violent dog walker

[manhill]

I sold an English setter to a couple on the Orkney Isles. They phoned up in great excitement to say they'd been out for the evening and returned home to hear barking. They let themselves in to find a very relieved burglar on the kitchen floor. Apparently, every time he tried to get up the dog bit him!

crime on Orkney???

 

[David.]

I was going to observe that the people you need to worry about don't usually tell you what they are going to do to you first, they just get on with it.

 

[Ranger Security Solutions]

I really can’t believe most of the posts on this, it’s absolutely ridiculous to even contemplate violence, taking it out on his dogs or damaging his vehicle.

Completely agree with that. Initiating violence or damage to some one else's property is not the way ahead. Two wrongs do not make a right. It is simple, the law is black and white.

Number one rule when confronting people on your property is that as soon as they threaten you with violence or retribution you know you are safe.

Disagree with that, as there are legal parameters - the landowner could take things too far and the use of excessive force (not reasonable or proportional) could easily result in prosecution.

I’ll guarantee that the violent nut job that’s going to beat seven shades out of you is never ever going to have a discussion with you about it first.

Disagree with that, as situations escalate and deescalate - what starts out as a discussion, deteriorates in to an argument, and proceeds to violence. Too many variables, all it takes is saying something wrong from either party. Similarly, a heated argument could deescalate to a discussion and parting of the ways without violence.

When they threaten you you must remain calm, tell them you’re not intimidated by them and they’ll shortly disappear, probably never to be seen again.

Agree with remaining calm - that is crucial. Whether they "shortly disappear, probably never to be seen again" is entirely circumstantial and depends on the individuals involved.

But the first point is vital; initiating violence or damage to some one else's property is not the way ahead. Two wrongs do not make a right. It is simple, the law is black and white.

 

[Fruitloop]

dont see why the dogs should suffer because a cock is taking them out

Quite so. There should be a defense at law for shooting owners of badly behaved dogs, as the owners are ultimately to blame.

 

[Fruitloop]

So what is the best way with these people.

In the field earlier loading some insect netting, noticed a guy running spaniels 150 metres from path from one end of field to the other.

I stopped tractor asked him to keep dogs under close control, extremely threating & violent. I'm in dry stone wall country & he picked up a large stone & threated to put it through tractor cab windows. Called me every name under the sun he does this "dog walking"
every afternoon 3pm ish.

I stood my ground stayed calm & firm but it is hassle I can do without & I can't afford to give in this is urban fringe land although in a reasonably good area.

Here is a little gift for you, courtesy of our local police, circulated to farmers at a meeting some time back.
"Common Law - Use of Force:
If you have an Honestly held belief that you or another are in imminent danger, then you may use such force that is reasonable and necessary to avert that danger"

The document continues:
"Furthermore, A man about to be attacked does not have to wait for his assailant to strike the first blow, circumstances may justify a pre-emptive strike"

If I sent that to the chief constable of the "lawful activity suppression, and bendy knee authority" (or their subsidiary "The Traveller Facilitation Society") that published the document, I would imagine that there would be an immediate shortfall in the supply of lavatory paper within 5 miles of the Police HQ.

 

[Fruitloop]

Completely agree with that. Initiating violence or damage to some one else's property is not the way ahead. Two wrongs do not make a right. It is simple, the law is black and white.



Disagree with that, as there are legal parameters - the landowner could take things too far and the use of excessive force (not reasonable or proportional) could easily result in prosecution.



Disagree with that, as situations escalate and deescalate - what starts out as a discussion, deteriorates in to an argument, and proceeds to violence. Too many variables, all it takes is saying something wrong from either party. Similarly, a heated argument could deescalate to a discussion and parting of the ways without violence.



Agree with remaining calm - that is crucial. Whether they "shortly disappear, probably never to be seen again" is entirely circumstantial and depends on the individuals involved.

But the first point is vital; initiating violence or damage to some one else's property is not the way ahead. Two wrongs do not make a right. It is simple, the law is black and white.

Actually I think you will find that the brandishing of a rock with a clearly stated threat to use it as an offensive weapon against the person or property of the landowner, would qualify as "initiation" and that taking reasonable steps to avert the threatened intent is an excusable reaction.

 

[Ranger Security Solutions]

Actually I think you will find that the brandishing of a rock with a clearly stated threat to use it as an offensive weapon against the person or property of the landowner, would qualify as "initiation" and that taking reasonable steps to avert the threatened intent is an excusable reaction.

You are right, the brandishing of the rock could qualify as "initiation" at the time, and taking reasonable steps, including self-defence, is a justifiable (not excusable) course of action - that was never disputed. See my post earlier in this thread. Though that incident has been and gone, and can not now be used to take further physical measures.

Some of the posts by other members have suggested/implied taking steps too far, beyond legal boundaries.

 

[teslacoils]

Some of the posts by other members have suggested/implied taking steps too far, beyond legal boundaries.

