Because it’s the end of summer, I happen to be spending a few days near Guilford, Connecticut, an “affluent coastal town of about 23,000 in New Haven County,” according to its website.

Recently, the town has been in the news because it’s deciding whether to kill a pit bull, Simon, who attacked a 12-year-old last summer. Although the town dog catcher recommended euthanizing Simon right away based on the severity of the attack, the dog’s past history and neighbors’ complaints, the town waited, pondered, and is now caught up in a media storm that many small town’s face when an influential dog owner challenges how to interpret “dangerous dog” laws.

Municipal hearings have turned into sideshows with standing-room-only crowds, media coverage, and supporters wearing “Save Simon” t-shirts and carrying placards. Simon’s owner, a well-to-do doctor in Guilford, has hired a dog-lawyer specialist and a New York City publicist. He started a GoFundMe campaign, the “Save Simon Defense Fund,” where in the assumed dog’s voice he writes, “I am on death row and I miss my family.” He’s even created a Facebook page to get the attention he thinks this case deserves and rally animal rights activists. And it’s working.

Although the dog has been quarantined in a local animal shelter, the battle rages over the next step — put him down, or set him free? The lawyer representing Simon’s owner now threatens to bring a federal suit should the local animal control officer not change her ruling.

So what happened? The victim of the attack was a 12-year-old old neighbor, who gets relatively short shrift compared to the campaign to “Save Simon.” A good kid from a good family who had been to Simon’s house on numerous occasions, he went into the yard to fetch his lacrosse ball. Although the dog is alleged to have had a “dog sitter” while the family was away, Simon attacked the boy and took a sizeable chunk out of the boy’s upper thigh, requiring hospital treatment, stitches and another surgical procedure set for this winter. It also left a permanent divot in his leg. Had the boy not blocked his face and neck with his forearm as the dog continued to maul him (a chunk was also taken out of his arm), he could have even died.

The difficulty is, some would argue, the boy was trespassing. Although the boy would never be criminally charged for such a trespass (to get his ball), trespass is nonetheless a cutout to the Connecticut “dangerous dog” statute.

“Dangerous dog” statutes exist throughout the country, some more punitive than others. In some states, when a dog injures a human, the owner can be criminally prosecuted whether he knew or not of the dog’s potential dangerousness. In other states, the decision on whether or not to kill the dog comes down to the interpretation of very broad language on “dangerousness.” Put simply — is the dog likely to attack again?

According to the Animal Legal and Historical Center at the University of Michigan, 39 states and numerous municipalities currently have statutes and ordinances that regulate dogs believed to exhibit or engage in violent behaviors. The Center states that between four to five million people in the United States are bitten by dogs annually. That’s a lot of bites.

Legislation allows for a range of approaches to cases involving dog attacks, including letting the local dog catcher decide whether to euthanize, convening panels to review cases, and permitting appeals. Most of the criteria on dangerousness includes: whether the dog caused unprovoked injury or death to a human; whether the dog had been involved in animal cruelty or organized fighting; and whether the dog injured other domestic or farm animals.

In Illinois, a potentially dangerous dog is a dog found running at large and unsupervised with three or more other dogs. In Minnesota, a dog is considered potentially dangerous if, unprovoked, it chases or approaches a person — including a person on a bicycle or on the street, sidewalk, or any public or private property other than the dog owner’s property — in an apparent attitude of attack. In Indiana, the owner of any dog that bites a postal worker or other government worker is liable for damages regardless of the dog’s viciousness.

Connecticut does not have a per se “dangerous dog” statute. It’s up to the local animal control officer to declare a dog “dangerous” if he or she finds by a preponderance of the evidence that it “killed or inflicted physical injury or serious physical injury upon a human being.” There’s no doubt the 12-year-old boy bitten by Simon suffered serious physical injury. [In full disclosure, I know relatives of the family and saw photos of the injuries.]

The problem is, it’s tough to be objective when the masses have joined the mess. “Save Simon” Facebook entries describe the injured boy as an unruly teen who used wire cutters to enter the neighbor’s yard through a fence. [Untrue, according to his family.] Some taunt that the boy should be euthanized instead of the dog. Others call out alleged town corruption and support boycotting local Guilford merchants.

Meanwhile, according to police reports, other neighbors of Simon were afraid of the 70-pound dog. They’d walk by the house with sticks at the ready in case he should go off property. It was noted that Simon attacked another dog some six months before this attack and even a town representative had been bitten.

Ultimately, the decision to rescind the kill-order must be made by the town animal control officer. The family of the injured boy plays no role and reportedly while they’d prefer the pooch not be returned to their neighborhood, they’re not looking to have him euthanized.

The town attorney and the dog-owner’s attorney might come to some compromise — save the dog but have him live elsewhere. In the meantime, the small-town drama continues.

Toni Messina has tried over 100 cases and has been practicing criminal law and immigration since 1990. You can follow her on Twitter: @tonitamess.