jsk wrote:I find it alarming how some people here say that if a stranger drew on a chasing dog in their presence, they would not only draw their own weapon but immediately shoot the other person. Arguing that it's justified because the mere presence of the gun represents an imminent threat ignores the fact that the other person was first justified in drawing, because the dog represents an imminent threat to them.
If an unfamiliar, off-leash dog is chasing me, I have no way of knowing what it intends to do. Maybe it's just playing, maybe it's just putting on a show and asserting its territory. But why should I give the dog the benefit of the doubt when the consequence for being wrong could be severe bodily injury or worse? Whether the owner is present or not is completely irrelevant; plenty of dog attacks happen in the presence of the dog owner.
I'm not going back and reading 7 pages of posts again, but I don't recall anyone saying they would pull a gun on some who was being chased by a dog and drew their own gun to apparently defend against the dog. I do recall posts, including my own, that said they would draw their handgun if the facts were as originally presented by the dog owner. Those facts were: 1) dog owner was walking his dog (dog not chasing anyone); and 2) an unidentifiable person (covered face) rode to within 10 feet of the dog owner and drew a pistol for no apparent lawful reason. That appears to be a hijacking, especially in light of numerous recent hijackings along jogging trails and other locations in the Houston metro area.
While some Members expressed doubt about the dog owner's story (and they were correct), those doubts revolved around the belief that the ATV rider did shoot the dog, but he did so because the dog was a threat to the rider. A guy shooting his own dog is so repugnant that no one seemed to see this coming.
Chas.