Animals Like This Deserve To Be In Cages

[AllisonWilder]

Someone should try to further educate us on some of this stuff. Can stuff like UFC or WWE trigger anything? What about things that just remind the person of the attacker?

Anything *can* be a trigger. Most of us just suck it up and deal with it without ever saying anything about it because it's on us, not anyone else. I've been assaulted and raped and the still image absolutely was a trigger for me. Now, I don't expect anyone to know what my triggers are or to pussyfoot around because it might trigger something in me because it's not your job to know (or honestly even care) about things that trigger me.

However, maybe in the future just toss in a *trigger warning* in the title when you're going to post something about a woman being assaulted (even if it's not rape) and call it a day. I really don't see any harm in someone asking for something like typing 14 extra characters in a title.

There's also no reason to be so snarky about it. Yeah, it's the internet. Yeah, we should have thick skin (especially since we're camgirls), but shit happens. No, you shouldn't walk on egg shells to appease everyone (free speech, yo) but it doesn't hurt anyone (ie. your reputation will be just fine) to be just a teensy bit mindful of the fact that many women here have openly admitted to being attacked.

That's just my :twocents-02cents: .

Carry on! :handgestures-salute:

 

[PunkInDrublic]

***************************TRIGGER WARNING********************************















Appreciate the insight and advice. Gonna take a xanax just cause.

 

[Red7227]

***************************TRIGGER WARNING********************************















Appreciate the insight and advice. Gonna take a xanax just cause.

While Bawksy and Boce might be opinionated, insensitive dumbasses, this comment elevates you to a level of vileness beyond anything they have done.

Some people have suffered trauma's that they don't wish to be reminded of. Some imagery, smells and sounds can trigger them. A warning is only courtesy. I've worked with a quadriplegic who cannot trust people to shave them because of the thought of a sharp edge near his throat. He was thrown through a window, which cut his throat and crushed his spine, and lay paralysed on the road in the rain for hours wondering when a car would hit him. He cannot go outside at night or out in the rain either. Just because you do not understand something doesn't mean it isn't a valid fear.

 

[Jupiter551]

***************************TRIGGER WARNING********************************















Appreciate the insight and advice. Gonna take a xanax just cause.

While Bawksy and Boce might be opinionated, insensitive dumbasses, this comment elevates you to a level of vileness beyond anything they have done.

I agree completely with the second part of your post, but don't understand this one. It was a dick comment, but that seems like a rather strong reaction unless I'm missing something?

 

[mynameisbob84]

Can stuff like UFC or WWE trigger anything?

Mild arousal. Wait, what?

 

[LilyMarie]

I had no idea you were that sensitive about an image like that especially since your own profile has video caps of women tied up and being flogged for sale.

Amazingly well played. 10 points for Gryffindor.

I can't believe I just had to read this. New low for both of you. How dare you compare those two things. You obviously know nothing about BDSM at all, in addition to being more insensitive and ruder than pretty much everyone I know...

Also, yes to everything Allison and Arrietty have said.

 

[AmberCutie]

I've made a new post to address the subject that has derailed this entire thread so suddenly. https://www.ambercutie.com/forums/viewt ... 12&t=14011

Boce, thank you for including a description above the video. You clearly didn't have any harmful intent with the original post, sorry things got so off track. While the topic was possibly not titled very accurately, I don't think you meant it to mislead anyone. I believe this could have been handled more privately to avoid the aftermath, and that immediate replies were pretty insensitive to others' feelings, but what's done is done.

As far as the examples other people are using, it's a little hypocritical to tell them they are completely off base and wrong when everyone already admits that anything can be a trigger to anyone. Images of BDSM (even if consensual), videos of WWE moves... who knows if they could upset someone? So, let's stop judging each other for the examples given.

If there is anything else to be said about triggers and insensitivity, please continue the discussion (maturely) in the new thread linked above. This thread needs to get back on track.

