Gilbert man shoots at family dog after it bites his daughter in face

[RRGlock23]

Gilbert man shoots at family dog after it bites his daughter in face

by Nathan Gonzalez - Feb. 17, 2010 06:40 AM
The Arizona Republic

A Gilbert man faces a felony weapons charge for shooting at his German shepherd after it bit his daughter in the face Sunday.

Kevin Townsend, 49, was charged with one count of discharging a firearm within town limits, a class 6 felony.

The incident began about 5:46 p.m. when Townsend's 11-year-old daughter was in the family's backyard on the 2500 block of E. Via De Palmas, north of Riggs and Higley roads, Gilbert police said.

The dog bit the child on the face, and Townsend allegedly grabbed a gun. He fired "multiple shots" at the dog, but one bullet strayed and broke a window at a nearby house.

The girl was transported to Gilbert Mercy Hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

The dog was not harmed, but Townsend arranged for someone else to take it, said Sgt. Mark Marino, a police spokesman.

 

[Alaska444]

He needs a good lawyer and a good jury. His actions may have actually saved his daughters life. A large German Shepherd is a dangerous beast when out of control. Perhaps better shot control would have been easier to defend.:yu:

 

[RRGlock23]

I agreed with you, Alaska444!

But the AZ's Section Code Law :
Arizona Revised Statutes §13-3107 Unlawful discharge of firearms; exceptions; classification; definitions

A. A person who with criminal negligence discharges a firearm within or into the limits of any municipality is guilty of a class 6 felony.

B. Notwithstanding the fact that the offense involves the discharge of a deadly weapon, unless the dangerous nature of the felony is charged and proven pursuant to section 13-604, subsection P, the provisions of section 13-702, subsection G apply to this offense.

C. This section does not apply if the firearm is discharged:

1. As allowed pursuant to the provisions of chapter 4 of this title.

2. On a properly supervised range.

3. In an area recommended as a hunting area by the Arizona game and fish department, approved and posted as required by the chief of police, but any such area may be closed when deemed unsafe by the chief of police or the director of the game and fish department.

4. For the control of nuisance wildlife by permit from the Arizona game and fish department or the United States fish and wildlife service.

5. By special permit of the chief of police of the municipality.

6. As required by an animal control officer in the performance of duties as specified in section 9-499.04.

7. Using blanks.

8. More than one mile from any occupied structure as defined in section 13-3101.

9. In self-defense or defense of another person against an animal attack if a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force against the animal is immediately necessary and reasonable under the circumstances to protect oneself or the other person.

D. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Municipality" means any city or town and includes any property that is fully enclosed within the city or town.

2. "Properly supervised range" means a range that is operated:

(a) By a club affiliated with the national rifle association of America, the amateur trapshooting association, the national skeet association or any other nationally recognized shooting organization, or by any public or private school, or

(b) Approved by any agency of the federal government, this state, a county or city within which the range is located or

(c) With adult supervision for shooting air or carbon dioxide gas operated guns, or for shooting in underground ranges on private or public property.


I assumed the police don't recognized the section number 9.

9. In self-defense or defense of another person against an animal attack if a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force against the animal is immediately necessary and reasonable under the circumstances to protect oneself or the other person.

 

[Graverober]

That's the Mesa area, since when do they care about the parts of AZ law that make it legal for you to defend yourself? I know people over there who are harrassed by the Mesa PD for OCing legaly....

 

[HK4U]

Article does not say what if anything the girl was doing when this happened. Was she pestering the dog. Kids some times can torment a dog until it bits them. Some dogs do not make good family dogs and some people do not make good dog owners.

 

[Saber]

It’s been posted many places on the web and taught by the professionals. If and when you discharge your gun and the police arrive, they are not your friends, regardless of the circumstances!
For what its worth, I am a former LEO.

 

[RRGlock23]

Saber, I am wondering he was doing "self-defense of another person against an animal attacks". That's what the section #9. But he was felony for discharged within city or town, that's silly. Just wondering.

 

[AvidshooterTX]

I would defend my daughter but I wouldn't miss.

 

[Unfettered Might]

Complicated.....

He's mostly in trouble for missing and shattering a window, by any definition that is negligence.

If it had not been for that, he probably would have gotten out of trouble.

Practice, practice, practice.....

I have to say I agree AvidshooterTX.

Once he fired the first time and missed, I suspect that the dog was running in fear and his chances of hitting him were greatly lessened at that point. If the dog was running and no longer attacking his daughter, he lost protection under that subsection because the dog was no longer threatening the life of his daughter.

That being said, I completely understand why he kept shooting at the dog and if it were up to me, I'd let him go. I'd also have the dog captured and put down.

