Author Topic: New to site , also a question. (Read 1154 times)

zapper223 · « **on:** March 02, 2005, 05:15:21 AM »

I am a new member and wanted to say hi to everyone. I also want some opinions. Its a heck of a 1st post but heres my question. I was coyote hunting the beginning of FEB , I set up and was calling when I heard something coming . I was a mile or so from any paved roads in the middle of a state property . The next thing I knew a big dog was right in my face if I hadn't swung my gun at it I believe it would have attacked . Well the dog ran off and I saw it go into woods across a powerline 200 - 300 yards away. I have had dogs respond to my calls allot of times and after being run off they have never returned. So thinking the dog was gone I went back to calling , i had called for about 2-3 minutes when it came back this time it wouldn't be run off it was coming straight at me I raised my rifle and fired in its direction not really trying to hit it but I did . I hit it somewhere in the back legs and it went running down the hill. Up until this point I had no idea anyone was in the area a few minutes later a guy comes riding up on a horse and says I shot his dog. I said I was sorry but his dog was going to attack me , he said that dog wouldn't bite you. I said how in the world would I know that and I wasn't going to wait and find out. I also said where were you your supposed to be at least close to your dog. They were squirrel hunting , and he said didn't you see the collar which I honestly hadn't but doubt it would have made any difference to me. We parted and I thought that was it, well last nite 2 forestry cops came to my house and wanted to know what happened . I wrote a statement just like what I told you above. I said now what is going to happen , they said the owner could file charges against me I asked for what shooting a dog that was going to attack me . They said they weren't sure it could be a civil case like destruction of personal property. I asked can I file charges for him not being in control of his dog and for that matter not even being close to the dog, no reply. I told them I've been predator hunting for years and call in dogs all the time and have never felt threatened enough to shoot one. This dog was not a hound or what would be recognized as a hunting dog it looked like a curr something cross from what I can recall. Again a mute point . Does anyone have any idea what my rights would be or have you ever heard of such a incident. I felt bad about this incident and still do I love dogs but am not going to be bit by one . Any information appreciated.
Thank-You,
zapper223 :?

ajj · « **Reply #1 on:** March 02, 2005, 07:48:47 AM »

Doesn't sound as if you're going to be arrested or prosecuted. If you're served with a civil lawsuit for damages, call your homeowner's insurance agent. Most homeowners policies have liability coverage that applies anywhere in the world (not just at your home) for almost any claimed negligence (except auto accidents.)

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #2 on:** March 02, 2005, 08:35:25 AM »

Well...welcome aboard...sorry it's on such a crappy note :? .

Yea, really, I wouldn't worry about it much. If you find yourself in a courtroom, that is your defense. The dog lunged at you. You aided in self-defense. Lo siento. Poor dog, boo hoo. Life sucks then ya die

. I mean for the dog, anyway.

I wish you best of luck with your case. Godspeed.

zapper223 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 02, 2005, 02:10:09 PM »

Thanks for the replies guys. Today I did a little research on net law sites . I found out that in KY a person is not liable for killing a dog if the dog was acting in a vicious manner or if person thought dog might attack. I can't see where the guy would have a case of any kind against me but who knows. The only thing that could be said was that why did I continue to call after the dog came once. As I said I've called dogs on several occasions and after chasing them off have never had one return. Also I could have moved a mile away and if dog could still here me the same result would have happened. I guess I was supposed to go home and let them have the whole place to themselves. I'm rambling but the more I think about it the madder I get, no one seemed to care about the fact the dog may have mauled me.
Thanks again,
zapper :-)

jh45gun · « **Reply #4 on:** March 02, 2005, 08:23:13 PM »

I think most of us would have done the same even us dog lovers as I big dog can really do some damage. With some dogs it is hard to tell some will come up wagging there tail and then nail you and others may try to bluff you and come up growling and then slink away doing no damage. If you felt threatened then you were. Heck my Cocker is very friendly but when he is playing with me he growles like crazy but is just playing but some one else may think he was mad but with others he just whines or barks and does not growl he is happy to see them. When I was a kid I had a vicious dog attack me and if I would have had a gun I would have shot it on the spot! I think you were within your rights and will be fine on this issue. Welcome to the site :grin: Jim

Ron T. · « **Reply #5 on:** March 02, 2005, 09:20:59 PM »

Welcome to the Forum...

