SpaceCritter
NES Member
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.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
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.
Stand up guy.
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?
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.
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.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.
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 thinkShooting 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"
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
Citizens can't shoot dogs, that's the job of the police!
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.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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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