Wanted Junk yard Dog

gumbo

FIGHT CLUB !
otter said:
Dur!! The fact is that I said not a word about your needing a dog for whatever reason, I have no problem with what you want to use the dog for. You said . That answered my question but it begs another, why did your nose get out of joint when you got what you expected??
Are you assuming that I'm not having fun :confused:
 

gumbo

FIGHT CLUB !
otter said:
:lmao: Never known you not to have fun from what I've seen here.
From this thread.....
I got a dog and we all got some intertainment. :popcorn: Whats not to like. :lmao:
 

river rat

BUCKING GOAT
bresamil said:
They were able to order the dogs to stop without the use of weapons. Sounds like they were well trained guard/attack dogs just doing their job.


Precisley, so why are their fates in the hands of the animal cops?
Sounds to me like the man had it coming. Breaking and entering.
I hope it was posted "Guard dog"
 

river rat

BUCKING GOAT
sinwagon said:
I don't see a problem w/ the animal being a guard dog/slash pet. As long as the dog would be treated in the same capacity as your pet, i.e., shots, proper shelter, love and attention then it should not be an issue.


A good point.
But no one took the time to find out if Gumbo was gonna be a good owner or not. Just jumping to the conclusion that "Junk Yard" is horrible. TV does not portray the "Junk Yard" dog image to well.
I go to a mechanic in Waldorf who has a guard dog at his shop.
"Sparky" has got it made.
It is warm in the winter and gets fed too much.
He stays there round the clock.
The man has had a dog before and he took very good care to make sure it lived a long life so, if it gives a pooch an oppurtunity to breathe a few more years, then I am all for it.
Dogs are meant to protect and be faithful companions.
The are not for dress up and tea parties. IMFO.
 
M

missperky

Guest
vraiblonde said:
Well...that's what the dog is for :lol: Of course, now the dead guy's relatives will sue the owner for millions (and win) because the dog did his job.

That's something to think about, too, Gumbo. If someone breaks in and the dog attacks them, you can be liable for the crook's injuries.

Funny old world we live in, ain't it?
I have a Beware of dog sign posted on my fence, you come in and the dog attacks, you SOL. IMO :biggrin:
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
missperky said:
I have a Beware of dog sign posted on my fence, you come in and the dog attacks, you SOL.
Wrong-O. If you have a swimming pool in your fenced in back yard, and some kid jumps the fence and drowns, you can be held liable.

Signs and warnings don't mean squat. Criminals aren't supposed to be breaking into places, anyway, sign or no sign. But there have been many instances of someone breaking into a house, injuring themself in some way, suing the homeowner and WINNING.
 
M

missperky

Guest
vraiblonde said:
Wrong-O. If you have a swimming pool in your fenced in back yard, and some kid jumps the fence and drowns, you can be held liable.

Signs and warnings don't mean squat. Criminals aren't supposed to be breaking into places, anyway, sign or no sign. But there have been many instances of someone breaking into a house, injuring themself in some way, suing the homeowner and WINNING.
I don't have a swimming pool so I don't have to worry about that.

I was just stating that I have a sign up, ignore it and face what happens afterwards.
 
jazz lady said:
:yeahthat: I believe it's called an attractive nuisance. I have a friend who is going through just such a lawsuit. He has a chain link fence around the property and "Beware of Dog" signs everywhere. A girl, who was also told on numerous occasions NOT to go in the yard and why, went in anyway and was bitten. Of course the parents are suing because it is HIS fault, not theirs or the girl. :rolleyes:
Personally, I think he should file a counter-claim, charging mental duress of his poor pooch... and himself as well, of course...:bubble:
 

PrepH4U

New Member
jazz lady said:
:yeahthat: I believe it's called an attractive nuisance. I have a friend who is going through just such a lawsuit. He has a chain link fence around the property and "Beware of Dog" signs everywhere. A girl, who was also told on numerous occasions NOT to go in the yard and why, went in anyway and was bitten. Of course the parents are suing because it is HIS fault, not theirs or the girl. :rolleyes:
That used to be the rule, putting up signs but, now
some insurance companies even frown upon you putting a beware of dog sign up. Some say that putting up the signs now the owners are acknowleding that the dog is mean. :shrug:
 

gumbo

FIGHT CLUB !
vraiblonde said:
Well...that's what the dog is for :lol: Of course, now the dead guy's relatives will sue the owner for millions (and win) because the dog did his job.

That's something to think about, too, Gumbo. If someone breaks in and the dog attacks them, you can be liable for the crook's injuries.

Funny old world we live in, ain't it?
Here is a question.
Lets take someone driving with a suspended license and they didn't know it was suspended.
Now someone else hits this person in an accident.
The laws says that the person with the suspended DL is automatically at fault because they should have been in the car anyway.
This also applies to DWI and DUI.

One would assume the same reasoning would apply to the idiot that broke the law by trespassing.
 

sinwagon

New Member
gumbo said:
Here is a question.
Lets take someone driving with a suspended license and they didn't know it was suspended.
Now someone else hits this person in an accident.
The laws says that the person with the suspended DL is automatically at fault because they should have been in the car anyway.
This also applies to DWI and DUI.

One would assume the same reasoning would apply to the idiot that broke the law by trespassing.

Who told you that? I don't think that is the case. They will be charge both drivers. The person at fault for the accident and the person w/ out the license would be charged w/ driving with a suspended license. They will not say "your injuries, your loss, you should not have been driving in the first place" Now that is something that could be brought up in the court room by the defense but it will not hold much water.

DUI/DWI may be a different story. Ofcourse if the person who is intoxicated is sitting at a red light and someone plows into him, I believe the person at the red light who was drunk will be charged w/ DWI/DUI but they will not be charged with the accident per se.
 

happyappygirl

Rocky Mountain High!!
gumbo said:
Here is a question.
Lets take someone driving with a suspended license and they didn't know it was suspended.
Now someone else hits this person in an accident.
The laws says that the person with the suspended DL is automatically at fault because they should have been in the car anyway.
This also applies to DWI and DUI.

One would assume the same reasoning would apply to the idiot that broke the law by trespassing.
it IS possible to have a suspendid license and not know it. you have to KNOW it to be held accountable. the cop can ticket you, but you can go to court and claim ignorance, and win. Unless you've been ticketed for it before, or attended classes to get it back. if you claim ignorance you'd better be able to prove ignorance, :lol: That's a fact, from the horse's mouth. (ie the supah troopah i live with).

Oh and you ARE responsible for a "dangerous dog". It is your responsibilty as owner to keep the 'public at large' safe, regardless of where the 'public at large' goes (which includes your back yard). In the event your dog bites an intruder, drag him in the house after the dog kills him, then you're covered :lol: putting up a beware of dog sign IS admitting you have a dangerous dog. It's asking for trouble. My signs say "The dogs can make it over this fence in 10 seconds, Can YOU?" Works for me.
 
Last edited:
Top