Nv. Open carry

[SloChicken]

OP needs to research the laws in his specific AO because it could honestly go either way.

Pets are legally considered property, rather than life, in many places. In some places, there are specific laws/ordinances on the books that allow the use of deadly force to protect pets. But in many places, there aren't such laws, so you'd be effectively using deadly force to protect your property... which we all know tends to be illegal.

If you know what the specific situation is in OP's AO, I would actually be curious to see it.

[PogoJack]

I hike and conceal carry in a Hill People Gear Original Kit Bag v2 chest pack. It doesn't have PALS loops on it so it doesn't look tactical. Ive got a 10mm in there for any critters.

You cannot shoot a dog to protect your dog but anything that would attack your dog would also be likely to make you fear for your own life and thats what you should remember to mention.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[-hanko]

[ATTACH]859810[/ATTACH]

Wow, could we get more FUD in this thread?

Also, I wonder what Bar-B-Q Coyote tastes like?

It's best with a Carolina vinegar sauce...not quite as gamy as California condor, more like bald eagle.

OP needs to research the laws in his specific AO because it could honestly go either way.

Pets are legally considered property, rather than life, in many places. In some places, there are specific laws/ordinances on the books that allow the use of deadly force to protect pets. But in many places, there aren't such laws, so you'd be effectively using deadly force to protect your property... which we all know tends to be illegal.

If you know what the specific situation is in OP's AO, I would actually be curious to see it.

In my area, animals that "worry" (i.e. bother per Idaho law) livestock in any way may be shot on sight. A couple years ago I was out cleaning up after the horses as a woman, a recent out of state transplant, was walking a couple Dalmatians down the street bordering the horses' pasture. One of the horses gave them a good snort.

I walked over to the fence with a holstered Model 27 and asked the lady to please put leads on the dogs and walk on the other side of the street...which she did. Five minutes later a deputy shows up, asks what's happening, and stated the woman said I threatened to shoot her dogs...which I did not.

He spoke with the woman for a few minutes, advising her I was well within my rights to drop the dogs if, in my opinion, they were worrying the horses. That ended that.

You cannot shoot a dog to protect your dog but anything that would attack your dog would also be likely to make you fear for your own life and thats what you should remember to mention.

That all depends upon where you reside and should not be used as a blanket statement. As to coyotes, I will shoot and have shot any I can see, day or night. Beyond looking for barn cat snacks, they definitely will take down a pheasant, duck, or goose...I've seen the results in both the horse pasture and hay field.

[tuna quesadilla]

Cool, then OP goes to trial and is convicted of illegally discharging a firearm within city limits because the Court isn't convinced that a grown man was "in fear of his life" from a malnourished 35lb coyote. You see why it's valuable to actually know the laws rather than depending on cute little catchphrases you read on the internet?

[Spartan301]

Yum,Yum!

It's best with a Carolina vinegar sauce...not quite as gamy as California condor, more like bald eagle.

Sounds good to me. Probably not as chewy as Mountain Lion!

I'm a member of P.E.T.A. (People Eating Tasty Animals!)

[SloChicken]

Cool, then OP goes to trial and is convicted of illegally discharging a firearm within city limits because the Court isn't convinced that a grown man was "in fear of his life" from a malnourished 35lb coyote. You see why it's valuable to actually know the laws rather than depending on cute little catchphrases you read on the internet?

Sorry dude, there are enough hwndwringers on this thread alone to show that some do validly feel them to be a threat.

That is all it takes.

Nice of you to paint the scene to fit your narrative though.

You need to understand the meaning of “beyond a reasonable doubt” and apply here.

“Know the laws” he says ...

[-hanko]

Sounds good to me. Probably not as chewy as Mountain Lion!

I'm a member of P.E.T.A. (People Eating Tasty Animals!)

If God didn't want us to eat animals, He wouldn't have made them out of meat.

[tuna quesadilla]

It's shockingly dismaying to know that you can not only be so confidently wrong, but that you think you're qualified to spread this as advice to others.

