Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: 41magsnub on March 12, 2014, 11:38:24 AM
-
http://www.searktoday.com/jury-awards-star-city-man-145k-executed-coon-dog/ (http://www.searktoday.com/jury-awards-star-city-man-145k-executed-coon-dog/)
Short version. Guys were raccoon hunting on public land. Their dogs followed a raccoon off of the public land onto posted private land. The hunters left their firearms on the public land and went into the private land to retrieve their dogs. They say they would have called for permission, but the signs did not have a phone number. I've never seen a no hunting or trespassing sign with a phone number, usually it is just a fence post spray painted orange.
When they found the dogs (treeing a raccoon) the land owner was there and told them to stay away, he was going to shoot the dogs. The hunters moved in and leashed their dogs anyway. The land owner ordered them to step way from the dogs so he could shoot them. The hunters declined so the land owner shot one of the dogs while it was on leash.
The owner of the shot dog sued the land owner and was awarded a $145K verdict ($45K compensation and $100K punitive). Earlier the land owner was convicted of a misdemeanor and sentenced to 6 months in jail over this issue.
What are your thoughts? I would have done the same thing as the hunters, though I think the dollar amounts of the verdict are excessive and are pretty much guaranteed to generate an appeal.
-
I can't say what I think and stay here.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
-
http://www.searktoday.com/jury-awards-star-city-man-145k-executed-coon-dog/ (http://www.searktoday.com/jury-awards-star-city-man-145k-executed-coon-dog/)
Short version. Guys were raccoon hunting on public land. Their dogs followed a raccoon off of the public land onto posted private land. The hunters left their firearms on the public land and went into the private land to retrieve their dogs. They say they would have called for permission, but the signs did not have a phone number. I've never seen a no hunting or trespassing sign with a phone number, usually it is just a fence post spray painted orange.
When they found the dogs (treeing a raccoon) the land owner was there and told them to stay away, he was going to shoot the dogs. The hunters moved in and leashed their dogs anyway. The land owner ordered them to step way from the dogs so he could shoot them. The hunters declined so the land owner shot one of the dogs while it was on leash.
The owner of the shot dog sued the land owner and was awarded a $145K verdict ($45K compensation and $100K punitive). Earlier the land owner was convicted of a misdemeanor and sentenced to 6 months in jail over this issue.
What are your thoughts? I would have done the same thing as the hunters, though I think the dollar amounts of the verdict are excessive and are pretty much guaranteed to generate an appeal.
Sometimes high punitive damage is to prove a point to future violators.
-
Seems like it would felony assault with a deadly weapon on the part of the landowner. =|
(that's kind of fuzzy - ordering them to stay and wait for LE wouldn't/shouldn't be a crime OTOH)
The leashed dogs were no longer a danger to any livestock.
Their is no public land adjacent to my property (the nearest is several miles away). So my first concern would have been if the coon hunters had permission to hunt on the neighbors.
I'm pretty damn territorial but jeeze - dogs can't read signs.
-
What's the law on that in Arkansas
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
-
I can't say what I think and stay here.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
Try as I might I'm in the same boat.
It wouldn't be pleasant or end well for the land owner.
Sent via tapatalk
-
Should have called the cops on trespassers. And only shoot if there is an actual threat.
-
Wow. To shoot leashed dogs when the owners are right there and the dog is not posing an actual threat. :mad:
-
I've been on both sides but shooting the dog was out of line.
I've hunted and lost my best bird dog for a nerve-racked day until safely recovered.
I've had coon hunters with bawling baying dogs and a treed coon 40' from my bedroom at 1am. Not happy about it but not shooting either.
-
Shooting a loose dog that poses a threat to livestock or pets is justified. Shooting a dog , on a leash, under control of the owner, who is not presenting a threat? Totally unjustified.
-
A legal act is not necessarily moral, ethical, or just. I think the landowner in this case needs a primer on the difference. Not asserting that this shooting was legal, but even if the landowner believed it was, I think he crossed a boundary which abjectly failed the reasonable person standard.
-
I might well have ended up killing the guy who killed my dog.
-
I might well have ended up killing the guy who killed my dog.
I think I'm less than 6' away from the target of an armed maniac who has just demonstrated a tendency toward extreme violence... There's no way the shooting is justified (and evidently the law agrees) and the hunter has a decent claim that he thought he was next... I'd have a hard time convicting the hunter for killing the owner.
I'm surprised this didn't end up a felony, but who knows if there was a plea deal or some such.
-
I'm surprised this didn't end up a felony, but who knows if there was a plea deal or some such.
Aggravated ADW, armed robbery, felony cruelty to animals ... I see all sorts of possibilities. :police:
I think the guy got off really cheap for $145K
-
his cost will be ongoing. he will likely need to move either before or after the fire.
-
Seems like a reasonable award, given the circumstances. I am not a fan of trespassers, but the hunters were trying to do the right thing and get their dogs off of the guy's property.
-
I can't imagine the dogs were very far away from the owner when shot if they were on a leash, could take that as attempted murder.
Back home people spray things purple for no hunting, usually a fence post or a tire draped over a fence post.
-
I can't imagine the dogs were very far away from the owner when shot if they were on a leash, could take that as attempted murder.
Back home people spray things purple for no hunting, usually a fence post or a tire draped over a fence post.
Orange/red statutorily means "private, keep out" in Montana.
-
in va you can enter to retrieve dogs must leave guns at property line
-
in va you can enter to retrieve dogs must leave guns at property line
All guns or just the ones you were using to take game?
