• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Man shoots dog; Police: You should've let us do it

Steck said if the man had called police the officers could have dealt with the animal in a more humane way.​
"The dog was aggressive and did attack the child, but this is not the way to go about remedying it," Steck said. "We can't have people discharging a firearm in in residential areas.
​
Click to expand...

read - we can't have people running around shooting all the dogs, then we won't have any dogs to shoot!
 
Can't speak for CT, but in MA, you are well within the law to shoot your own dog if necessary. If you can articulate why you needed to put your own dog down by whatever means at your disposal, you are good.
But, if the dog attacked your kid, and 2 hours later, after the hospital trip and some stitches, you come home and blow your dogs head off, you are probably gonna get charged.

Telling the cops that the sound of gunshots was a car backfiring and the dogs body was found behind the residence was just ****ing stupid. Why did the guy lie? Did he lie because he knew he ****ed up? Or (because I know this is coming from someone) did he lie because he knew the JBT were gonna charge him, arrest him, eat his kittens, and seize his guns?
 
GPP said:
Can't speak for CT, but in MA, you are well within the law to shoot your own dog if necessary. If you can articulate why you needed to put your own dog down by whatever means at your disposal, you are good.
But, if the dog attacked your kid, and 2 hours later, after the hospital trip and some stitches, you come home and blow your dogs head off, you are probably gonna get charged.

Telling the cops that the sound of gunshots was a car backfiring and the dogs body was found behind the residence was just ****ing stupid. Why did the guy lie? Did he lie because he knew he ****ed up? Or (because I know this is coming from someone) did he lie because he knew the JBT were gonna charge him, arrest him, eat his kittens, and seize his guns?
Click to expand...

The man's only mistake was lying to cops. As its always the case.

Unlawful discharge in CT is nearly impossible to make stick as long as he was not stupid about it.


Sec. 53-203. Unlawful discharge of firearms.
Any person who intentionally, negligently or carelessly discharges any firearm in such a manner as to
be likely to cause bodily injury or death to persons or domestic animals, or the wanton destruction of
property shall be guilty of a class C misdemeanor.
 
dcmdon said:
The man's only mistake was lying to cops. As its always the case.

Unlawful discharge in CT is nearly impossible to make stick as long as he was not stupid about it.


Sec. 53-203. Unlawful discharge of firearms.
Any person who intentionally, negligently or carelessly discharges any firearm in such a manner as to
be likely to cause bodily injury or death to persons or domestic animals, or the wanton destruction of
property shall be guilty of a class C misdemeanor.
Click to expand...


I've bolded the pertinent parts. Seems to me like it might be difficult to make stick in general, but in this case it sounds like a pretty open and shut case that this guy's looking at a class C misdemeanor based on what you've quoted. One could, of course, argue the merits of if he deserves it but it's hard to argue "I shot the dog" as anything other than fitting the definition.
 
dcmdon said:
The man's only mistake was lying to cops. As its always the case.

Unlawful discharge in CT is nearly impossible to make stick as long as he was not stupid about it.


Sec. 53-203. Unlawful discharge of firearms.
Any person who intentionally, negligently or carelessly discharges any firearm in such a manner as to
be likely to cause bodily injury or death to persons or domestic animals, or the wanton destruction of
property shall be guilty of a class C misdemeanor.
Click to expand...
Define " stupid about it" . They found the guys dog behind his house, shot, after the guy lied about it. That would fall under " stupid" in my opinion.
 
Silversnake.

the law means OTHER PEOPLE'S domestic animals. Nobody has ever tried to say that you could not kill your own domestic animals. Especially since many domestic animals are kept precisely so that they can be killed and eaten. By your read of the law, a farmer couldn't slaughter a cow or a pig with a firearm.

GPP - the law is very clear in what it does not say. It has no distance requirements. So you could live on a .25 acre lot and if you did it properly, you could discharge a firearm without being negligent or careless. Remember, the state has to prove that the discharge was likely to cause death or injury to others.

I said above that lying to the cops was stupid. I'm with you on that 100%. Never lie to the cops.
 
So could the shooting of the dog be used as evidence the discharging of the firearm could have caused death or injury to others? I don't imagine there is already case law on this ( of course you never know lol) so this could be interesting. I think he's more than screwed on the cruelty to animals charge, even tho it sounds like he's able to articulate why he shot the dog.
 
Shooting the dog only proves he discharged the firearm. It does not indicate in any way whether or not he did it in a negligent way that was likely to harm others.

Cruelty to animals has little to do with killing animals. It has to do with neglect, torture, that kind of stuff.

The relevant law is CGS 53-247

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap945.htm#Sec53-247.htm

He looks fine to me. The key word is "maliciously"
 
dcmdon said:
Shooting the dog only proves he discharged the firearm. It does not indicate in any way whether or not he did it in a negligent way that was likely to harm others.

Cruelty to animals has little to do with killing animals. It has to do with neglect, torture, that kind of stuff.

The relevant law is CGS 53-247

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap945.htm#Sec53-247.htm

He looks fine to me. The key word is "maliciously"
Click to expand...
Interesting. You would think he should be fine, because he didn't maliciously execute the dog, In fact he did it in regards to exigent circumstances, the dog had attacked his kid. Is the time that elapsed between the attack and him doing the shooting known? I imagine that will be the prosecutors argument, that enough time had elapsed from the attack, that he could have called the ACO, because no one was in fear of being attacked. It's too bad he lied, had he just been up front with it, he'd look better i think
 
GPP said:
Interesting. You would think he should be fine, because he didn't maliciously execute the dog, In fact he did it in regards to exigent circumstances, the dog had attacked his kid. Is the time that elapsed between the attack and him doing the shooting known? I imagine that will be the prosecutors argument, that enough time had elapsed from the attack, that he could have called the ACO, because no one was in fear of being attacked. It's too bad he lied, had he just been up front with it, he'd look better i think
Click to expand...

