Ok, Legal question about vicous dogs

[Wyldk2]

Ok, now I am not a dog hater or anything, but do I have the right to shoot a dog on my property if that dog is threatening towards me? My neighbors 2 houses down from me have one of those "Pit-Bulls" and so far it has gotten into my yard and came near close to biting me. The owners keep it leashed up or penned up, but dogs do on occasion get loose. I live here in the county and since there is no leash law, people round here let their dogs go rampant.

Since then I carry my gun on me everytime i leave the house. Not that i am afraid for myself, but the dog could attack anyone.

I just want to make sure i have the right to defend myself on my own property.

[MacGyver]

Have you tried animal control? You've likely got some more justifiable options at your disposal that don't involve an angry neighbor retaliating against you for shooting his dog. And, if the dog really is a threat, you can take action before it bites somebody.

Edited February 26, 2010 by MacGyver

[E4 No More]

Personally, I wouldn't wait for the dog to succeed in biting me or my family. I'd call the authorities to have them do something.

[Guest db99wj]

NOT A LEGAL OPINION.

Simple answer. If you are in fear of your life, then yes.

You can search on here and there should be several dog threads regarding this. Pit Bulls, while not all or even most are bad, they do have a reputation.

As mentioned above, you might want to look at other avenues, like animal control, or other authority, before it escalates to this, which might even voicing your concerns to the neighbor if you have no other avenue. They might not realize there dogs are causing problems.

[Krull]

I agree there is no such thing as a bad dog.....only bad owner...(I think mr myaghi said something like that.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

This one is easy.. the State law is on your side...

1st and foremost if your in fear of your life, or in fear of serious bodily injury and have to shoot then shoot! However there is a leash law in the state of Tennessee. It would be wise to call the sheriff's Dept. and have them come out and make a report before you do anything. Therefor you have documentation there was a problem if anything unfortunate happens.

[lowbud]

If i'm not mistaken there's a specific law on pitbulls and they need to be secured at all times. I would call animal control, sheriff, or the health dept.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

Theres no such law in Tennessee that im aware of about pits, all dogs are supposed to be under contolled restraint... Meaning leash, fence or electronic device... except while hunting.

[Guest dlstewart01]

Tennessee code 39-14-205B

) A person is justified in killing the animal of another if the person acted under a reasonable belief that the animal was creating an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to that person or another or an imminent danger of death to an animal owned by that person. A person is not justified in killing the animal of another if at the time of the killing the person is trespassing upon the property of the owner of the animal. The justification for killing the animal of another authorized by this subsection ( shall not apply to a person who, while engaging in or attempting to escape from criminal conduct, kills a police dog that is acting in its official capacity. In that case the provisions of subsection (a) shall apply to the person

[GLOCKMEISTER]

44-8-408. Dogs

(a) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires, "owner" means a person who, at the time of the offense, regularly harbors, keeps or exercises control over the dog, but does not include a person who, at the time of the offense, is temporarily harboring, keeping or exercising control over the dog.

( The owner of a dog commits an offense if that dog goes uncontrolled by the owner upon the premises of another without the consent of the owner of the premises or other person authorized to give consent, or goes uncontrolled by the owner upon a highway, public road, street or any other place open to the public generally.

© It is an exception to the application of this section that:

(1) The dog was on a hunt or chase;

(2) The dog was on the way to or from a hunt or chase;

(3) The dog was guarding or driving stock or on the way to guard or drive stock;

(4) The dog was being moved from one place to another by the owner of the dog;

(5) The dog is a police or military dog, the injury occurred during the course of the dog's official duties and the person injured was a party to, a participant in or suspected of being a party to or participant in the act or conduct that prompted the police or military to utilize the services of the dog;

(6) The violation of subsection ( occurred while the injured person was on the private property of the dog's owner with the intent to engage in unlawful activity while on the property;

(7) The violation of subsection ( occurred while the dog was protecting the dog's owner or other innocent party from attack by the injured person or an animal owned by the injured person;

(8) The violation of subsection ( occurred while the dog was securely confined in a kennel, crate or other enclosure; or

(9) The violation of subsection ( occurred as a result of the injured person disturbing, harassing, assaulting or otherwise provoking the dog.

(d) The exception to the application of this section provided in subdivisions ©(1)-(4) shall not apply unless the owner in violation of subsection ( pays or tenders payment for all damages caused by the dog to the injured party within thirty (30) days of the damage being caused.

(e) It is not a defense to prosecution for a violation of subsection ( and punished pursuant to subdivision (g)(1), (g)(2) or (g)(3) that the dog owner exercised reasonable care in attempting to confine or control the dog.

(f) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution for a violation of subsection ( and punished pursuant to subdivision (g)(4) or (g)(5) that the dog owner exercised reasonable care in attempting to confine or control the dog.

(g)(1) A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by fine only.

(2) A violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only if the dog running at large causes damage to the property of another.

(3) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor punishable by fine only if the dog running at large causes bodily injury, as defined by § 39- 11-106, to another.