 

[Brad]

Now this may sound bad but I think this is a great example of how having video surveillance in your home can be a great thing. Yes it is horrible that a person was robbed and assaulted BUT they got the jerk on video which can only help lead to his capture, arrest, and conviction. Hard for a lawyer to argue against that evidence.

And while I certainly do not care to debate gun ownership I will say that Maggy would have blown the guys brains all over the wall! She knows how to shoot and practices with me. She was raised on a farm with plenty of guns so this guy would have never had a chance to "take it from her" as I often see people say. She'd have smoked his ass the minute he entered the house because we have practiced that. Know what to do and practice it so that it becomes second nature. (I also understand that guns are not for everyone and I respect that too.)
:twocents-02cents:

 

[Red7227]

Now this may sound bad but I think this is a great example of how having video surveillance in your home can be a great thing. Yes it is horrible that a person was robbed and assaulted BUT they got the jerk on video which can only help lead to his capture, arrest, and conviction. Hard for a lawyer to argue against that evidence.

And while I certainly do not care to debate gun ownership I will say that Maggy would have blown the guys brains all over the wall! She knows how to shoot and practices with me. She was raised on a farm with plenty of guns so this guy would have never had a chance to "take it from her" as I often see people say. She'd have smoked his ass the minute he entered the house because we have practiced that. Know what to do and practice it so that it becomes second nature. (I also understand that guns are not for everyone and I respect that too.)
:twocents-02cents:

I'm sure the defence will make a case for the video being an invasion of his privacy, an attack on his civil rights and have it banned from use by the prosecution because it would "prejudice" the jury.

As for guns being the the one trick pony solution to all your home security requirements - murdering people is traumatic, hell on the carpet and will involve legal fees and other fucking about that is both time consuming and expensive. Get a dog and locking your doors will solve 80% of the problems without giving your kids the opportunity to blow their brains out, or you shooting a neighbour because you didn't hear them knock.

 

[Brad]

Now this may sound bad but I think this is a great example of how having video surveillance in your home can be a great thing. Yes it is horrible that a person was robbed and assaulted BUT they got the jerk on video which can only help lead to his capture, arrest, and conviction. Hard for a lawyer to argue against that evidence.

And while I certainly do not care to debate gun ownership I will say that Maggy would have blown the guys brains all over the wall! She knows how to shoot and practices with me. She was raised on a farm with plenty of guns so this guy would have never had a chance to "take it from her" as I often see people say. She'd have smoked his ass the minute he entered the house because we have practiced that. Know what to do and practice it so that it becomes second nature. (I also understand that guns are not for everyone and I respect that too.)
:twocents-02cents:

I'm sure the defence will make a case for the video being an invasion of his privacy, an attack on his civil rights and have it banned from use by the prosecution because it would "prejudice" the jury.

As for guns being the the one trick pony solution to all your home security requirements - murdering people is traumatic, hell on the carpet and will involve legal fees and other fucking about that is both time consuming and expensive. Get a dog and locking your doors will solve 80% of the problems without giving your kids the opportunity to blow their brains out, or you shooting a neighbour because you didn't hear them knock.

As silly as the law can be that person has no expectation of privacy when invading someones home. The video is slam dunk evidence. If or when he is caught I bet he will plea bargain, just watch and see.

And I will make a guess that you are anti gun. Why? Because NOWHERE in my post did I ever say guns being the the one trick pony solution to all your home security requirements and quite honestly that is a silly statement. Home security number 1 is that we lock our doors. Number 2 is a big assed Lab. Number 3 is I am a big, angry man. Number 4 are no bushes in front of windows. Number 5 is motion sensing security lights. Get the idea here?


