Beware of Dogs - Page 2

thats nuts glad everything worked out

On March 29 2013 13:12 devon06atX wrote: Show nested quote + On March 29 2013 11:45 HeRoS)eNGagE wrote: also can the guy sue you if the dogs hurted him? might sound stupid but here he could lol I'd be very interested to hear of a few instances of something like this happening in our country. Criminal running from cops, jumps over a fence onto your property - you feel like he's putting you and your family in danger, and dogs protect you on your property from a fleeing villain can be grounds for suing? If you have any news clippings or anything like that saying that this has happened in Canada, I'd be extremely interested in reading about it. Not being sarcastic, I just really find it hard to believe.

its not because a thieft break the law that the laws dont stands for you anymore
tahts all ;o) like, if someone hurt himself while walking down your stairs, (if its your fault) , well he can sue you, same for a thief, but obv who is retarded enough to go to court saying hi i stole x thing from him but got hurt''
so its the same about hte dogs you are 100% responsable of what your dog do, even if you let your dog and go in another country for vacation, if something happen ...the person taking care of your dog while you are away can be sued and you can also be sued at the same time ;3
its hard to find stuff about it online but you might find somes, i did earlier, but alot of them were in the us i think
xd

You're completely misinformed about the subject herosengage.
If you invited a guest into your home and the steps of your stairs is so rotted that your guest steps through the steps, falls and hurts himself, you're liable to be sued for lost wages + pain and suffering & etc.
In the same exact scenario where we replace invited guest with uninvited trespasser, you're not liable for shit all.

If you're thinking about the case with that lucky panda or w/e store owner used "excessive force" to detain a repeat shoplifter under the grounds of citizens arrest and got charged for assault & unlawful confinement or whatever it was, thats a slightly different situation compared to the one in OP in that its a store and theres no reasonable threat to the owner's safety (theft under $5000). OPs situation is that of a domicile and a presumably armed individual who have just committed (in Canadian terms) an indictable criminal offence

op confirmed bamf