Not really, a dog has the same civil rights as a bottle of coke or a TV set. It’s property. You shoot it if you think its a threat. If a judicial someone decides you were wrong, then you hafta write the guy a check for a few hundred bucks. Same as if he left a TV set on your lawn and you threw it away.
This isn’t the same as shooting a person. And the world is FULL of stories of a child that age even playing with their own Pit Bull or Mastif, then pulling its ear wrong and getting killed or mutilated for life. Go dad!
Funny. I Googled for info and that's not what comes up.
The breeds most likely to kill
"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)
Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.
There are studies that claim certain breeds are more likely to attack than others. A study by Merritt Clifton, which analyzed serious attacks in the U.S. and Canada between 1982 and 2006, determined that Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios, and their mixes were responsible for 74% of attacks studied and 65% of fatalities. Another study indicates that pit bulls and their mixes were involved in approximately one third of the reported human dog bite-related fatalities between 1981 and 1992, while Rottweilers were responsible for about half of those fatalities reported between 1993 and 1996.
I don't see anything about Mastiffs.
“Not really, a dog has the same civil rights as a bottle of coke or a TV set. It’s property. You shoot it if you think its a threat. If a judicial someone decides you were wrong, then you hafta write the guy a check for a few hundred bucks. Same as if he left a TV set on your lawn and you threw it away. This isn’t the same as shooting a person. And the world is FULL of stories of a child that age even playing with their own Pit Bull or Mastif, then pulling its ear wrong and getting killed or mutilated for life. Go dad!”
It’s attitudes like this which give gun owners a bad name. People that go around looking for any lame excuse to kill someones dog just for being on their property. If the dog was attacking his kid or acting in a threatening manner, fine, no argument. Furthermore, any normally adjusted person knows that in the US dogs are often considered to be part of a person’s family. Its not like a freaking TV set. Technically the may be property (like your gun) but anyone who thinks they can kill them for no reason may be in for some VERY unpleasant and violent blow back.