Soooooooo if you are so stupid as to break into our house then yes, you take a very good chance of being shot for doing so. I have NEVER had nor heard of any neighbors that just walk into our home. Nor would I ever do that to even my closest of friends so I don't get that at all. And statements like that are exactly why I dislike trying to discuss gun ownership.
:naughty:

I sat on our local grand jury and heard the case of a couple that shot and killed an intruder. They were not punished at all for doing so and honestly I still think the guy was a dope dealer and the intruder was trying to rip him off. But if you enter a home as an intruder in our city/state and you are killed by the home owner then there is very little chance you will have any issues with that at all. And our carpet is crap anyway so if you really think that my wife and son's welfare is less important then some stupid carpet you are terribly mistaken. I'll burn the fucking house down if it means saving my family from harm!

NOBODY is allowed in our home without our permission period. Break in and you may die period. I have a FOID and will not get in any trouble over it period. Pretty simple no matter how you want to try and spin it. I have lived it so I know what I am doing. Some of you may not have ever had to live in high crime areas but I have. Look up the crime stats on Rockford, Illinois if you don't want to believe me. I will be damned if anyone believes they have any rights once they illegally enter my home, because they don't and they will pay the price.

If you don't like guns then that is fine but don't make it out like those of us raised with them are a bunch of foolish rubes. We have them because of situations just like the one in this thread. I take great pride in trying to keep my family safe and do not like to see that trivialized by someone who is anti gun. Just being honest but reading that crap pisses me off.
:thumbleft:

 

[CharlotteLace]

While I'm fine with having guns in the house, I much prefer to depend on our dogs for alarm and protection. We have one small dog that barks at anything he hears outside, and one large shepherd that's quiet, unless he's pissed. I know the big guy would defend us in a dangerous situation, and while our gun is loaded, it's in our bedroom in the gun safe, making it less accessible than a dog who knows how to maneuver to get to an attacker.

Not only that, but in my state, dogs are actually a more legal form of home defense than a firearm. Colorado has a "stand your ground" law, meaning it's within your legal right to shoot an intruder if they've broken into your dwelling and you believe they intend to do you harm. However, many people using that as a defense still have trouble absolutely proving that they felt menaced at the time, and therefore were justified in shooting. Every time somebody invokes that law, there's a great hullabaloo concerning justification. Not only that, but if I have menacing trespassers on our property, I can't legally do anything until they break into the actual dwelling.

Here's the funny little legal loophole, though. In most (if not all) counties here, if your dog bites a legitimate trespasser on your property, you're not liable for the damage the dog does. Hell, he won't even be assigned the "vicious dog" label that many dogs get after biting. I can let our big dogs roam freely on our property, and be more protected than if I were to shoot an intruder.

 

[PunkInDrublic]

While Bawksy and Boce might be opinionated, insensitive dumbasses, this comment elevates you to a level of vileness beyond anything they have done.

Not even sure what was offensive about the post. I put a warning because I mention xanax, I figured even mentioning xanax could be a trigger if people use it for panic attacks.

 

[BlueViolet]

While I'm fine with having guns in the house, I much prefer to depend on our dogs for alarm and protection. We have one small dog that barks at anything he hears outside, and one large shepherd that's quiet, unless he's pissed. I know the big guy would defend us in a dangerous situation, and while our gun is loaded, it's in our bedroom in the gun safe, making it less accessible than a dog who knows how to maneuver to get to an attacker.

Not only that, but in my state, dogs are actually a more legal form of home defense than a firearm. Colorado has a "stand your ground" law, meaning it's within your legal right to shoot an intruder if they've broken into your dwelling and you believe they intend to do you harm. However, many people using that as a defense still have trouble absolutely proving that they felt menaced at the time, and therefore were justified in shooting. Every time somebody invokes that law, there's a great hullabaloo concerning justification. Not only that, but if I have menacing trespassers on our property, I can't legally do anything until they break into the actual dwelling.

Here's the funny little legal loophole, though. In most (if not all) counties here, if your dog bites a legitimate trespasser on your property, you're not liable for the damage the dog does. Hell, he won't even be assigned the "vicious dog" label that many dogs get after biting. I can let our big dogs roam freely on our property, and be more protected than if I were to shoot an intruder.