(4) A violation of this section is a Class E felony if the dog running at large causes serious bodily injury, as defined by § 39-11-106, to another.

(5) A violation of this section is a Class D felony if the dog running at large causes the death of another.

(h) Notwithstanding subsection (g), a violation of this section shall be punished as provided in subsection (i) if the violation involves:

(1) A dog that was trained to fight, attack or kill or had been used to fight; or

(2) The owner of the dog violating this section knew of the dangerous nature of the dog and, prior to the violation of this section, the dog had bitten one (1) or more people that resulted in serious bodily injury or death.

(i) A violation of this section, where one (1) or more of the factors set out in subsection (h) are present, shall be punished as follows:

(1) A Class C misdemeanor if the dog running at large does not cause property damage, injury or death;

(2) A Class A misdemeanor if the dog running at large causes damage to the property of another;

(3) A Class E felony if the dog running at large causes bodily injury to another;

(4) A Class D felony if the dog running at large causes serious bodily injury to another; and

(5) A Class C felony if the dog running at large causes the death of another.

1901 Acts, c. 50, § 1; 1903 Acts, c. 419, § 1; 2007 Pub.Acts, c. 533, § 1; 2007 Pub.Acts, c. 556, § 1, eff. July 1, 2007.

[dariks]

Here's the relevant section.

44-8-408. Dogs not allowed at large — Exception — Penalties. —

(a) As used in this section, unless the context otherwise requires, “owner†means a person who, at the time of the offense, regularly harbors, keeps or exercises control over the dog, but does not include a person who, at the time of the offense, is temporarily harboring, keeping or exercising control over the dog.

( The owner of a dog commits an offense if that dog goes uncontrolled by the owner upon the premises of another without the consent of the owner of the premises or other person authorized to give consent, or goes uncontrolled by the owner upon a highway, public road, street or any other place open to the public generally.

© It is an exception to the application of this section that:

(1) The dog was on a hunt or chase;

(2) The dog was on the way to or from a hunt or chase;

(3) The dog was guarding or driving stock or on the way to guard or drive stock;

(4) The dog was being moved from one place to another by the owner of the dog;

(5) The dog is a police or military dog, the injury occurred during the course of the dog's official duties and the person injured was a party to, a participant in or suspected of being a party to or participant in the act or conduct that prompted the police or military to utilize the services of the dog;

(6) The violation of subsection ( occurred while the injured person was on the private property of the dog's owner with the intent to engage in unlawful activity while on the property;

(7) The violation of subsection ( occurred while the dog was protecting the dog's owner or other innocent party from attack by the injured person or an animal owned by the injured person;

(8) The violation of subsection ( occurred while the dog was securely confined in a kennel, crate or other enclosure; or

(9) The violation of subsection ( occurred as a result of the injured person disturbing, harassing, assaulting or otherwise provoking the dog.

(d) The exception to the application of this section provided in subdivisions ©(1)-(4) shall not apply unless the owner in violation of subsection ( pays or tenders payment for all damages caused by the dog to the injured party within thirty (30) days of the damage being caused.

(e) It is not a defense to prosecution for a violation of subsection ( and punished pursuant to subdivision (g)(1), (g)(2) or (g)(3) that the dog owner exercised reasonable care in attempting to confine or control the dog.

(f) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution for a violation of subsection ( and punished pursuant to subdivision (g)(4) or (g)(5) that the dog owner exercised reasonable care in attempting to confine or control the dog.

(g) (1) A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by fine only.

(2) A violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only if the dog running at large causes damage to the property of another.

(3) A violation of this section is a Class A misdemeanor punishable by fine only if the dog running at large causes bodily injury, as defined by § 39-11-106, to another.

(4) A violation of this section is a Class E felony if the dog running at large causes serious bodily injury, as defined by § 39-11-106, to another.

(5) A violation of this section is a Class D felony if the dog running at large causes the death of another.

(h) Notwithstanding subsection (g), a violation of this section shall be punished as provided in subsection (i) if the violation involves:

(1) A dog that was trained to fight, attack or kill or had been used to fight; or

(2) The owner of the dog violating this section knew of the dangerous nature of the dog and, prior to the violation of this section, the dog had bitten one (1) or more people that resulted in serious bodily injury or death.

(i) A violation of this section, where one (1) or more of the factors set out in subsection (h) are present, shall be punished as follows:

(1) A Class C misdemeanor if the dog running at large does not cause property damage, injury or death;

(2) A Class A misdemeanor if the dog running at large causes damage to the property of another;

(3) A Class E felony if the dog running at large causes bodily injury to another;

(4) A Class D felony if the dog running at large causes serious bodily injury to another; and

(5) A Class C felony if the dog running at large causes the death of another.

[Acts 1901, ch. 50, § 1; 1903, ch. 419, § 1; Shan., § 2853a4; Code 1932, § 5086; T.C.A. (orig. ed.), §§ 44-1408, 44-8-108; Acts 2007, ch. 533, § 1; 2007, ch. 556, § 1.]