Sorry to you animal lovers, but I have no tolerance for any animal that attacks a child FOR ANY REASON. This is why I don't have pets.

 

[HK4U]

Complicated.....

He's mostly in trouble for missing and shattering a window, by any definition that is negligence.

If it had not been for that, he probably would have gotten out of trouble.

Practice, practice, practice.....

I have to say I agree AvidshooterTX.

Once he fired the first time and missed, I suspect that the dog was running in fear and his chances of hitting him were greatly lessened at that point. If the dog was running and no longer attacking his daughter, he lost protection under that subsection because the dog was no longer threatening the life of his daughter.

That being said, I completely understand why he kept shooting at the dog and if it were up to me, I'd let him go. I'd also have the dog captured and put down.

Sorry to you animal lovers, but I have no tolerance for any animal that attacks a child FOR ANY REASON. This is why I don't have pets.

If an animal attack is unprovoked then I agree. There are some dogs that are more dangerous than others. There are however people that are so mean that they abuse and torment an animal long enough until the dog attacks. I have known cases like that. They are the same type of psychos that can beat a baby to death simply because they are just plain evil. There are as I have said some people that should never have animals and also never have children.

 

[AvidshooterTX]

Right, I don't know all the facts. Might be the dog owner who needs to be shot. Fortunately in Texas we have the "he needed killing law".

 

[Unfettered Might]

If an animal attack is unprovoked then I agree. There are some dogs that are more dangerous than others. There are however people that are so mean that they abuse and torment an animal long enough until the dog attacks. I have known cases like that. They are the same type of psychos that can beat a baby to death simply because they ae just plain evil. There are as I have said some people that should never have animals and also never have children.

Right, I don't know all the facts. Might be the dog owner who needs to be shot. Fortunately in Texas we have the "he needed killing law".

It's true I am making certain assumptions with my last post. I don't believe it's ok to harm or kill an animal without just cause. However, I also don't think that a dog getting it's ears or tail pulled or even an accidental injury by a child to a animal justifies them attacking.

Animals instinctively know that a child is a cub, I've seen in their behavior all my life. If an animal attacks and causes grave injury or permanent disfigurement for anything other than to save their own life, they should be put down.

My mother, when she visits, regularly brings her dog (German Shepherd/Great Pyrenees) along with her. At first, one of my daughters (2 1/2) would be quite reckless in her treatment of her, she just didn't understand that she was hurting her. That dog NEVER growled, nipped or acting aggressively towards her in spite of how she was treated. Of course I scolded and disciplined my daughter for her actions and I did it right in front of the dog so as to reinforce that she(the dog) didn't need to do anything in retaliation, I would handle it.

She's a good dog.

 

[RRGlock23]

Guys, I think you missed that part of why police arrested Kevin. Let me point out from the article. 2 Things:

"Kevin Townsend, 49, was charged with one count of discharging a firearm within town limits, a class 6 felony."

Why ?? Because

"The dog bit the child on the face, and Townsend allegedly grabbed a gun. He fired "multiple shots" at the dog, but one bullet strayed and broke a window at a nearby house."

That's why one bullet strayed out to a window broken at a nearby house, which is felony count discharged a firearm within town limits.

But he had right to protection his daughter from attack animal section #9 , unfortunately I was keep thinking why and I re-read article over again, over again, and I get it because one bullet strayed out to a window, that's why he arrested for discharged a firearm within town limits.

AZ's Section Code Law :
Arizona Revised Statutes §13-3107 Unlawful discharge of firearms; exceptions; classification; definitions

A. A person who with criminal negligence discharges a firearm within or into the limits of any municipality is guilty of a class 6 felony.

 

[Unfettered Might]

Guys, I think you missed that part of why police arrested Kevin. Let me point out from the article. 2 Things:

"Kevin Townsend, 49, was charged with one count of discharging a firearm within town limits, a class 6 felony."

Complicated.....

He's mostly in trouble for missing and shattering a window, by any definition that is negligence.

If it had not been for that, he probably would have gotten out of trouble.

Practice, practice, practice.....

Nope, I got it.

 

[Debray]

Poor judgement

Number one it was a family dog, not some wild stray, it could have been caught and dispatched (if need be) in a safe location. I have had stray dogs get into my sheep and kill lambs. I was mad and upset and wanted them dead and I found the first one in a valley with a good backstop and the 308 killed him instantly.
The second dog made a run for it and got up out of the valley and sky lined toward some neighbor's homes. No matter how bad I wanted that dog dead I didn't take the shot without a good safe backstop.
Most hunting accidents happen because someone gets so involved in the kill they forget to think.
Never get so involved in anything that you forget to think, Your life or someone elses may depend on it.