Didn't IN just pass a law stating that an officer can come on your property or in your home and shoot your dog if it even looks at them cross-eyed?
If ANYONE comes on MY property and shoots my dog, it isn't the lawyer they need to worry about. Any dog will be apprehensive of any stranger, especially on it's turf.
Giving permission to shoot a dog that one believes might attack, is deplorable. It gives way to *********s shooting dogs and claiming the dog was going to attack.
If the dog actually attacks, i.e. bites and draws blood, then it would be justifiable. It's no different than a person that yells at someone or "growls" per se. Is it justified to shoot them
for displaying a conspicuous demonstration?
If ANYONE comes on MY property and shoots my dog, it isn't the lawyer they need to worry about. Any dog will be apprehensive of any stranger, especially on it's turf.
Giving permission to shoot a dog that one believes might attack, is deplorable. It gives way to *********s shooting dogs and claiming the dog was going to attack.
If the dog actually attacks, i.e. bites and draws blood, then it would be justifiable. It's no different than a person that yells at someone or "growls" per se. Is it justified to shoot them
for displaying a conspicuous demonstration?