[Guest clownsdd]

1st choice animal control.

Next, paintball gun. legal to shoot inside most city limits, runs the dog away, and the irresponsible owner has a mess to clean up.

and don't have to worry about all the above posts

[dariks]

/shakes tiny little fist at Glockmeister

[E4 No More]

Something else to consider: Most insurance companies have clauses so that they do not cover specific breeds of dogs, and Pitbulls are number 1 on the list. If that dog attacks you do not expect their insurance company to pay out.

Edited February 26, 2010 by SWJewellTN

[Guest Straight Shooter]

I have PM'd you sir with info. I THOROUGHLY DISAGREE on calling animal control. Id KILL THIS DOG THE MOMENT IT THREATENED ME, PERIOD. Im from Fayetteville and WE DO have a law here on animals running free...its ILLEGAL. Any dog that'll threaten an adult, will attack a child, a pet,a calf{seen this several times}. I HATE when people dont control their animals and allow them to crap all over the place, and terrorize people. Its a misdemeaner here, and if the animal injures or kills someone, the owner will be charged with a felony. They SHOULD be. The FIRST TIME one acts like it wants a piece of me, Im gonna let him have one...or two.

[Guest dlstewart01]

Posted on the first page. Some may have missed it...

39-14-205B

) A person is justified in killing the animal of another if the person acted under a reasonable belief that the animal was creating an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to that person or another or an imminent danger of death to an animal owned by that person. A person is not justified in killing the animal of another if at the time of the killing the person is trespassing upon the property of the owner of the animal. The justification for killing the animal of another authorized by this subsection ( shall not apply to a person who, while engaging in or attempting to escape from criminal conduct, kills a police dog that is acting in its official capacity. In that case the provisions of subsection (a) shall apply to the person

Edited February 26, 2010 by dlstewart01

[saintsfanbrian]

I wouldn't hesitate if the dog acted threatening to me or mine while I was on my property. If I am on their property that is another story. Prior to that happening if the dog had already been loose and on my property I would contact the owner and ask them if they are aware of it and that the next time the dog is on my property I will be contacting the authorities. Let them know that the dog has acted aggressively towards you and that you are very uncomfortable about it.

[Fallguy]

Nothing I can add...just wanted to be a part of the thread.

[Krull]

Nothing I can add...just wanted to be a part of the thread.

I miss your TV show.

[GLOCKMEISTER]

I LIKED YOUR MOVIE

[dralarms]

I have PM'd you sir with info. I THOROUGHLY DISAGREE on calling animal control. Id KILL THIS DOG THE MOMENT IT THREATENED ME, PERIOD. Im from Fayetteville and WE DO have a law here on animals running free...its ILLEGAL. Any dog that'll threaten an adult, will attack a child, a pet,a calf{seen this several times}. I HATE when people dont control their animals and allow them to crap all over the place, and terrorize people. Its a misdemeaner here, and if the animal injures or kills someone, the owner will be charged with a felony. They SHOULD be. The FIRST TIME one acts like it wants a piece of me, Im gonna let him have one...or two.

1st, I agree on any animal that acts in a threatening manner on my property.

2nd, straight from a deputy shrieff's mouth "Tn has a leash law, if the dog comes into your yard and bares it's teeth then you are in your right to protect yourself. Do NOT wait until a child has been hurt on your property by this dog"

He told me this when I had them called on me for peppering some pit pups. Finally broke the parents from coming over and starting crap and then I come home and find 4 or 5 pups on my front porch, harassing my snake controllers. Went in the house, got my 22 H&R revolver loaded with 9 rounds of rat shot and proceeded to explain property rights to them. They got the picture, never saw them again (heard them for the next 2 hrs though). Wasn't long before the owner got put in jail for killing this guy and setting his house on fire to cover it up.

I have a co2 bb pistol I run regular dogs out of the yard with. Works for most. The pits I don't even bother trying, I take em out with my 40S&W carry or if I'm close enough to the shotgun I see if I can get more than one with a shot.

Don't get me wrong, I love animals, I keep 9 to 12 cats constantly, I feed them just enough to keep them out of the neibors trash, that way they hunt. I have come home once to 5 tree rat tails laying on the front porch.

[dats82]

Kill it, dispose of it far away from your house, and never mention a word about it to anyone.

[DaveTN]

I hate people that do not control their animals.

I also hate people that kill animals for sport.

[Guest marine77]

NOT A LEGAL OPINION.

Simple answer. If you are in fear of your life, then yes.

You can search on here and there should be several dog threads regarding this. Pit Bulls, while not all or even most are bad, they do have a reputation.

As mentioned above, you might want to look at other avenues, like animal control, or other authority, before it escalates to this, which might even voicing your concerns to the neighbor if you have no other avenue. They might not realize there dogs are causing problems.

+1 put it down.

[Volzfan]

I agree there is no such thing as a bad dog.....only bad owner...

But that bad owner can transform that dog into a bad dog. That is a shame.