a home invader).

Now to the totally irrelevant part....guess what, the crime you're defending yourself against doesn't have to be a crime people are executed for in order to defend yourself with lethal force --people aren't executed for rape, aggravated robbery, or home invasions either, but the law allows the use of lethal force in such situations.

[The Annoyed Man]

Now to the totally irrelevant part....guess what, the crime you're defending yourself against doesn't have to be a crime people are executed for in order to defend yourself with lethal force --people aren't executed for rape, aggravated robbery, or home invasions either, but the law allows the use of lethal force in such situations.

BINGO! KingofChaos, look up the word "reasonable" in the use of force and use of deadly force statutes. In Texas, you don't have to KNOW that someone is trying to cause you "death and/or serious bodily harm" (the filter under which use of lethal force is justified under Texas law) in order to respond with deadly force. You only have to reasonably believe that someone is trying to cause you death and/or serious bodily harm in order for you to use deadly force against them.

If I am walking down the street, with my substantial (58 lb) dog on a leash, and some fool comes raging up with a bat and starts to attack US, it really doesn't matter if he starts with me or with my dog. He is, at that point, an existential threat to me, and if I am able to, I will shoot him if he does not immediately cease and desist. Either way, I'm involving the cops, and he'll have some justifying to do—either before God, or from his hospital bed to the local DA.

This is not an issue having anything to do with how I perceive the value of another human being, and everything to do with how much I value my own life and the life of my much beloved dog, who also happens to be my property—which the state also allows me to defend with deadly force—of which the attacker is attempting to deprive me by beating it to death.

And remember, about 80% of gunshot people survive their injuries, so shooting a person, while it may result in their death, is not a guaranteed death sentence.

If you can't shoot another person to defend your own dog from either an unprovoked attack or an attack for unsubstantiated reasons, then you don't deserve the dog, and the dog deserves better than you. Do the dog world a favor and stick to cats.

[Bulldog1911]

stick to cats

ewe... the c word