WOW, idiot shot a dog in a neighborhood.

[Hayseed_40]

Does that matter

And actually to point out, this isn't a "lower class" neighborhood by any means.

Of course it does not matter and no assumption here on the class of neighborhood.

It was responding to Scutter's post and poking fun of these groups that form mobs well before any facts are even known. It is all in the FAQ that Scutter swears exists.

 

[mcolford]

Deleted.

 

[Scutter01]

I hope the cops arrest them for negligent discharge of a firearm and cruelty to animals.

As for the ******* that shot, hope he lands in the pokey.

This guy is nuts. He should be fined a hefty sum at a bare minimum. Also sued for property damage to the dog, homeowner of the garage and for stress to the garage owner as what if someone had been in there and was killed. What an idiot and a negative incident for responsible gun owners.

Good to know that everyone's already made up their mind about the shooter's guilt.

 

[the1kidd03]

Granted, the dog had just been shot but that being the case I would expect to see a level of aggression out of him at that point if anything. He was hurt and surrounded by people he didn't know, but NOTHING. No aggression what so ever other than simply trying to get up and get away when we were helping him. Regardless, that dog was not a threat at that distance and there was a substantial delay before hearing the second shot.

 

[Hoosierdood]

Good to know that everyone's already made up their mind about the shooter's guilt.

If it's good enough in Florida, it's good enough in Indiana.

 

[mcolford]

Deleted.

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

If it's good enough in Florida, it's good enough in Indiana.

rimshot!!!!

 

[Bunnykid68]

Was the dog wearing a hoodie, was it raining outside....blah blah blah

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

Was the dog wearing a hoodie, was it raining outside....blah blah blah

I think it had skitt uh hmm nevermind.

 

[the1kidd03]

I do not condemn a man for protecting family and I completely feel that everyone deserves a fair trial as our Constitution has laid out. BUT, there is NOT one speck of evidence to support any of this man's claims. None, of the dozen or so "witnesses" saw a second dog. All of which came from various directions to which there was no possible route to take that someone wouldn't have seen another dog. There wasn't anything to suggest ANY immediate danger to the couple. If anything, the evidence only suggests that HAD the dog presented any aggression they had plenty of distance to have gotten in their front door from the assumed position the round was fired from. Indeed, I feel this man needs to be charged and I will be calling the officer who responded.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Your account certainly makes the neighbor sound reckless.

Was the dog in his own yard? Was it under the control of the owner? Failure on either doesn't give anybody the right to endanger the public nor shoot an innocent animal, but out here where I live, I see many many dogs running around uncontrolled.

 

[Scutter01]

Im basing my thoughts on all of the given information is factual. Obviously, I am not there, so I cant know for sure that the given information is in fact true. If it is all true, and this guy (or girl, never did find out who the shooter is) did make a reckless shot like this, then yes, this person should have appropriate consequence.

No, you're not. You're basing your judgement on the hearsay of a bystander who wasn't in view of the events and showed up minutes afterwards, with no information from the shooter whatsoever. What I'm saying is that there is more to the story that we don't know. We don't know WHY the shooter fired. Will you change your opinion if it turns out that the dog was attacking a child as it rode by on its bike? Will it matter by then? The shooter's already been smeared. The damage is done.

Gun owners are already behind the curve with accusations and wild speculation by the media and anti's. When a discharge happens, as gun owners, wouldn't you like to have the benefit of the doubt until all the facts are in? Doesn't the shooter (or anyone) deserve to not be tried in this manner?

 

[the1kidd03]

What I find funny is that had my wife and I not sat down on a bench to play with our puppy for only a minute, we would have been far enough further down the road to have witnessed it all, intervened, etc. Funny how things happen in life.

 

[mcolford]

Deleted.

 

[the1kidd03]

Your account certainly makes the neighbor sound reckless.

Was the dog in his own yard? Was it under the control of the owner? Failure on either doesn't give anybody the right to endanger the public nor shoot an innocent animal, but out here where I live, I see many many dogs running around uncontrolled.

Again, the dog had apparently just ran out of his owners home when their child began to open the door. Of course the owners were in hot persuit, but too late apparently. I've seen dogs do this countless times and they seem to like the freedom to run from yard to yard, sniff around, etc. This was a large pitbull, but in NO WAY was he threatening. He was more of a "fat" lethargic looking dog than in any way intimidating. Of course, I was around the corner and did not witness any of it but I find it hard to believe given the evidence I've laid out here which I did witness.

 

[netsecurity]

Amazing first person account of a real shooting! I'm so used to seeing a link in such posts, or someone relating a story they heard. Your info is detailed enough to add to the police report IMO.

You didn't see if the dog was acting aggressive with the shooter or not, but as you say, it seems irrelevant at the distance involved. That guy is almost certainly a real idiot for shooting his neighbor's dog like an exterminator. If he was justified, shouldn't he have said more than "It's a pit bull", his first words should have been "It was attacking that kid" or similar.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Again, the dog had apparently just ran out of his owners home when their child began to open the door. Of course the owners were in hot persuit, but too late apparently. I've seen dogs do this countless times and they seem to like the freedom to run from yard to yard, sniff around, etc. This was a large pitbull, but in NO WAY was he threatening. He was more of a "fat" lethargic looking dog than in any way intimidating. Of course, I was around the corner and did not witness any of it but I find it hard to believe given the evidence I've laid out here which I did witness.

Right. I didn't see that info until I had already posted.

 

[Ted]

Was the shooter named Zimmerman?

 

[the1kidd03]

No, you're not. You're basing your judgement on the hearsay of a bystander who wasn't in view of the events and showed up minutes afterwards, with no information from the shooter whatsoever. What I'm saying is that there is more to the story that we don't know. We don't know WHY the shooter fired. Will you change your opinion if it turns out that the dog was attacking a child as it rode by on its bike? Will it matter by then? The shooter's already been smeared. The damage is done.

Gun owners are already behind the curve with accusations and wild speculation by the media and anti's. When a discharge happens, as gun owners, wouldn't you like to have the benefit of the doubt until all the facts are in? Doesn't the shooter (or anyone) deserve to not be tried in this manner?

Well, it wasn't really "minutes" later. I would say a MAXIMUM of a minute between the second shot and noticing the dog on the ground after turning the corner. The kid wasn't on a bike, nor was there a bike present and the garage door was closed. The daughter was standing there right next to the parents.

I agree, and usually I advocate whole heartedly for those in self-defense situations. But that is why I chose to write about it. NOTHING about this instance, from what I witnessed and everybody else on the scene even hints at the possibility that this dog was a real threat to the family.

 

[Scutter01]

If facts were to show that the shooter was in fact in the right, absolutely I would change my view. As far as you thinking you know how Im thinking, you are wrong.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm asking you not to condemn him out of hand. And I'm not pretending to know how you're thinking, I'm basing my comment on the information you posted:

Originally Posted by mcolford
As for the ******* that shot, hope he lands in the pokey.

I have seen over and over what happens when someone is tried in the court of public opinion. A very close friend of mine had his life and business destroyed because someone accused him of a particularly heinous crime. He was innocent (in fact, never charged), but by then, the damage was long past done. None of his business partners would talk to him, let alone continue to do business with him. His neighborhood and family shunned him.

All I'm saying is that the shooter deserves his opportunity to tell his side. I'm asking people to consider themselves in the same situation for a moment.