TexasCHLforum.com

speedsix wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

KingofChaos wrote:Actually, it really appears that you're just reinforcing Rex's point. If there weren't in fact different expectations where he lives, than where you live, you be wouldn't be having this discussion at all. And while I agree that I don't live in a place where people run around shooting dogs, that's really an extreme action, an outlier. If you look to more common situations, the differences are likely to become more pronounced. Such as VM volunteering an hour of his time to try and get a stray back to it's home. That may be a normal reaction upon seeing a stray dog where he lives. Where I live I believe most people would simply ignore it.

In my neighborhood the "normal" reaction would probably be for most people to ignore it. My wife and I both happen to love dogs and when we see one loose we don't want to hear later it got hit by a car and think we might have prevented it if we'd done something. Also part of it is probably that when I set out to do something I don't like to give up without doing it. I will say though, I followed it all over the neighborhood, the same kind of dog shot by the security officer, and none of the people whose path it crossed, from children to old ladies, showed the slightest sign of fear. While we didn't catch it, we did manage to get close enough to read the phone number on his tag and call the owner.

...Man, either you got eagle's eyes or you were only a cookie away from catching that pup...I'm a pushover for dogs, too...I'd spend all day helping one get away from the evil dogcatcher...

We got him close by throwing dogs treats to him, closer and closer, until my wife was able see the last few digits of the phone number and the area code. Then I looked for a matching number in the subdivision directory. He was very skittish. Came up no closer than he had to get by stretching his body and neck out to reach the treat.

KingofChaos wrote:Actually, it really appears that you're just reinforcing Rex's point. If there weren't in fact different expectations where he lives, than where you live, you be wouldn't be having this discussion at all. And while I agree that I don't live in a place where people run around shooting dogs, that's really an extreme action, an outlier. If you look to more common situations, the differences are likely to become more pronounced. Such as VM volunteering an hour of his time to try and get a stray back to it's home. That may be a normal reaction upon seeing a stray dog where he lives. Where I live I believe most people would simply ignore it.

In my neighborhood the "normal" reaction would probably be for most people to ignore it. My wife and I both happen to love dogs and when we see one loose we don't want to hear later it got hit by a car and think we might have prevented it if we'd done something. Also part of it is probably that when I set out to do something I don't like to give up without doing it. I will say though, I followed it all over the neighborhood, the same kind of dog shot by the security officer, and none of the people whose path it crossed, from children to old ladies, showed the slightest sign of fear. While we didn't catch it, we did manage to get close enough to read the phone number on his tag and call the owner.

I don't buy it either, the HOA has a vested interest in framing events to escape a lawsuit. The description doesn't even make sense. If the officer was at the door then the dog couldn't run outside towards the officer, since after his first couple of steps he'd be past him; and in order for the dog to need to be controlled he would have to be well outside --and the news report said he was in the flower bed which doesn't sound like he ran "at" anyone. Furthermore, just because the officer asked her to control the dog doesn't mean the dog was actually out of control, as their statement attempts to imply. It also fails to mention that he grabbed the woman, as reported in the news. That deliberate omission is an attempt to make it look like the dog acted without provocation, but it appears from combining the different version of events, that IF the dog lunged, he did so after the officer grabbed his owner.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

Grog wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:Glad we agree that rent a cops haven't the training to be running around with loaded guns playing batman.

Why do you have such an issue with security officers? Police officers receive more hours of training in many subjects, but do not ever make believe that they receive a heck of a lot more than armed security does in the actual use of firearms.

I only have issues with armed security officers that over step their bounds. They typically don't have the proper training to be equated to a police officer. They are not even close. Mostly, I have a huge issue with a armed security guard behaving in the manner of this particular hot rod. Thank god the clown did not accidentally shoot the home owner. A bullet can easily penetrate through a dog and bounce off the ground hitting bystanders.

The issue is not "HOW" to use a firearm... the issue is when. Any fool with five minutes training, can shoot a handgun accurately. It is not a special skill. I will go with a policemans decision making ability over a rent a cop any day of the week.

It isn't just training, it's experience --by which I mean exposure to threatening situations......a rent-a-cop driving around in a gated subdivision probably doesn't encounter many bad guys and situations that test his judgement.