This is another case of proving the proverb "Silence is golden"... or as my ol' fishin' buddy sez, "Even a fish wouldn't get in trouble if he kept his mouth shut!"

Too bad you ADMITTED you shot the dog.

The burden-of-proof WAS on the dog-owner. He would have had to PROVE you did the shooting, even in a civil suit... and proving it would have amounted to an IMPOSSIBLE job since he didn't see you do the shooting, the dog can't talk and the bullet is long-gone and couldn't be found to prove it came out of YOUR rifle.

Unfortunately, at this point, there is no doubt about WHO shot the dog.

However, even though you admitted you did the shooting, it still seems that you were within your rights to shoot a "vicious dog that gave all the indications that it was preparing to attack you."

If you swear, under oath, that the dog made a direct "bee-line" for you, a 2nd. time after it KNEW you were there, and that upon seeing the dog coming, you were in DREAD FEAR for your safety, courts put greater emphasis on "human safety" than on "animal safety".

Net result... the dog loses.

But the advice to contact the insurance company that carries your home-owners policy (if you don't have an "umbrella liability policy") is a good one.

They will ask a lot of questions. However, the insurance company does NOT need the dog owner's name in order to tell you whether or not your policy "covers" you in this situation.

I would not give the insurance company the dog-owner's name in this case since you are not sure what the dog's owner intends to do. You don't want your insurance company "stirring up" a law-suit by contacting the dog-owner and/or making him realize he might be dealing with the "deep pockets" of an insurance company rather than the lean pockets of a fellow hunter.

"Greed" does strange things, even to SEEMINGLY decent men.

The dog-owner may drop further action... or he may initate action at a later date (the statute of limitations is probably 3 years or less). If you determine your home-owners policy "covers" you, then I'd suggest you simply sit back and wait... secure in the knowledge your insurance company will defend you up to the limits of the liability amount on your home-owners insurance policy if the dog-owner successfully brings suit against you.

Meanwhile, do NOT change insurance companies. Insurance companies tend to more vigorously defend CURRENT policy holders as opposed to PREVIOUS policy holders.

'Nuff said... good luck. :-)

Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

williamlayton · « **Reply #6 on:** March 02, 2005, 11:14:03 PM »

I am wondering if it might be worthwhile to spend the money to seel legal council on this matter.
That would give you some basis for easing the mind and possibly give you a plan of action.
Seeking legal advice from us is less than comfoting to me, not putting anybody down :grin: , but I would go to someone whose stock in trade is his advice.
Blessings

doc_kreipke · « **Reply #7 on:** March 03, 2005, 12:56:35 AM »

In Indiana, the dog owner would be in violation of the law, which states that a dog must be confined to one's property, or, if on public property (as you were), restrained by a leash. Also, a person in violation of the law is negligent per se, in and of itself. So, if your state's laws are anything like Indiana's, then you seem to be in good legal standing. Of course, in America that never stops one from bringing a bogus lawsuit. But in that case, there's always an option to countersue for harrassment, or at least have the court make the frivolous party pay your attorney's fees.

If you're in doubt, William's advice is sage. It might be worth it just to put your mind at ease, if anything.

Old Syko · « **Reply #8 on:** March 03, 2005, 03:12:13 AM »

doc, what you are stating might be Indianapolis city law but is certainly not Indiana law. Otherwise how would you explain the use of hunting dogs and the like. Indianapolis doesn't live like the rest of the state nor does the rest of the state recognize Indy city law.

Where I come from shooting another mans dog is a sorry thing to do and would be looked at in an altogether different light than what is being proposed here.

BamBams · « **Reply #9 on:** March 03, 2005, 03:36:05 AM »

Yep....the previous poster was correct about one thing. Never say anything without talking to an attorney first.

