Defense of a "third party" or "property"?

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by jce07a, Apr 5, 2012.

  1. armoredman

    armoredman New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,437
    Location:
    Proud to be in Arizona
    Can you attach any real property? Lien on his car?
    Pepper spray works wonders.
  2. jce07a

    jce07a New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2012
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    Abilene, Texas
    im not 100% sure. apparently all i can do is file a "failure to pay" against him that last for 10 years and basically prevents him from owning property within the county until he pays me what he owes me.
  3. yellerdawg

    yellerdawg Former Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    244

    Yes, a lot of questions.

    I am not a lawyer or magistrate or even a reserve LEO any longer.
    I am a DPS trained CHL instructor.

    The training you received per your CHL and the Texas penal codes varies
    by instructor, but all require students to follow up and stay as up to date as
    they can on their own.

    The park...There are public parks where CHL is not allowed, I'm sure you
    checked on that. There are no such parks without "posted" rules and
    responsibilities and reliefs etc...

    Yes, a legal action against the other owner is your route. In future, be sure
    and obtain any witness info and contacts. Know all rules and such when
    you are off your own property.

    The dog is your property, but as with any penal code provisions as they
    are stated, any action per your part must be viewed as "reasonable" by
    final peer review and the courts. The risks of firing a weapon within
    city limits for the reason(s) you state are too great for all aspects as
    I see you report.

    The State of Texas has, and does allow a great deal of leeway as to
    property owners defending ones property, and even still has special
    provisions for protecting such "when dark".

    The use of your CHL to "stop the threat" against your dog, in an
    enclosed area it was put into by you, to mix with other unleashed or controlled dogs, is something I would not advise. I also would not
    consider a dog, no matter how much valued or loved, as a "third person"
    with respect to self defense laws. However, it is as lawful to defend a
    third person as one's self, if and when that third person is under the
    same threat requirements as you would be etc...but it still will fall into
    the "as deemed reasonable" when you are judged.

    You will need to ask an attorney as to your best legal recourse to recover
    any possible damages from such an incident, civilly. I told you I was not
    an attorney, but I strongly feel after a week of teaching by the DPS, and
    years of other experience that although protecting one's property, especially if on one's property to start with, is very liberally offered by the State and is well written within the penal code(s) and has little to do with CHL, with exceptions of stopping "aggravated" sexual/criminal/robbery assault etc...your use of your CHL to stop such a dog situation would seem ill advised, as I read it.

    Had the other dog, God forbid, grabbed a child or woman and was injuring
    and a threat to them..then possibly you could have put yourself between
    this and removed the threat if you "reasonably" decided you could...

    Anyway...am sorry you were injured or your good dog...but without trying
    to muddy anything further in my attempts, wanted you to know it "appears" to me that you did right by not using your weapon.

    At claims court , you might have respectfully petitioned the court to have
    party furnish "proof" that his home owners (if he had any) insurance would
    not have covered such damages...as the dog was his property...many
    would have covered it....etc....

    In Dec around 79 when it was pretty cold here...a pit grabbed a liitle
    girl on our street in Hurst, TX. A neighbor and I ran to the ruckuss and
    he grabbed the girl and I grabbed the dog, which locked onto my right
    arm pretty good. I walked to the nearest tree with the dog and took him
    out using the tree. I dont advise such for all, but, all are not 6'3' and 300 lbs and
    had the temper or training I once had.

    regards, and remember to use your weapon only to "stop" the threat
    as needed.

    yellerdawg
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2012
  4. time2shoot

    time2shoot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    3,036
    Location:
    Brandon SD
    Since you have his address and know where he lives watch what he drives get make model and plate number. Go back-to-back court house to the clerks office and get an execution order list his car or truck in it pay the fee to the sheriff and they will go get it and auction it off.


    And use your boot in the dogs ribs.
  5. Hammerslagger

    Hammerslagger New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,097
    Well said yellerdawg.
  6. Alpo

    Alpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,483
    Location:
    NW Florida
    I definitely ain't a lawyer, but that sounds dumb.

    Dog A is chewing on dog B. Dog B's owner should stand aside, and then seek redress in the courts, for damages, as dog B, his property, was "damaged", by dog A?

    How about dog B laying there screaming in agony as dog A chews on him? It's okay, because he's just "property"? If dog A chews him into little bitty dog chunks, A's owner can just replace him?
  7. Hammerslagger

    Hammerslagger New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,097
  8. yellerdawg

    yellerdawg Former Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    244
  9. Hammerslagger

    Hammerslagger New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,097
    Looking at the totality of the Florida situation, to the extent which is possible, for a person not directly involved, but who has done some independent investigation; I would expect that there will either be an acquittal or two hung juries.

    The major news media coverage of this matter can only be called racially biased, and about 90% blatantly inaccurate and unfair. The special prosecutor demonstrated bias in the way that she announced that she was filing information for criminal charges.

    It is now appears that this entire matter has turned political. Facts do not matter. Witnesses who have significantly changed their stories are credible. Witnesses who apparently say that they saw the decedent on top of the shooter smashing his head against the sidewalk, and the shooter calling for help, do not matter. A so called expert in the pseudo-science of voice analysis is to be believed when he declares that there is only a 48% chance that the voice calling for help is the voice of the shooter. The decedent's mother is to be believed when she swears that the voice calling for help is definitely that of her 2 month dead son.

    Certain racist individuals whose livelihoods and social standing has long depended upon stirring up racial strife have been quite effective in doing what they do best in this case.

    May the truth and justice, whatever it is, come out and be done.
  10. Caneman

    Caneman Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Messages:
    1,455
    In my state you can not shoot an animal to protect your property, but you can shoot the animal if it is attacking you and you are "in fear of your life or great bodily harm"... I think in Texas, their version of the castle doctrine allows lethal force in protection of personal property, but I don't know if this applies once you are outside the "domain of your castle"... every state is different, you need to read the self-defense laws of your state and see if it includes provisions for personal property... once the dog was biting you on the hand, and you were in fear of "great bodily harm" you could pull out your gun and shoot the dog in public... of course, if you did not have a permit to carry you would have to answer for that, but at least you would be alive...
  11. tcox4freedom

    tcox4freedom Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,442
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    I personally keep my pits out of dog parks.

    It's NOT because my dogs misbehave. It's because the majority of people there use dog parks like kid's playgrounds. They let their bratty a$$ mutts run around not watching them at all.

    To top it off most dog park visitors use the dog park as a "exercise" time in lieu of a disciplined walk on leash routine. IMHO; dogs need to be fully "exercised" and fully "relaxed" before you let them run loose in a dog park.

    I just find a dog park to be the place where "inept" & "lazy" dog owners congregate. So, I just stay away from them.
  12. obxned

    obxned New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,342
    Yeah, you probably could have gotten away with shooting, stabbing, or whatever to the attacking mutt, but what you did is the best possible response.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Store Clerk Shoots Black in Self Defense ... Nov 30, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Military defense budget Oct 22, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Self defense for truckers Sep 26, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Dems introduce legislation to do away with self defense May 10, 2012
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Gov Goofy Vetoes "Castle Doctrine Self Defense Bill Bill. Mar 5, 2012

Share This Page