Rex B wrote:Irrelevant.
My only point is this is a typical suburban, nice neighborhood, sidewalks etc. Gated community, with paid security?
If you are in such a neighborhood, your front yard is not fenced, dogs don't roam free, and you have a nice inviting walkway up to the front door "Welcome" mat, and a doorbell to press.
It's not a Red Alert event if someone walks up to your door. Maybe a yellow at best. And if you have pets, you take care they don't slip past you and get out when you open the door.

Yes, and sometimes they get out anyway. Some people train their dogs to stay on their property. Some people have invisible fences to keep the dog on their property. And I'll point out the simple fact: lawn guys, letter carriers, UPS drivers, meter readers, sales people, census takers, all encounter dogs routinely, some of them hostile (and the dog shot was not), yet they don't find the need to be armed to protect themselves against them, and they don't shoot dogs. In fact, there seems to be some unfathomable belief that somehow because someone is authorized to carry a gun as a LEO, or "security guard," that shooting people's dogs is somehow OK --the primary reason probably being the fact that, so far as the police go, they always get away with it. If UPS drivers shot dogs like this their companies would lose money --consequences-- and they would be risking taking a few bullets themselves. I don't give one whit that this guy is a rent-a-cop, he should be charged with assault, whatever other act is applicable, and sued, just like a UPS driver would be if he'd done the same thing.

threoh8 wrote: There is no evidence yet of any abnormal fear of dogs. Some degree of wariness of large canines (this one bred for hunting, by the way) is not abnormal. It's healthy. We don't know exactly what happened at the door between the dog exiting and the "grab", nor do we know about the guard's relationship with or attitude toward dogs.

True in a way, depending on what you consider evidence. It's supposition on my part based on experience with dogs and people --like the guy I described, and the description of events in the media. In particular, I've got a big dog, and I've seen various people react to him. Every single person who has exhibited fear has told me they are afraid of dogs or afraid of big dogs. Wariness of any dog you don't know is smart but fear and caution are not the same thing. Still, many are wary, but most people DON'T exhibit fear, so in my view, if most people encountering him don't exhibit fear, then fear is an abnormal reaction. Labs are also bred for hunting and they're one of the most gentle breeds around. Absent abnormal behavior on the part of the dog, anyone afraid of a Lab has an abnormal fear of dogs. I've encountered numerous dogs of this breed that he shot and I've not seen a single one that was scary or inspired fear. I don't pull out my gun when in proximity to a dog, no matter what the size, just because he's growling or barking. I certainly wouldn't walk onto someone else's property and draw my gun on their dog because I'd expect that might lead to being shot by the property owner.

Yes, we don't know exactly what happened or the guard's attitude about dogs. However, as I've read about the incident, he knocked on the door, the dog ran out and got in the flower bed, the guard grabbed the woman and placed her between himself and the dog provoking a reaction from the dog, then the guard shot him. The dog never attacked the guard. It didn't lunge towards him, bite him, jump on him, etc. This is a sweet breed of dog he shot. The range owner where I shoot has several. I've arrived before range opening a few times while they have been running around. They've run right at me two or three at a time --that's what dogs do, they play. The first time they also stopped in front of me and growled at me --and it's their right to growl and bark at me on their property. This dog was on HIS OWN property, not running loose in the neighborhood or threatening anyone. Many dogs are also trained not to leave their yard --some have invisible fence collars.

threoh8 wrote:As a contractor with the HOA in a gated community, he probably had authority - and responsibility - to be there on the porch. In other words, the contract with the HOA was likely, in effect, an invitation to be where he was.

Most Americans, probably including most of the people on this board, live where various people have legitimate reasons to come and knock on the door. Police, mail carriers, landlords, the guy who cuts the lawn, census takers, utilities workers, etc.

Even the police have constraints that apply when they're on private property. I can't argue the HOA for this place because I have no idea what it says. However, I doubt it grants a blanket invitation. I highly doubt, for instance, that under color of the HOA, the guard can come sit on the porch whenever he wants, or wash his car with your garden hose. I'm pretty sure the HOA doesn't give him the authority to shoot people's dogs on their own property. What if this guy "thought" he saw something in the backyard, entered through a closed gate, encountered a barking dog, and shot it?