You need to know your local laws, and printing off a page from Calguns where "enough hwndwringers on this thread alone to show that some do validly feel them to be a threat" will not be your bulletproof armor against a criminal conviction.

By the way, what's a hwndwringer?

[Chapped Hide]

Lots of gun toting idiots in my neighborhood that claim they will shoot a coyote in their yard if it is threatening. They give the rest of us a bad name, ****ing stupid dunces.

[nitroxdiver]

In my area, animals that "worry" (i.e. bother per Idaho law) livestock in any way may be shot on sight. A couple years ago I was out cleaning up after the horses as a woman, a recent out of state transplant, was walking a couple Dalmatians down the street bordering the horses' pasture. One of the horses gave them a good snort.

I walked over to the fence with a holstered Model 27 and asked the lady to please put leads on the dogs and walk on the other side of the street...which she did. Five minutes later a deputy shows up, asks what's happening, and said I threatened to shoot her dogs...which I did not.

He spoke with the woman for a few minutes, advising her I was well within my rights to drop the dogs if, in my opinion, they were bothering the horses. That ended that.



That all depends upon where you reside.

Truth [emoji631]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[-hanko]

Cool, then OP goes to trial and is convicted of illegally discharging a firearm within city limits because the Court isn't convinced that a grown man was "in fear of his life" from a malnourished 35lb coyote. You see why it's valuable to actually know the laws rather than depending on cute little catchphrases you read on the internet?

The malnourished ones are the ones that bother me. Everybody's got to eat, but I get to draw the line on whom eats what.

[-hanko]

Truth [emoji631]

Thanks...a dose of reality is sometimes needed for those who don't know what they're talking about.

[SloChicken]

It's shockingly dismaying to know that you can not only be so confidently wrong, but that you think you're qualified to spread this as advice to others.

You need to know your local laws, and printing off a page from Calguns where "enough hwndwringers on this thread alone to show that some do validly feel them to be a threat" will not be your bulletproof armor against a criminal conviction.

By the way, what's a hwndwringer?

You, are a handwringer,

Quite simply, to be in fear for your life, or the life of others is the criteria for lethal self-defense.
I can assure you, this is the EXACT CRITERIA LE uses when they shoot a dog during a contact.

And yes, I do know what I am talking about, I was a sworn peace officer for many years as part of my Fire Investigations training as part of our metro arson strike team.

The quote of “It’s not how it went down, but how it is written up” is a direct quote from one of our firearms instructors (Local PD instructor) during our training. It actually applies more to our narratives we compose, but it is applicable here as to one’s statements to LE if such an incident happens.

Somehow this hurt your butt, and for that I am sorry not sorry.

You, on the other hand, need to study up dude.

[1911man]

I like the idea of the cattle prod, I would want dual purpose it as a walking stick, but the rod part maybe to flexible for a viable walking stick.

[subscriber]

Cool, then OP goes to trial and is convicted of illegally discharging a firearm within city limits because the Court isn't convinced that a grown man was "in fear of his life" from a malnourished 35lb coyote.

Unless you corner a wild animal that is smaller than you, or interfere with its young, it should be deemed to have rabies if it comes at you, rather than runs away. Never mind if it even "nips" you:

https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/exposure/type.html

Any penetration of the skin by teeth constitutes a bite exposure. All bites, regardless of body site, represent a potential risk of rabies transmission

If a coyote bites you, shooting it will enable testing it for rabies. The text from the CDC implies erring on the side of caution: https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/exposure/testing.html

After exposure to wildlife in which rabies is suspected, prophylaxis is warranted in most circumstances. Because the period of rabies virus shedding in wild animal hybrids is unknown, these animals should be euthanized and tested rather than confined and observed when they bite humans.

Vaccination should be discontinued if tests of the involved animal are negative for rabies infection.

Treatment to prevent rabies is much more expensive than the cost of a bullet. So; you shot the coyote because its behavior was consistent with that of a rabid animal. Why let it go on to bite other people or animals?

"How do you know what rabid animal behavior looks like? Are you a veterinarian".
"No. As an outdoorsman, I consider it my duty to have a basic understanding of wild animal behavior".