As a young'un I had occasion to witness a training session for a "coon dawg". The animal being trained was a 4 month old pit bull and the training target was a raccoon in a small steel wire cage. The lesson plan was to allow the dog to smell the raccoon and agitate the dog into an aggressive state while keeping the raccoon in the dog's field of vision and filling the dog's nose with it's scent to fixate the dog on the raccoon as the source of it's frustration. This will associate the raccoon with the frustration in the dog's mind and initiate a chase impulse when the scent is encountered again.
The lesson seemed to work very well. The dog was able to force his head through the heavy wire cage and proceeded to maul the raccoon despite having two pieces of wire piercing his eye and neck and four men trying to pull the cage and the dog apart. Neither animal survived the training session that day.
Dave, I am convinced that if a piece of 12ga wire poking into it's eye did not deter this dog from attacking then a few cans of military grade pepper spray would not either and I can't easily obtain military grade anything. Just a thought. When confronted with a lethal grade weapon, I will turn to a lethal grade defense.
How about a meat clever swung well onto the back of the neck? That's pretty lethal, but would take considerable force to get through the hair, maybe more than the average person could do. People do manage to get results where guns are not as prevalent as here, so it is possible. Of course, your story is a testament to the nature of some dog breeds too. If you had that on video and showed it to people looking for a pet dog, how many would choose that breed?
As I said earlier, I might have done the same as the cat owner. I liked this post from IPlayFarmer:
Agreed. Mitigating circumstances need to be considered. I'd have done the same thing if a neighbor's dog was attacking an animal I liked, and I'd hope that the police would understand. If they didn't, I'd hope the judge understood. If he didn't I'd just have to suck it up and deal with the consequences. I chose the action. I chose the consequence.
I also agree with IPlayFarmer about the chances that the gun user is competent. I think I would choose to have restrictions on gun use in built-up areas than to take the approach that I will rely on the competence of whoever may have a gun handy. If there were a citizen's muster for firearms training on a monthly basis, I might feel differently.
I'm glad the DA did not press charges, he had discretion and used it no matter his motives. If he felt the use was justified, fine, if he was dodging potential heat from the public, also fine. That's the way it is supposed to work, up to a point at least.
The police should not be deciding that for the DA, a law was broken, a person was cited. They were doing their job.
How would you feel if the story ended differently? Maybe the bullet glances off the dog's skull and hits a neighbor kid who has run over to see the commotion, or the dog owner's foot. Then what? Isn't that a reasonable example for the for restrictions on firearms discharges in populated areas, or within so many feet of a road, house, etc.? How many gun owners would be willingly to swear that no accident will ever occur as a result of their choices?
It's a good discussion. It's also good to remember that any of us could petition a city, town or county to amend local gun laws such that the police would not have had cause to issue a citation in this case. It will be decided by a majority; meaning there will be an unhappy minority. That is democracy in action; some percentage of the population is ticked-off about something 100% of the time. :laughing:
Dave.