Exactly. Though, in most counties around here, you do need to have a clearly posted "beware of dog" or "attack dog on duty" and you are covered. That's why I plan on getting at minimum 8 Caucasian Shepherds to patrol our land, and those dogs don't need to be taught to attack in order to attack. If someone is stupid enough to jump our fences for whatever reason, they'll get a pack of vicious, 150+ lbs dogs after them.

And I'm sure people will try to jump the fence in order to hunt illegally on my land, which pisses me off so much because many dogs have been shot on their owners land by illegal hunters trespassing. So I have no sympathy for trespassers.

I have heard of cases where the home owner shot and killed the intruder who was threatening them in their home, and then the home owner ended up going to jail anyway for murder. But wasn't there also a case where a guy broke into someone's home and fell on a knife and stabbed himself while the home owners were sleeping and sued them and won for being injured in their home?

 

[mynameisbob84]

But wasn't there also a case where a guy broke into someone's home and fell on a knife and stabbed himself while the home owners were sleeping and sued them and won for being injured in their home?

I hope not. That kind of thing just makes me want to smash things up while lamenting how stupid we are as a society :?

 

[Jupiter551]

While I'm fine with having guns in the house, I much prefer to depend on our dogs for alarm and protection. We have one small dog that barks at anything he hears outside, and one large shepherd that's quiet, unless he's pissed. I know the big guy would defend us in a dangerous situation, and while our gun is loaded, it's in our bedroom in the gun safe, making it less accessible than a dog who knows how to maneuver to get to an attacker.

^This. Most importantly, their senses are much sharper than ours. Unless your intruder is a master ninja, he's not breaking into a house so stealthily he's bypassing guard dogs lol.

And hey so, why would it be a good thing if she had shot the guy anyway? He deserves punishment, and he's scum, but no one died. Also, and I'm in no way defending guys who hit women, but when did it become a capital offence? It's a horrible thing to do, but death sentence?

The argument that if she had a gun she would have shot him dead is not a positive one heh. You're looking at a situation where a crime was committed, but no one was killed or permanently maimed, then volunteering to give it a far more violent ending??!

As for the comment I made earlier about having the gun taken off her - it's not about training, it's about what CAN happen. It's about possibilities like violent sudden gunshot death - of either party - that simply didn't exist before one of them had a gun.

Anyway what happened to the criminals all have guns? She didn't have a gun and the guy is caught (right?), and she's alive, and he'll likely have a horrible time in prison. Does someone really need to die?

 

[Red7227]

While I'm fine with having guns in the house, I much prefer to depend on our dogs for alarm and protection. We have one small dog that barks at anything he hears outside, and one large shepherd that's quiet, unless he's pissed. I know the big guy would defend us in a dangerous situation, and while our gun is loaded, it's in our bedroom in the gun safe, making it less accessible than a dog who knows how to maneuver to get to an attacker.

Not only that, but in my state, dogs are actually a more legal form of home defense than a firearm. Colorado has a "stand your ground" law, meaning it's within your legal right to shoot an intruder if they've broken into your dwelling and you believe they intend to do you harm. However, many people using that as a defense still have trouble absolutely proving that they felt menaced at the time, and therefore were justified in shooting. Every time somebody invokes that law, there's a great hullabaloo concerning justification. Not only that, but if I have menacing trespassers on our property, I can't legally do anything until they break into the actual dwelling.

Here's the funny little legal loophole, though. In most (if not all) counties here, if your dog bites a legitimate trespasser on your property, you're not liable for the damage the dog does. Hell, he won't even be assigned the "vicious dog" label that many dogs get after biting. I can let our big dogs roam freely on our property, and be more protected than if I were to shoot an intruder.

Yep, likewise in Australia. You can own a gun but shooting an intruder is a legal morass that will result in the person going to jail while the issue of who shot whom is resolved. The "stand your ground" legislation in the US is also very recent, more than about 10 years ago a person could reasonable expect to be taken away in cuffs for using a gun on an intruder.