I'm not arguing that there is no legitimate reason for someone to enter my property. I might argue about census takers, and the police are an exception when they enter while legally performing their duties, but the other examples are all by my consent. For instance, by receiving mail I implicitly grant my consent for the letter carrier to enter my property, however, it doesn't give him the right to shoot my dog. I don't consider unsolicited sales calls to be legitimate reasons to enter my property. And BTW, postal workers and meter readers encounter hostile dogs all the time and they don't shoot them.

threoh8 wrote:Suggestion for a more civil discussion: Take the "you" out of the hypothetical situations, especially those involving violence.

Point taken, however I intended a rhetorical "you," not a specific you --as in "you" don't tug on superman's cape, "you' don't spit into the wind, etc.

Rex B wrote:I think the point is that it's fairly normal for strangers to walk onto your property, up to the front door and ring the doorbell.
Whether it's a solicitor, or a neighbor, or a girl scout selling cookies, it's normally no cause for alarm in a decent neighborhood. And if you have an aggressive/protective dog, you take care not to open the outer door until you know the caller and have the animal under control.

Yes, the security guy was very wrong and should pay a price.
But the homeowner is not entirely without fault in the matter. She should have controlled her animal.

All dogs are protective, and territorial, under the right circumstances. However, you seem to be suggesting the dog was normally aggressive, in the sense that it would be perceived as a danger to strangers. That does not fit the facts of this case. The dog is not an aggressive breed. The dog ran out and got in the flower bed. This guard apparently has an abnormal fear of dogs, and was afraid merely at the presence of the dog. We had a pizza delivery guy who would stand at the curb because we answered the door with our Great Dane. My dog never barked at him, never growled, never lunged, never did anything even remotely threatening. This guy was afraid just because he was a big dog, period. He got used to it eventually, and now he comes to the door and pets the dog. But sweet as my dog is normally, had this guy grabbed me or my wife, my dog would quickly ramp up to scary.

My point is that this guard is 100% responsible for what happened. He entered private property without an invitation. He assaulted the home owner on private property and then killed her dog when the dog showed signs of being defensive. If this had happened on my property and I saw this guy grab my wife I would have immediately pulled my gun and shot him. You grab my wife and you're armed, you'd better be a LEO, or else you're going to get shot. He had no more right to shoot the dog than he would have to shoot the woman's husband if he'd come outside with a baseball bat to defend his wife.

threoh8 wrote:Not enough information, and what we have is apparently from the dog owners and the neighbors. The guard and company may be lawyering up and holding their tongues. Assuming the statements we have so far are accurate (BIG assumption), this seems to be the sequence:

Guard on patrol sees something unusual.
Guard knocks on door to inquire.
Homeowner answers.
Dog comes out.
(What happens here? How did the "gentle giant" behave?)
Guard (possibly in fear of dog) grabs homeowner.
Dog barks.
Guard shoots dog.

Grabbing a person as a shield is pretty bad form, but so is "loosing the hounds" in an area legitimately open to others. Either could be viewed as escalating the situation.

I'll reserve judgement, except to say that it's a sad story.

Seriously? --an area legitimately open to others? The dog was in her yard --PRIVATE PROPERTY. My yard is not "legitimately open to others." You come in MY yard and threaten my dog, you better be prepared for the consequences. You come in my yard and grab my wife and you're not a LEO, my gun is coming out. MY dog has a RIGHT to growl and bark at strangers on MY property. You don't like it, you'd better get off my property in a hurry.

I've encountered a dog just like this one loose in our neighborhood. By no stretch of the imagination could he be considered a threat. I tried to approach him to read his tags so I could contact his owner --he barred his teeth and growled at me. He was scared, defensive. I merely backed off. I ended up following this dog all over the neighborhood for an hour, trying to catch him. Shooting a dog like this guy did on the owner's private property is a cowardly and despicable act. He should be charged with assault for grabbing the wife, unlawful discharge, and any other violation of the law that is applicable, and sued.