Officer shoots carjacker dead in Harris county

[The Annoyed Man]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/texas-deputy-carjacking-k-9

A Texas deputy shot and killed a carjacking suspect who was reportedly beating a K-9 officer with a pistol after a foot chase Monday.

The dead man, who was not identified, was allegedly one of several males reported to have attacked and shot at a man before stealing his vehicle around 11 p.m. in Harris County, according to KPRC-TV, citing the sheriff’s office. The man whose car was stolen wasn’t seriously injured, officials said.

[Redneck_Buddha]

I hope the K9 officer is OK.

[crazy2medic]

Beat my dog I'd shoot you too!

[crazy2medic]

If the BG had survived the attack on the K9 he would have been charged with assault on a Peace Officer! By Texas Law a Police dog or horse is considered a Police Officer and the charges are the same! I think the BG should have been shot!

[Charles L. Cotton]

If the BG had survived the attack on the K9 he would have been charged with assault on a Peace Officer! By Texas Law a Police dog or horse is considered a Police Officer and the charges are the same! I think the BG should have been shot!

This is interesting, especially since officers can and do shoot dogs with little or no justification.

Chas.

[OneGun]

Beat my dog I'd shoot you too!

I share your sentiment! However, I heard this question and IIRC, a pet dog is considered property under state law and shooting someone beating your dog will get you in trouble.

Is this correct and can someone elaborate?

[crazy2medic]

If the BG had survived the attack on the K9 he would have been charged with assault on a Peace Officer! By Texas Law a Police dog or horse is considered a Police Officer and the charges are the same! I think the BG should have been shot!

This is interesting, especially since officers can and do shoot dogs with little or no justification.

Chas.

I read an article awhile back where some drunk punched a mounted officers horse, the drunk guy was charged with assault on a police officer, the article states this was permissible under Texas Law!

[Paladin]

When I saw the headline, I though the carjacker beat a human police officer.

The dead man, who was not identified, was allegedly one of several males reported to have attacked and shot at a man before stealing his vehicle around 11 p.m. in Harris County...

This carjacker had already used deadly force to rob a man of his vehicle that night. He would not surrender. I will not shed a tear over the carjackers death.

[crazy2medic]

Beat my dog I'd shoot you too!

I share your sentiment! However, I heard this question and IIRC, a pet dog is considered property under state law and shooting someone beating your dog will get you in trouble.

Is this correct and can someone elaborate?

Since my dogs as individuals and irreplaceable, my dogs never leave my property, I would assume that your on my property, damaging property that is irreplaceable I would have to assume they would or are attacking me, I'd use deadly force to stop the attack!

[OneGun]

Beat my dog I'd shoot you too!

I share your sentiment! However, I heard this question and IIRC, a pet dog is considered property under state law and shooting someone beating your dog will get you in trouble.

Is this correct and can someone elaborate?

Since my dogs as individuals and irreplaceable, my dogs never leave my property, I would assume that your on my property, damaging property that is irreplaceable I would have to assume they would or are attacking me, I'd use deadly force to stop the attack!

Like I said before, I share your sentiment. I just do not believe your position is legal. I did some research. According to the Texas Supreme Court, pets such as dogs are considered property. This quote below is from the court's opinion in Matter 12-0047, Strickland v. Medlen:

Pets are property in the eyes of the law, and we decline to permit non-economic damages rooted solely in an owner’s subjective feelings. True, a beloved companion dog is not a fungible, inanimate object like, say, a toaster. The term “property” is not a pejorative but a legal
descriptor, and its use should not be misconstrued as discounting the emotional attachment that pet owners undeniably feel. Nevertheless, under established legal doctrine, recovery in pet-death cases is, barring legislative reclassification, limited to loss of value, not loss of relationship.

This was a case where a pet escaped the Medlen's home. The dog was picked up by the dog catcher and put down before the Medlens arrived to retrieve their dog. The Medlens sued on the basis that the dog is more than property, but a family member with emotional attachment. The case went to the Texas Supreme court.

If a person was chopping down your tree, would you deadly force to stop them from chopping down your tree? Probably not. In the same vein, you may not have a legally defensible position if you shoot someone that is abusing your dog regardless of your emotional attachment. The contradiction is that a police dog discussed in the OP is considered a law enforcement officer and is treated differently. I am not a lawyer but this question came up in a class I was attending and the instructor made a point of saying that dogs are property, not people and you can't defend them like you could your spouse, child, etc.

[Tex1961]

Beat my dog I'd shoot you too!

I share your sentiment! However, I heard this question and IIRC, a pet dog is considered property under state law and shooting someone beating your dog will get you in trouble.

Is this correct and can someone elaborate?

Since my dogs as individuals and irreplaceable, my dogs never leave my property, I would assume that your on my property, damaging property that is irreplaceable I would have to assume they would or are attacking me, I'd use deadly force to stop the attack!

Like I said before, I share your sentiment. I just do not believe your position is legal. I did some research. According to the Texas Supreme Court, pets such as dogs are considered property. This quote below is from the court's opinion in Matter 12-0047, Strickland v. Medlen:

Pets are property in the eyes of the law, and we decline to permit non-economic damages rooted solely in an owner’s subjective feelings. True, a beloved companion dog is not a fungible, inanimate object like, say, a toaster. The term “property” is not a pejorative but a legal
descriptor, and its use should not be misconstrued as discounting the emotional attachment that pet owners undeniably feel. Nevertheless, under established legal doctrine, recovery in pet-death cases is, barring legislative reclassification, limited to loss of value, not loss of relationship.

This was a case where a pet escaped the Medlen's home. The dog was picked up by the dog catcher and put down before the Medlens arrived to retrieve their dog. The Medlens sued on the basis that the dog is more than property, but a family member with emotional attachment. The case went to the Texas Supreme court.

If a person was chopping down your tree, would you deadly force to stop them from chopping down your tree? Probably not. In the same vein, you may not have a legally defensible position if you shoot someone that is abusing your dog regardless of your emotional attachment. The contradiction is that a police dog discussed in the OP is considered a law enforcement officer and is treated differently. I am not a lawyer but this question came up in a class I was attending and the instructor made a point of saying that dogs are property, not people and you can't defend them like you could your spouse, child, etc.

Excellent points... Question though.. If it's at night, then can you shoot the attacker? This question is gong along the same line as the law as it pertains to non recoverable property taken during the nighttime.

[narcissist]

I've noticed dogs are smarter and have more sence then some people I've met.

[dlh]

I doubt any charges will be filed against the deputy in this case. The article says the thug was "brandishing a gun" and beating the dog while fleeing first in a vehicle then on foot and a suspect in a previous carjacking while pulling a gun and causing injury to the owner. Do we know how far away the deputy was when he shot the thug who may have easily been able to take a shot at the deputy?
If a grand jury did indict I would predict a not guilty on this one at trial--but ya never know.

[ELB]

As reported I think and hope the deputy is in the right.

I also think that we are strategically better off if our pets are legally considered property. If you start constructing legal rights that class them as “family members” or some such you will quickly find the law also “helping” you with everything associated with them, from veterinary care to the size of his water bowl whether they can sleep on your bed or your porch. This will all require tax funding of course.. PETA and other nutjobs have been trying to assign “rights” to animals for years do as to have a legal cudgel to best you with (hint: PETA does not like “pets.). If your pet has a status outside of your property, you can bet he will soon have legal “advocates” intervening on his behalf.

Now, if i find you mistreating my kitties or my horse, I will most certainly intervene and this will become a human interaction, with all that entails.

[03Lightningrocks]

I detect an extreme thread drift. From shot dead carjacker to deadly force in the defense of ones pet.