At which time the dog's owner will ask why you didn't turn the gun around and use the other end of the gun on the dog. You can simply ask the owner why the dog didn't turn around and attack with his other end!steves 50de wrote:Think I will take a bit before shooting, a bit mark proves self defense.Werz wrote:And likewise, in this scenario, the question for a judge or jury will be: "Was he in genuine fear of injury, or was he an angry guy who didn't like the dog?"WestonDon wrote:Actually there is other criteria. They are spelled out pretty clearly in the AG's handbook for concealed carry licensees. Most who read this are intimately familiar with them so I won't go into detail. It never hurts to refresh one's familiarity with that publication.
On another rather nitpicky point, it doesn't really matter if you are in fear for your life. It matters if a judge and/or jury thinks a reasonable person would be in fear for their life.
Goddard’s Law
Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators
-
- OFCC Member
- Posts: 7481
- Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 4:53 pm
- Location: Sandusky County
Re: Goddard’s Law
Famous last words: "I just drank What?!-Socrates
bruh bruh is slang for "complete and total moron" -sodbuster95
The following is a list of children's books that didn't quite make it to the printing press...
1. What Is That Dog Doing to That Other Dog?
2. Daddy Drinks Because You Cry
3. You Were An Accident
4. Bi-Curious George
bruh bruh is slang for "complete and total moron" -sodbuster95
The following is a list of children's books that didn't quite make it to the printing press...
1. What Is That Dog Doing to That Other Dog?
2. Daddy Drinks Because You Cry
3. You Were An Accident
4. Bi-Curious George
-
- Posts: 127
- Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 11:30 pm
- Location: Columbus
Re: Goddard’s Law
Are you sure the dog was tri g to attack you and your dog tried to help? So you would be protecting yourself first....
NRA Endowment Life Member
"Every late-19th-century legal scholar that we have read interpreted the Second Amendment to secure an individual right unconnected with militia service." -- U.S. Supreme Court, June 26, 2008.
"Every late-19th-century legal scholar that we have read interpreted the Second Amendment to secure an individual right unconnected with militia service." -- U.S. Supreme Court, June 26, 2008.
- WY_Not
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 2435
- Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 10:15 pm
- Location: Miami County, OH
- Contact:
Re: Goddard’s Law
Why? Nothing in the law says you must be in fear of your life or actually harmed by the dog. The bar set in O.R.C. 955.28 is VERY low.
steves 50de wrote:Think I will take a bit before shooting, a bit mark proves self defense.
Learn how Project Appleseed is supporting freedom through Marksmanship and Heritage clinics.
Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
- Werz
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 5506
- Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:37 am
Re: Goddard’s Law
Compare and contrast:WY_Not wrote:Why? Nothing in the law says you must be in fear of your life or actually harmed by the dog. The bar set in O.R.C. 955.28 is VERY low.steves 50de wrote:Think I will take a bit before shooting, a bit mark proves self defense.
"[A} dog that is chasing or approaching in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of attack, that attempts to bite or otherwise endanger, or that kills or injures a person or a dog that chases, threatens, harasses, injures, or kills livestock, poultry, other domestic animal, or other animal, that is the property of another person, except a cat or another dog, can be killed at the time of that chasing, threatening, harassment, approaching, attempt, killing, or injury." R.C. 955.28(A).
"No person shall knowingly torture, torment, needlessly mutilate or maim, cruelly beat, poison, needlessly kill, or commit an act of cruelty against a companion animal.
"No person shall knowingly cause serious physical harm to a companion animal." R.C. 959.131(B),(C).
There are plenty of tough guys who think they can shoot any dog that barks at them. There are plenty of jurors willing to tell them they are wrong. And remember: R.C. 955.28(A) is an affirmative defense which the accused must prove by a preponderance of the evidence.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
- WY_Not
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 2435
- Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 10:15 pm
- Location: Miami County, OH
- Contact:
Re: Goddard’s Law
And unless the new law changes or takes precedence over 955.28...
Not trying to be a tough guy. Just someone who has had to deal with other people's "loving pets" turned predators. In no way, shape, or form even remotely enjoy having to dispatch a dog but when it is threatening my family or my livestock then I have ZERO compassion. I've had to deal with dogs chasing cattle and also with a pack of strays that went feral. NOT fun. NOT pleasant.O.R.C. 955.28 wrote:If, in attempting to kill such a dog, a person wounds it, the person is not liable to prosecution under the penal laws that punish cruelty to animals.
Learn how Project Appleseed is supporting freedom through Marksmanship and Heritage clinics.
Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
- Werz
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 5506
- Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 2:37 am
Re: Goddard’s Law
Law must be read in pari materia. The sentence you quoted just expands on the sentence I wrote earlier. You still have to establish by a preponderance of evidence that you would have been justified in killing the dog. What that sentence means is, if you were justified in the killing the dog, but only wounded it, you cannot be convicted on the basis of being intentionally cruel just because you are a bad shot.WY_Not wrote:And unless the new law changes or takes precedence over 955.28...
O.R.C. 955.28 wrote:If, in attempting to kill such a dog, a person wounds it, the person is not liable to prosecution under the penal laws that punish cruelty to animals.
We are all informed by our experiences. I don't see many dogs like that. I do see a lot of humans like that. And I've seen examples of both species that needed to be shot. Just more of the latter.WY_Not wrote:Not trying to be a tough guy. Just someone who has had to deal with other people's "loving pets" turned predators. In no way, shape, or form even remotely enjoy having to dispatch a dog but when it is threatening my family or my livestock then I have ZERO compassion. I've had to deal with dogs chasing cattle and also with a pack of strays that went feral. NOT fun. NOT pleasant.
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
-- Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
"Remember that protecting our gun rights still boils down to keeping a majority in the electorate, and that our daily activities can have the impact of being ambassadors for the gun culture ..."
-- BobK
Open carry is a First Amendment exercise.
-
- OFCC Coordinator
- Posts: 3515
- Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 5:26 pm
- Location: n.e. ohio
- Contact:
Re: Goddard’s Law
Like I said I'll take the bit before shooting. 140 pound dog or a 20 pound dog use common sense. Shooting the dog is the LAST resort.Werz wrote:Compare and contrast:WY_Not wrote:Why? Nothing in the law says you must be in fear of your life or actually harmed by the dog. The bar set in O.R.C. 955.28 is VERY low.steves 50de wrote:Think I will take a bit before shooting, a bit mark proves self defense.
"[A} dog that is chasing or approaching in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of attack, that attempts to bite or otherwise endanger, or that kills or injures a person or a dog that chases, threatens, harasses, injures, or kills livestock, poultry, other domestic animal, or other animal, that is the property of another person, except a cat or another dog, can be killed at the time of that chasing, threatening, harassment, approaching, attempt, killing, or injury." R.C. 955.28(A).
"No person shall knowingly torture, torment, needlessly mutilate or maim, cruelly beat, poison, needlessly kill, or commit an act of cruelty against a companion animal.
"No person shall knowingly cause serious physical harm to a companion animal." R.C. 959.131(B),(C).
There are plenty of tough guys who think they can shoot any dog that barks at them. There are plenty of jurors willing to tell them they are wrong. And remember: R.C. 955.28(A) is an affirmative defense which the accused must prove by a preponderance of the evidence.
Black Rifles Matter
- DontTreadOnMe
- OFCC Patron Member
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am
- Location: SW Ohio
Re: Goddard’s Law
It's up to you, but waiting until you're bitten is IMO a terrible idea. It's like waiting until you're actually stabbed before shooting a knife attacker.steves 50de wrote:Like I said I'll take the bit before shooting. 140 pound dog or a 20 pound dog use common sense. Shooting the dog is the LAST resort.
Odds are a single bite likely won't be traumatic, but some dogs have bitten into a man's femoral artery with a single bite
http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/a ... fwqce.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Another man who was bitten by a police dog successfully sued the city that employed the officers after he had been stopped for a traffic violation. He ran away from his car, and officers pursued him with a police dog which had been trained to bite a suspect and hold him until officers commanded otherwise. The man's upper leg was bitten, and his femoral artery was severed.
The dog might be rabid. Even if it's not, other types of infections from dog bites aren't rare.
Also if the dog's already biting you that means it's right next to you, you're now stressed (on account of being bitten) and are going to try to put a shot into the dog without hitting yourself. You wouldn't be the first person to accidentally shoot himself while trying to shoot an attacking dog.
-
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:54 am
- Location: Ashland Richland and Other Counties
Re: Goddard’s Law
This is the heated topic of discussion I have on facebook, frequently. Even with folks from OHIO. There is an outline in terms of when one may employ use of deadly force. Folks just don't believe it. Obviously, in some states, you simply hang the barrel out the window or door and start shooting. In ohio, that isn't going to fly.WestonDon wrote:Actually there is other criteria. They are spelled out pretty clearly in the AG's handbook for concealed carry licensees. Most who read this are intimately familiar with them so I won't go into detail. It never hurts to refresh one's familiarity with that publication.
On another rather nitpicky point, it doesn't really matter if you are in fear for your life. It matters if a judge and/or jury thinks a reasonable person would be in fear for their life.