In any case, I doubt you're going to hear another peep out of the dog owner. He'll probably check into the laws himself and realize you haven't broken any. It would cost HIM money to sue you, so that's probably not going to happen either.

In Colorado, the dog owner would be at fault simply for not maintaining constant control over his dog. In fact, if you counter sued him on that basis, you'd probably wind up winning everything and costing him a lot more money anyway.

I would not lose a bit of sleep over this one.

Nightrain52 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 03, 2005, 05:47:06 AM »

First of all welcome to Graybeards. Now, you stated you were calling coyotes. Were you using a mouth call or an electronic call? If it was electronic was the speaker right next to you. My way of thinking the dog was responding to the call especially if it was a hunting dog. Canines instinctively will respond to most distress calls to see what is there. How close was the dog when you fired at it? Did you stand up and yell at it to present yourself as a human being and not some animal in distress. Did the dog live after you fired and hit him? If he did you may be responsible for vet bills. I am not saying you did the wrong thing but if this goes to court or small claims court these things will be asked more than likely. With some of the judges we have anymore you may very well be found at fault. If It were me I think I would at least pay an attorney for a consultation session. In a judges eye things don't seem as cut and dried in a situation such as this.

Graybeard · « **Reply #11 on:** March 03, 2005, 06:30:53 AM »

For future reference I'd do two things differently.

1. Don't let the dog leave. Kill it outright. Then move some distance away. At least a couple hundred yards or out of sight of that location.

2. NEVER ever admit to anything. Just say huh? What you talking about? Dog? What dog?

Since he has taken it this far he very well may file a civil suit. Folks seem to do that a lot these days. Just stick with the self defense story and hope the jury isn't stacked with pet lovers and anti hunters.

zapper223 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 03, 2005, 08:07:56 AM »

I was using hand / mouth calls and as I said in original post the dog came 1 time and I ran it off . The second time it came so fast it was in my face before I could get up or try to scare it off. I'm not generally afraid of dogs but this was a different story. You must realize when I'm set up calling coyotes I am sitting on the ground on a small cushion trying to be as inconspicuous as possible I mean hunkered down . When dog came at me 2nd time I was caught off guard and had no where to go a tree at my back. One poster from IN said where he's from shooting a mans dog is sorry I agree if shooting just because you don't like dogs. But where I'm from if my dog ,your dog, his dog, her dog or whatever is acting like or trying to bite a person do what ya gotta do. I have had dogs all my life and a few were not as nice as others, I told my neighbors and friends if said dog ever got loose and they felt threatened to shoot it or hit with a shovel whatever and if any of my dogs ever bit anyone but a thief I would put them down myself.
zapper223
PS Thanks to everyone for there replies.

Graybeard · « **Reply #13 on:** March 03, 2005, 09:50:52 AM »

Unlike some I have no problem whatsoever with shooting dogs or cats. Just make sure it don't run off after the shot and never admit to anything after ward. Now since you have admitted it you just have to convince the judge or jury it was self defense. If they believe the story as you've told it anyone should agree on that.

BUT there is no reasoning with animal rights folks. They will never accept any reason for shooting one. If it goes to trial just keep to keep those folks off the jury.

That's why I say the best policy is to never let it run off if you shoot and never admit it was you after the deed is done. Then the burden of proof falls on them to prove you did it rather than you to prove it was justified.

Old Syko · « **Reply #14 on:** March 03, 2005, 02:20:07 PM »

Well here it is. I've shot more than my share of dogs, cats and other critters. Most of the dogs were put down because some lazy, gutless moron hauled them out into the country where I live and dumped them to fend for themselves or starve to death. Shooting a dog has nothing to do with my previous comment aside from the fact that this man damaged or destroyed the property of someone else and doesn't feel anything more for his actions than the fear that he may be held financially responsible for his actions. He called the dog in not once but twice before he shot it, even though he claims he didn't intend to hit it. If you don't intend to hit something what are you shooting at? I was taught to never point a firearm at anything you don't intend to destroy or kill.