If he had said "thanks for your concern and showing up so quick to a report of gunshots in my neighborhood. Appreciate it. Have a nice day, good luck, safe watch" it would be much better. No need to be a dick, but no need to be stupid and lie, either.

Personally, with an unknown officer, no way I'd volunteer the entire series of events. No way to know if it's someone with a head on their shoulders, or if it's 'that guy'. Or if some hippie shithead ADA is going to prosecute some BS anyways. Thanks for checking it out, good luck.
 
GPP - I don't even think there needs to be exigence.

There is nothing illegal with simply shooting my dog because he is old and I'm tired of him. As long as I do it humanely with minimal suffering.

I'm not saying its right or that I'd ever do that. But people seem to forget that pets are PROPERTY.
 
dcmdon said:
GPP - I don't even think there needs to be exigence.

There is nothing illegal with simply shooting my dog because he is old and I'm tired of him. As long as I do it humanely with minimal suffering.

I'm not saying its right or that I'd ever do that. But people seem to forget that pets are PROPERTY.
Click to expand...
I agree totally, the pooch is your (his) property. If you live on a farm, away from the eyes and ears of neighbors, putting Old Yeller out to pasture with grandads fowling piece is a no brainer.
Doing that in a residential area obviously has it's downfalls; neighbors calling the local PD being the big one, in my opinion. The cops are ALWAYS going to err on the side of caution ( ie saving their job), and let the courts handle the charges. You then run the risk of being heard by a jury forepersoned by former greenpeace president Gladys Savethewhales.
I think the exigency of the particular scenario would go a long way, even though the pooch is your property.
 
I agree with your assessment of what the cop will do and think when confronted with this situation. Which is why if the guy had simply shut up and asked the cop to get off his property he wouln't have these problems.

Whats smart and whats legal are two things. I agree that this was probably not a smart thing to do. But it is legal if he discharged the firearm in a safe direction (down).

It won't ever get to a jury trial. If this guy is dumb enough to lie to a cop, he'll agree to some reduced charge.
 
dcmdon said:
I agree with your assessment of what the cop will do and think when confronted with this situation. Which is why if the guy had simply shut up and asked the cop to get off his property he wouln't have these problems.

Whats smart and whats legal are two things. I agree that this was probably not a smart thing to do. But it is legal if he discharged the firearm in a safe direction (down).

It won't ever get to a jury trial. If this guy is dumb enough to lie to a cop, he'll agree to some reduced charge.
Click to expand...
Oh I'm sure he will plea, but I don't think it's because he's dumb ( tho he may very we'll be). He will go down in flames in front of a jury, even tho the dog attacked his kid. Oh, the kid didn't die or isn't horribly disfigured? And you couldn't wait for ACO etc? In Montana, sure, NG. In CT? Home of the Newtown shooting? G. All day long.
 
5 years ago a neighbor of mine shot another neighbors dog that was in his yard harrasing his sheep. The cop showed up and started to give him crap. My neigh or reminded the cop of a CT statute that explicitly allows people to shoot dogs harrasing livestock. The cop left grumbling.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk
 
dcmdon said:
Sec. 53-203. Unlawful discharge of firearms.
Any person who intentionally, negligently or carelessly discharges any firearm in such a manner as to
be likely to cause bodily injury or death to persons or domestic animals, or the wanton destruction of
property shall be guilty of a class C misdemeanor.
Click to expand...

Silversnake said:
I've bolded the pertinent parts. Seems to me like it might be difficult to make stick in general, but in this case it sounds like a pretty open and shut case that this guy's looking at a class C misdemeanor based on what you've quoted. One could, of course, argue the merits of if he deserves it but it's hard to argue "I shot the dog" as anything other than fitting the definition.
Click to expand...

NO, *I've* bolded the pertinent parts.

Did he hit what he was aiming for?

Was anyone or any thing else injured? If not, then he clearly was not negligent nor careless.

Case closed.
 
I saw a cop backed up against his car by a batshit crazy Rottweiler. He pulled his sidearm but didn't shoot the dog.

I was very disappointed.
 
dcmdon said:
5 years ago a neighbor of mine shot another neighbors dog that was in his yard harrasing his sheep. The cop showed up and started to give him crap. My neigh or reminded the cop of a CT statute that explicitly allows people to shoot dogs harrasing livestock. The cop left grumbling.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That is why they use donkeys to protect sheep! They will just stomp anything that is bothering the sheep
 

Similar threads

Police: Hunter Shoots Man in Head After Mistaking Him for a Turkey
2
Replies
31
Views
698
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
Robotic police dog shot multiple times, credited with avoiding potential bloodshed
Replies
19
Views
433
millbilly
millbilly
Grandma Shoots Burglar, Tends To His Wounds Until ABQ Police Arrive [VIDEO]
Replies
1
Views
114
Palladin
Palladin
Parents of man shot, killed by Atlanta police at Buckhead restaurant demand justice
Replies
10
Views
291
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
Texan Shoots, Kills Man Who Allegedly Stole His BBQ Pit
Replies
22
Views
516
Scuderia
Scuderia
Back
Top Bottom