Shooting people should be the absolute last resort, but watching your friend's dog (Sam, a giant german sheperd) try to rip his pants off as he struggled to get back over the fence is actually pretty funny. Especially when sam comes back with the ass of his jeans and wallet. I didn't have a gun licence by that time so I would have gone to jail for a while if i had shot him. My friend George, wasn't there, but even he would have gone to jail until the issues were sorted through.

As it was Sam got a bag of treats and some petting from the local police girls, and then they went to collect the fuckknuckle who tried to break into the Georges business. Much less stressful all round.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

As for guns being the the one trick pony solution to all your home security requirements - murdering people is traumatic, hell on the carpet and will involve legal fees and other fucking about that is both time consuming and expensive. Get a dog and locking your doors will solve 80% of the problems without giving your kids the opportunity to blow their brains out, or you shooting a neighbour because you didn't hear them knock.

I'm not going to get into a gun debate but I thought I would point out locking your door simply gives a false sense of security. If a person truly wants in either they can bust open most doors or simply pick the locks. The overwhelming majority of house locks in this country are the cheap kind bought at walmart, Lowes or Home Depot. Every single lock they sell can be picked by someone with very little experience (and $30 bucks) in under a minute. Most less than 30 seconds.
http://www.lockpickshop.com/

To make your doors more secure you should also have some sort of locking bar wedging it shut. I have a 2X4 with a wedge shape cut on one end so it fits under the door handle. Then it's cut long enough so it forms a 30 degree angle when it's jammed into the carpet. Since it's a steel door I'm fairly confident a police battering ram wouldn't open the handle side, they'd have to ram the hinges out to get in. There are commercial bars that fit into holes in the floor in front of your door, or ones that wedge under the door if it's opened. But a 2X4 is cheap and easy and just as effective.

As for blowing my neighbor's head off. I keep my door locked at all times, even checking the mail. No one is allowed in without me being there and inviting them in. If I'm home and he's in my apartment without me knowing it, he dies same as any other intruder.

 

[CharlotteLace]

Exactly. Though, in most counties around here, you do need to have a clearly posted "beware of dog" or "attack dog on duty" and you are covered. That's why I plan on getting at minimum 8 Caucasian Shepherds to patrol our land, and those dogs don't need to be taught to attack in order to attack. If someone is stupid enough to jump our fences for whatever reason, they'll get a pack of vicious, 150+ lbs dogs after them.

See, it's encouraged for us to put "no trespassing" signs to warn trespassers, but when researching liability, I found some states actually use "beware of dog" signs as evidence you knew you had a vicious dog, and are therefore liable! :icon-rolleyes: It's so annoying that rules can be so opposite to those in other areas. Also, I love Caucasian Shepherds!!!

I have heard of cases where the home owner shot and killed the intruder who was threatening them in their home, and then the home owner ended up going to jail anyway for murder. But wasn't there also a case where a guy broke into someone's home and fell on a knife and stabbed himself while the home owners were sleeping and sued them and won for being injured in their home?

Not surprised. We live in a supremely litigious society that often lacks common sense.

As it was Sam got a bag of treats and some petting from the local police girls, and then they went to collect the fuckknuckle who tried to break into the Georges business.

I sincerely hope they found him because of his assless jeans.

 

[Jupiter551]

As for guns being the the one trick pony solution to all your home security requirements - murdering people is traumatic, hell on the carpet and will involve legal fees and other fucking about that is both time consuming and expensive. Get a dog and locking your doors will solve 80% of the problems without giving your kids the opportunity to blow their brains out, or you shooting a neighbour because you didn't hear them knock.