Around here, I've had 1 neighbor kill one of my dogs a few years ago and I've killed 2 that I was able to track down an owner for. The thing is we met, discussed the situation, and settled it in all 3 cases without incident or need for legal intervention. There's a lot to be said for taking responsibility for your actions.

We call in and kill coyotes here as often as some folks go to the grocery but when we get a dog to respond to the call we quit then and there because for the most part coyotes and domesticated dogs don't occupy the same territory any longer than necessary.

I'm astounded that noone cares about the man who's property was damaged. Wonder how much different it would be if the dog belonged to some of the responders to this thread.

Don Fischer · « **Reply #15 on:** March 03, 2005, 03:03:23 PM »

I hate to say this as I really love dog's. If the dog was being agressive, you should have killed the dog. We had a guy here in town a number of year's ago get blocked out of his own house by a dog growling at him and obviously being agressive. So he went around the front, went inside and got a pellet gun and shot at the dog to scare it off. Hit the dog in the ear and brought blood. Some kid's saw it happen and told the dog's owner, who in turn filed a complaint with the county sheriff who,, came out and wrote Rod a citation for animal cruleity. Rod went to court and was found guilty. Fined $250.00 then signed into the county jail but was released on probation for one year.

Animal control and the county sherrif both advised Rod that if it happened again, kill the dog, don't wound it. That dog was inside his house when this happened!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dog get's agressive, kill the dog......

Nightrain52 · « **Reply #16 on:** March 03, 2005, 04:32:01 PM »

Zapper 223-I am not trying to say who is right or wrong. I grew up on a farm here in Indiana and when I was a kid in the late 50s any dog that showed aggression in any way were dealt with with a 12ga. or a well placed 22lr. That was the way it was right or wrong, no questions asked. Fast forword to now. A lot of people think of their dogs as one of their kids. Let us know how things work out.

JPSaxMan · « **Reply #17 on:** March 03, 2005, 05:37:07 PM »

I'll tell ya what, when two of our cats (yes, domestic) turned on us or their fellow felines in sever aggression, I only had small doubts about knocking their lights out. First time was with a 12 ga. Second time was with a .243 (only gun at hand; emergency).

Yes, I know I said cats, but its the principle. The animals were acting aggresive and posed a threat to the occupants of the property. So the only right thing to do is to take care of the problem. Which means shooting the animal. Exterminating it so it no longer poses a problem. Period. End of story.

fe352v8 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 03, 2005, 06:21:59 PM »

Check your home owners policy there is often a limit of $500.00 for loss to live stock, or domestic animals. Not to give you a hard time, but you said you did not see the collar, did not intend to shoot the dog, you shot him in the back leg, you were afraid he was going to bite you.

If you say, I was afraid he was going to bite me, and I shot reflexivly in self defense, and hit the dog in a hind leg. It has a lot better ring than, I was afraid he was going to bite me, I did not mean to shoot him, but somehow hit him in the hind leg after I called him in the second time.

In court its how you say it, there is a funny insurance story, a man involved in an accident wrote on his statement; "I swerved several times before I manged to hit him", not good he meant to say I swerved several times to avoid the other person before we collided. Good luck you may find it cheaper to pay vet bills, make sure you get a release from the dog owner, than to screw with this.

life is no joke but funny things happen

jon

zapper223 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 04, 2005, 05:54:29 PM »

I didn't want this to turn into a argument old syko but you seem to read between the lines alot I grew up with guns and hunting and shooting so yes I know about pointing or shooting only what you want to kill. In this case I had no time to plan on what to do . I pointed in direction of dog that was coming at me in a hurray and fired didn't care where I hit it or if I just scared it off. As far as shooting it again to kill it by the time I got a shell in my gun the dog was way down the holler running and squalling or I would have. I agree 100 percent graybeard I should have never admitted to it, but as I thought I had done what I had to do I told the story as it happened. One more thing not wanting to make this into a big argument but being the dogs owner was on horseback what is his excuse for being so far from his dog when he was riding on a powerline clearcut. And there is no way I'm going to sit there and let anyones dog chew on me even just for a little bit. I thank you all for your input and really don't think after doing more research on the laws here that I have a thing to worry about as I said in earlier post it states that no one is liable for killing or defending oneself or any human being from a dog that is acting vicious . One last thing to clarify I've been predator hunting since a child but seriously the last several years and as I said have called in a great many dogs and never once had one return after the initial encounter . Once they knew the sounds were coming from a human and not a critter they didn't return this was first time one did and wasn't going to stop until it was in my lap.
Again thank everyone and I'll let you know what comes of this,
zapper

zapper223 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 04, 2005, 06:10:04 PM »

