Yeah... wouldn't want to be a visitor either. Common sense says they'll be more easily provoked to attack after experiencing a human kill.I realize it's different if you're the owner, but personally I don't think I'd want to live with dogs that were capable of and known to have killed a person. As unlikely as it would be that they'd kill their owner, I think I'd still feel creeped out a little.
My statement has nothing to do with the breed. About 38 years ago . A guy came by my house to look at a car I had for sale. My wife had him wait outside the fence while she put my Great Dane in the garage. Then he came in the yard and looked at the car. He later came back while nobody was home and came into my yard from the back gate and looked at the car again. The dog started barking and came out of the garage after him. The guy ran ,made it to the gate and turned to lock the gate when the dog reached over the fence and bite him in the face. The guy went to the hospital and got 41 stiches down his face. So the cops got involved and it became an ordeal about cutting the dog's head off for testing. During all of this I remember being told by a cop that even if a person breaks into your house and the dog bites them ,you are liable. The dog survived the ordeal. We had to put him up at a vets for 10 days. He wasn't a mean dog ,just very protective of his area. He loved to ride in my pickup and anywhere we took him ,we could leave him in the truck and he never bit anyone.I believe the pit bull ban was overturned; thereby still requiring a un-provoked attack (there may be other elements also). However, I do believe there are homeowner insurance implications for owning certain breeds.
He was aware that you had a dog and had to put it inside the garage for his own protection. Yet, he came back without notifying you that he was returning to look a the car. during your absence. He was trespassing...and didn't have common sense.My wife had him wait outside the fence while she put my Great Dane in the garage.