I'm not going to get into a gun debate but I thought I would point out locking your door simply gives a false sense of security. If a person truly wants in either they can bust open most doors or simply pick the locks. The overwhelming majority of house locks in this country are the cheap kind bought at walmart, Lowes or Home Depot. Every single lock they sell can be picked by someone with very little experience (and $30 bucks) in under a minute. Most less than 30 seconds.
http://www.lockpickshop.com/

To make your doors more secure you should also have some sort of locking bar wedging it shut. I have a 2X4 with a wedge shape cut on one end so it fits under the door handle. Then it's cut long enough so it forms a 30 degree angle when it's jammed into the carpet. Since it's a steel door I'm fairly confident a police battering ram wouldn't open the handle side, they'd have to ram the hinges out to get in. There are commercial bars that fit into holes in the floor in front of your door, or ones that wedge under the door if it's opened. But a 2X4 is cheap and easy and just as effective.

As for blowing my neighbor's head off. I keep my door locked at all times, even checking the mail. No one is allowed in without me being there and inviting them in. If I'm home and he's in my apartment without me knowing it, he dies same as any other intruder.

Isn't the argument though something along the lines of - if you make it harder for them to break in they'll go for an easier target? I mean that seems to a common argument for gun ownership.

 

[Nordling]

:lol: With eight Caucasian shepherds, you should probably ENCOURAGE trespassers to provide your pets with food. lol I do suggest free range trespassers though, since they're much healthier to eat.

 

[Jupiter551]

:lol: With eight Caucasian shepherds, you should probably ENCOURAGE trespassers to provide your pets with food. lol I do suggest free range trespassers though, since they're much healthier to eat.

Well, I used to have a sheepdog (a kelpie) and sometimes those herding behaviours are bred generations deep, they do it without any training - you may well discover herds of intruders on your land from time to time lol.

 

[Brad]

And hey so, why would it be a good thing if she had shot the guy anyway?

You are joking right? If not then the obvious answer is "YES it would have been a great thing because then only the BAD guy would have been harmed." The life of the bad guy is not more important then the life and safety of the innocent woman. You can't say "well this guy totally broke the law BUT..." It just isn't like that in this case. Had she had a gun and shot him she would have been held as a hero for her bravery in protecting herself and her kids. And I would be cheering in her honor!!

Now if anyone here is not from the US (and I am sorry that I do forget this) then I really have no idea what goes on in your country. Nothing of what I post may even apply. But this happened in NJ and I do know my country pretty well. There's even a chance that if this guy is recognized he may not make it to the arrest. I know what street justice can be like and who knows about the husband of the lady he assaulted. Once you break the law in the way that he did, and on video no less, all bets are off. Any possible outcome is all on him including possible death. And if the cops had shown up there's a good chance that they would have capped his ass too!

So if you do not want to possibly die from being legally shot to death, do NOT CHOOSE to illegally break into my home and certainly do not injure my wife on cam. Because I know for a fact that in my city Maggy can kill you dead in order to save herself from being harmed (or worse) and the law will stand behind her 100%. Sorry she didn't aim for the knee.

 

[Bocefish]

And hey so, why would it be a good thing if she had shot the guy anyway? He deserves punishment, and he's scum, but no one died. Also, and I'm in no way defending guys who hit women, but when did it become a capital offence? It's a horrible thing to do, but death sentence?

The argument that if she had a gun she would have shot him dead is not a positive one heh. You're looking at a situation where a crime was committed, but no one was killed or permanently maimed, then volunteering to give it a far more violent ending??!

As for the comment I made earlier about having the gun taken off her - it's not about training, it's about what CAN happen. It's about possibilities like violent sudden gunshot death - of either party - that simply didn't exist before one of them had a gun.

Anyway what happened to the criminals all have guns? She didn't have a gun and the guy is caught (right?), and she's alive, and he'll likely have a horrible time in prison. Does someone really need to die?

SO it's about what can happen? How about you put your mother, sister or any other woman you care about her shoes and see if you're fine with seeing what can happen.