Im back one more time , I forgot a point or two,old syko you stated that where you live you call and kill coyotes regularly . Also that they don't occupy the same territory as dogs, not so here as coyotes kill alot of dogs and I have killed numerous coyotes on the same stand that a dog or group of dogs responded to first . As far as leave the area I have no idea what kind of calls you use but I have several that a human can hear a mile away under the right conditions but a canine can hear that far or farther under not such good conditions. I guess what your saying is I should have quit hunting or walked 2 or more miles away so the dogs wouldn't hear my calls. Well sorry ,I work and hunt when I can and I'm not going to pack up and go to the next county every time a dog responds to my call. I may as well stay home ,if the owner was at least in the same vicinity of his dog I would have seen him and told him to control his dog.
zapper

leverfan · « **Reply #21 on:** March 04, 2005, 08:13:42 PM »

Quote from: Old Syko

I'm astounded that noone cares about the man who's property was damaged. Wonder how much different it would be if the dog belonged to some of the responders to this thread.

If my dog charged a person, twice, in an aggressive manner, while I was failing to control it, I would apologize to the poor guy that had to go through the trauma of shooting another man's dog. I would finish the job on my aggressive, ill-mannered, and now wounded dog. I would offer to pay for the other guy's ammo, or at least offer to buy him a round back in town, since his hunting chances in that area were blown by all the commotion. That's just me, and I realize my view of the world is not common. :wink:

Zapper, good luck with the fall out from this. Contrary to a previous post, it doesn't cost a dime to sue someone, if the damages are substantial enough to whet a lawyer's appetite. The lawyer will happily sue you for the chance to get about one third of the take at the end of the law suit, if the money is big (payment for loss of loved pet, pain and suffering, vet bills, future breeding profits, etc.). It costs money to defend yourself in a suit, so countersue the guy for not controlling his dog if he wants to see you in court. Once he has to start paying his lawyer to mount a defense, then he might back off.

zapper223 · « **Reply #22 on:** March 05, 2005, 08:44:31 AM »

Thanks Leverfan and everyone else who understands my situation. Again I want to make clear I don't like what happened and still feel bad about the loss of this guys dog. However I would not have done one thing differently than I did. I am as big a dog lover as the next guy and would do anything I could to prevent such an occurence. If only the dogs owner would have at least stayed in the same general area as his dog this whole thing would not have happened.
Thanks,
zapper
P.S. By the way I did get in touch with an attorney and it looks like, as I stated from my research , that I was well within my rights to do as I did. When a dogs well being overrides that of a human being it will be a heck of a world we live in. JMHO

Nightrain52 · « **Reply #23 on:** March 07, 2005, 05:10:29 AM »

Let us know the final outcome Zapper. It's easy to sit back and second guess what a person should do but until they are put in a situation such as this no one really knows. In a snap decision I would have done the same thing. Good luck.

zapper223 · « **Reply #24 on:** March 07, 2005, 08:20:17 AM »

Nightrain,
Thanks for your understanding. Most of the replies to my post were from guys that either understood or strongly agreed with what happened . I wanted others opinions and everyone has one, I didn't expect that any other hunters would have any problem with what I did. There was one that didn't see or didn't want to see the situation for what it was. I'd like to know what he would have thought ,if it would have been a youngster out on a turkey hunt and got so scared he or she couldn't react in time and got badly bitten or mauled. I have had dogs respond to turkey calling as well. I don't want to stir this up again, just something to give a little thought. Yes , I will let everyone know what comes of this, I haven't heard a word as of yet.
Thanks again,
zapper