-
in va you can enter to retrieve dogs must leave guns at property line
Same in Iowa unless you have the owner's permission to go armed. Even if you have a CCW you have to leave that at the property line.
-
All guns or just the ones you were using to take game?
not sure . i would leave em all in the interests of not going to jail. let me see if i can find the actual code
-
Speaking up from the risk management side, the best part is that the award will likely not be covered by the landowner's property or liability insurance. This means that he has to pony up the money out of his own pocket. I bet few of us could come up with $ 145,000 at the drop of a hat.
-
The landowner behaved disgustingly.
I loath having hunting dogs cross my property. Around here they hunt with packs of hounds and the hounds can be dangorous (especially to companion animals) when running like that.
OTOH, they are generally pretty sweet when they've been left behind. I've grabbed ahold of stragglers crossing the property before and called for the owners to pick them up (sometimes they show up before I call because of the radio coller) and the hunters are generally very nice and prompt about collecting their dogs.
Shooting a leashed dog because it was doing what it was trained to do was snotty. Shooting it even with the owners taking the correct actions to remove the dog from the property is just downright wrong for a whole host of reasons.
-
A legal act is not necessarily moral, ethical, or just.
I agree, however the fact that the landowner was convicted of a crime and sentenced to ~6 months incarceration indicates that what he did wasn't just immoral, unethical, and unjust, it was also illegal.
The landowner just really wanted to shoot the dogs. He's paying a suitable penalty for that.
-
He's paying a suitable penalty for that.]
I disagree. Far too light.
-
Assuming the law in AR is the same as CSD said in VA, and Charby said in IA, then it sounds like the hunters were 100% within the law, and not illegally trespassing. Especially once the dogs were leashed and the hunters trying to leave he should have let them go. Shooting the dog was rightly judged criminal, and I agree that 6 months in the pokey and $145k is getting off easy.
That guy sounds like my neighbor.
-
We used to pen up the deer hounds, give them a snack and wait for the owners to come explain themselves. We don't shoot dogs, just another animal following a learned behavior with no capacity for decisions of right/wrong. Now the guys that drove down 1/2 mile of private road knew right from wrong and they had the worst mechanical luck with their trucks.
-
We used to pen up the deer hounds, give them a snack and wait for the owners to come explain themselves. We don't shoot dogs, just another animal following a learned behavior with no capacity for decisions of right/wrong. Now the guys that drove down 1/2 mile of private road knew right from wrong and they had the worst mechanical luck with their trucks.
Leaky tires?
Sawdust
-
The landowner just really wanted to shoot the dogs.
If he'd shot them before the hunters got there, he probably could have gotten away with it. He wanted to shoot them in front of the owners.
-
If he'd shot them before the hunters got there, he probably could have gotten away with it. He wanted to shoot them in front of the owners.
Ordering the hunters at gunpoint to step away from their dogs so he could shoot them raises it to armed robbery IMO :mad:
-
I was thinking he probably could have gotten a trespassing complaint on them, but once he shot the leashed dog, it all falls on his head. That is just wrong. I agree he could have shot the dogs before they got there, but even then, it sounds like they weren't threatening him.
That said, an uncle used to be a ranch manager for a rich guy on 800 acres near where I grew up. It was mostly light woods with some pasture. He said if they have seen packs of dogs (as many as 15 or 20) running through that land at night, some wearing tags, some not. He said they shot as many of them as they could before they ran off. They would generally take off at the sight of people. Hunting dogs like this especially when the owners are right there is a whole different story.
-
I know ranchers in MT that have a zero tolerance for stray dogs: shoot on sight.
Makes sense when your livelihood is at stake. One calf might be one percent of your annual gross revenue, but if your profit is only five or ten percent then one calf is a lot.
-
In va shooting dogs harassing livestock is kosher. As it should be
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk
-
Yep, but unless they do things differently there and a raccoon is considered livestock :)
-
I know ranchers in MT that have a zero tolerance for stray dogs: shoot on sight.
Makes sense when your livelihood is at stake. One calf might be one percent of your annual gross revenue, but if your profit is only five or ten percent then one calf is a lot.
And I completely agree with that. I'm still struggling to comprehend shooting a dog, where the owner is holding the leash. Just crazy...
-
And I completely agree with that. I'm still struggling to comprehend shooting a dog, where the owner is holding the leash. Just crazy...
Same here. I've already said that what this person did constitutes armed robbery.
-
Same here. I've already said that what this person did constitutes armed robbery.
Agreed, and considering the worth of some of those hunting dogs...
-
Got no problem with folks shooting strays in rural settings on GP. Or obviously owned/collared dogs that are posing a danger to person/livestock/property.
But shooting a leased dog under control of its owner is asinine. WTF, over? Also, owner--who looks like he gave zero indication of threat and did his best to comply with laws-- was downrange of the firearm as it discharged and dispatched the dog. But, lack of gun safety seems to be Nutball's least offense.
-
But shooting a leased dog under control of its owner is asinine.
What about dogs that are under a financing contract? :P
-
What about dogs that are under a financing contract? :P
Well, I guess you gotta insure and take care of them just like leased autos until the lease is up.
-
Hmmm... wonder if Chris could give us a complete list of possible criminal charges here
I count at least reckless endangerment, assault w/deadly weapon, possible attempted murder (if you REALLY want to get hardcore)
-
Hmmm... wonder if Chris could give us a complete list of possible criminal charges here
I count at least reckless endangerment, assault w/deadly weapon, possible attempted murder (if you REALLY want to get hardcore)
We are forgetting ..... :facepalm:
Terrorism! >:D