She could have easily died in the attack numerous times or been paralyzed. The coward nearly split her head open on the corner of the table atleast once and looks like he tried to snap her neck before throwing her down the stairs to the basement. As it is, she's going to remember that day every second she's living in that house not to mention the trauma the 3 year old girl has to now deal with for the rest of her life. They'll probably end up having to sell their home just to avoid the memories associated with it along with therapy bills forever.

Watch this video and imagine a woman you care about in her place, then see if you'd be willing to see what can happen to her or if you'd have rather had her shoot the fucker.

http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2013/ ... y_cam.html

 

[Jupiter551]

And hey so, why would it be a good thing if she had shot the guy anyway? He deserves punishment, and he's scum, but no one died. Also, and I'm in no way defending guys who hit women, but when did it become a capital offence? It's a horrible thing to do, but death sentence?

The argument that if she had a gun she would have shot him dead is not a positive one heh. You're looking at a situation where a crime was committed, but no one was killed or permanently maimed, then volunteering to give it a far more violent ending??!

As for the comment I made earlier about having the gun taken off her - it's not about training, it's about what CAN happen. It's about possibilities like violent sudden gunshot death - of either party - that simply didn't exist before one of them had a gun.

Anyway what happened to the criminals all have guns? She didn't have a gun and the guy is caught (right?), and she's alive, and he'll likely have a horrible time in prison. Does someone really need to die?

SO it's about what can happen? How about you put your mother, sister or any other woman you care about her shoes and see if you're fine with seeing what can happen.

She could have easily died in the attack numerous times or been paralyzed. The coward nearly split her head open on the corner of the table atleast once and looks like he tried to snap her neck before throwing her down the stairs to the basement. As it is, she's going to remember that day every second she's living in that house not to mention the trauma the 3 year old girl has to now deal with for the rest of her life. They'll probably end up having to sell their home just to avoid the memories associated with it along with therapy bills forever.

Watch this video and imagine a woman you care about in her place, then see if you'd be willing to see what can happen to her or if you'd have rather had her shoot the fucker.

http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2013/ ... y_cam.html

No, I'm not saying it's about what 'can' happen, I'm saying it should be about what DID happen in that she is alive. He is caught. It's not perfect but assuming he gets a decent custodial sentence it's as close to justice as you're gonna find.

I'm not even defending the fucker, he assaulted her and he needs to pay but your fellow citizens have decided what is, and isn;t an appropriate punishment for this kind of crime.

 

[Nordling]

:lol: With eight Caucasian shepherds, you should probably ENCOURAGE trespassers to provide your pets with food. lol I do suggest free range trespassers though, since they're much healthier to eat.

Well, I used to have a sheepdog (a kelpie) and sometimes those herding behaviours are bred generations deep, they do it without any training - you may well discover herds of intruders on your land from time to time lol.

Oh, god yes. We had an Australian Shepherd-Border Collie mix named Samantha. She would herd anything shorter than 4' tall, including children. lol When the neighborhood kid came over to cut the lawn, we'd have to put Sam indoors until the job was done. She also liked to snap yellowjackets (type of wasp) in mid-air and swallow them, she never got stung.

 

[BlueViolet]

:lol: With eight Caucasian shepherds, you should probably ENCOURAGE trespassers to provide your pets with food. lol I do suggest free range trespassers though, since they're much healthier to eat.

Well, I used to have a sheepdog (a kelpie) and sometimes those herding behaviours are bred generations deep, they do it without any training - you may well discover herds of intruders on your land from time to time lol.

Oh, god yes. We had an Australian Shepherd-Border Collie mix named Samantha. She would herd anything shorter than 4' tall, including children. lol When the neighborhood kid came over to cut the lawn, we'd have to put Sam indoors until the job was done. She also liked to snap yellowjackets (type of wasp) in mid-air and swallow them, she never got stung.