None of which would be needed if plod gave a hoot about rural crime. Too busy playing woke ford transit tipper lovers, catching those doing 35 in a thirty than any proper work.

 

[Fruitloop]

You are right, the brandishing of the rock could qualify as "initiation" at the time, and taking reasonable steps, including self-defence, is a justifiable (not excusable) course of action - that was never disputed. See my post earlier in this thread. Though that incident has been and gone, and can not now be used to take further physical measures.

Some of the posts by other members have suggested/implied taking steps too far, beyond legal boundaries.

Quite so. Always worry when people start talking about 1080 or baseball bats. Key words...Reasonable, necessary, self defense.

 

[jimred]

I really can’t believe most of the posts on this, it’s absolutely ridiculous to even contemplate violence, taking it out on his dogs or damaging his vehicle.
Number one rule when confronting people on your property is that as soon as they threaten you with violence or retribution you know you are safe. I’ll guarantee that the violent nut job that’s going to beat seven shades out of you is never ever going to have a discussion with you about it first. When they threaten you you must remain calm, tell them you’re not intimidated by them and they’ll shortly disappear, probably never to be seen again.

Love to see you trying to put that into practice on some of the wilder bits of the urban fringe.

 

[teslacoils]

As a rule I don't like to get the police involved but the system works in certain ways so you need to make a report about the situation, get in there first so it's on record and you are the complainant, milk it too, tell them you were scared, in fear of your life, were intimidated and are too afraid to be there alone again, play the game to be the winner not the loser!

Perhaps you also thought you heard them mutter a racial slur towards you? Involving plod is a tick-box exercise. If you say the right magic words they do some work. If you dont, it's a crime number, biscuit, and told to sod off.

 

[Guiggs]

Perhaps you also thought you heard them mutter a racial slur towards you? Involving plod is a tick-box exercise. If you say the right magic words they do some work. If you dont, it's a crime number, biscuit, and told to sod off.

Yeah use any tool in the box so to speak
** just to say I deleted my reply as I forgot to quote the original post and realised the thread had moved on 5 pages so didn't want to confuse anyone or, as in the past, have a misunderstanding that would lead me to receiving a official TFF bollocking from those in authority!

 

[Simon Chiles]

Love to see you trying to put that into practice on some of the wilder bits of the urban fringe.

I reckon I’ve got more than my fair share of fields I wouldn’t dare leave a machine in overnight or unattended during the day incase of it being smashed up, set light too or having bits nicked off it. We’ve got fields next to housing estates where it’s a race to get the straw bales before it gets torched and have even had fields set light too several times when we’ve even been there. What I’ve realised is that these people aren’t actually really targeting me as such, life has dealt them a bum deal and they they are just taking it out on something/someone and they haven’t really considered it from my perspective. Many occasions I’ve started off with’ Oi you, what do you think you’re doing’ which you need to then manage the conversation ( if you can call the threats to kick your head in that ) to swing it around. Often halfway through if you’re lucky they’ll say that they’re sorry mate they weren’t thinking and that their head was in the wrong place. I’ve wasted many an hour hearing from kids how their mum’s kicked them out because they don’t get on with her latest boyfriend and from adults who’ve got drink, drug, relationship and work problems, sometimes more than one of them. Mostly I never see them again. Very rarely however I’ll meet someone I’ve had a real contretemps with in the first instance only to have a really friendly chat with next time round. One bloke who I would have thought that he was very close to the edge on our first encounter when I was challenging him about damaging my crop has ended up being quite chatty, I still think he’s got a lot of problems but I hope our little conversations sometimes help him with struggles.

 

[thorpe]

crime on Orkney???

i bet they wernt pickeys!

 

[Dry Rot]

i bet they wernt pickeys!

Apparently he was very apologetic and grateful for being rescued! Yes, there is crime on the islands. There are fish in the pools and deer on the hills and people who enjoy taking them from all walks of life!

 

[thorpe]

Apparently he was very apologetic and grateful for being rescued! Yes, there is crime on the islands. There are fish in the pools and deer on the hills and people who enjoy taking them from all walks of life!

when i was last on the outer hebrides i didnt see owt worth nicking. ( tounge in cheek)

 

[DeeGee]

when i was last on the outer hebrides i didnt see owt worth nicking. ( tounge in cheek)

That’s because you weren’t really there Thorpe; a bit like the 1960’s?

 

[Chae1]

crime on Orkney???

Eddie Ross.

 

[steveR]

Just control your terrier, no problem. When young delivering papers, wife of ATV exec. Used to let her poodle chase me down their long drive, one day in wet brought me down. Next day I was ready and drop kicked poodle into porch as owner opened door

Similiar here with an agressive terrier from a stupid woman who objected if her paper was not put in teh letter box. A size 10 sorted the terrier...

 

[steveR]

new one I heard today was expanding foam up exhaust pipe

A potato used to do the job... allegedly