Oh yeah, I've had several herders nipping at my ankles as a kid! But even though the Caucasian Shepherd does have some herding mixed in long ago in the lines, they are primarily livestock guardians and I think their guarding instincts would be too strong for them to try and herd in a strange intruder who didn't belong. They're pretty much just larger, more aggressive Great Pyrenees that even Russia uses as police dogs, bred for their ferocity.

BUT if they did try to herd them in, I'll have a big Mastiff or two that can hold them down while the Pyrs take care of it.

And yeah, dog food is expensive, intruders are certainly encouraged.

 

[Nordling]

:lol: With eight Caucasian shepherds, you should probably ENCOURAGE trespassers to provide your pets with food. lol I do suggest free range trespassers though, since they're much healthier to eat.

Well, I used to have a sheepdog (a kelpie) and sometimes those herding behaviours are bred generations deep, they do it without any training - you may well discover herds of intruders on your land from time to time lol.

Oh, god yes. We had an Australian Shepherd-Border Collie mix named Samantha. She would herd anything shorter than 4' tall, including children. lol When the neighborhood kid came over to cut the lawn, we'd have to put Sam indoors until the job was done. She also liked to snap yellowjackets (type of wasp) in mid-air and swallow them, she never got stung.

Oh yeah, I've had several herders nipping at my ankles as a kid! But even though the Caucasian Shepherd does have some herding mixed in long ago in the lines, they are primarily livestock guardians and I think their guarding instincts would be too strong for them to try and herd in a strange intruder who didn't belong. They're pretty much just larger, more aggressive Great Pyrenees that even Russia uses as police dogs, bred for their ferocity.

BUT if they did try to herd them in, I'll have a big Mastiff or two that can hold them down while the Pyrs take care of it.

And yeah, dog food is expensive, intruders are certainly encouraged.

Great Pyrenees are such cool dogs. I spent a whole afternoon at a Pyrenees kennel where they allowed me to play with their personal pet when I was about ten years old. Aggressive but very protective of children (at least this one was.) lol Oh and another breed of "protective" sheep dogs is the Komondor. Another bear-like dog.

 

[Jupiter551]

BUT if they did try to herd them in, I'll have a big Mastiff or two that can hold them down while the Pyrs take care of it.

And yeah, dog food is expensive, intruders are certainly encouraged.

I admittedly don't know shit about US law but I would assume having your dogs tear someone apart isn't covered under self-defense/stand your ground.

 

[BlueViolet]

Great Pyrenees are such cool dogs. I spent a whole afternoon at a Pyrenees kennel where they allowed me to play with their personal pet when I was about ten years old. Aggressive but very protective of children (at least this one was.) lol Oh and another breed of "protective" sheep dogs is the Komondor. Another bear-like dog.

Komondor's fur is so wirey, lol. But they are very awesome dogs. I'll always love Pyrs, I have a wonderful Great Pyrenees sleeping on the kitchen floor right now. I love their temperament--so sweet and gentle with you, your family, other pets, but if that neighbor takes one step over the property line, you'll know it.

I love that they were bred for guarding by scaring away and attacking only as a very last resort to anyone stupid enough to not heed their excessive warning. The only reason I prefer having more Caucasians than Pyrs is that if I have 100+ acres in the middle of nowhere, I want a dog who is bred to attack and not just scare away, personally.

And they both are great with kids.

BUT if they did try to herd them in, I'll have a big Mastiff or two that can hold them down while the Pyrs take care of it.

And yeah, dog food is expensive, intruders are certainly encouraged.

I admittedly don't know shit about US law but I would assume having your dogs tear someone apart isn't covered under self-defense/stand your ground.

Perfectly legal where I live. If a person trespasses on your property and your dog attacks them, you aren't held liable because they are doing their job (especially here where people have lots of livestock that need protecting).

 

[bawksy]

I admittedly don't know shit about US law but I would assume having your dogs tear someone apart isn't covered under self-defense/stand your ground.

US law wouldn't come into play in a situation like that. It would be state law, which can vary WIDELY among the 50 states. Don't try it without consulting a lawyer first.