Man shoots and kills charging dog in Charlotte County(FL)

fox4now.com ^ | 21 November, 2012 | Staff

[Uncle Chip]

Witness said he NEVER SAW A GUN, so how does that translate to the man had it open carry in his hand?

Well how did the gun get into his hand without the witness seeing him reach into his fanny pack and pull it out??? How did the witness miss him pulling out the gun???

Answer: He didn't pull out the gun when the witness was watching. He didn't need to. The gun was already in his hand ready to fire before he told the police it was and before the dogs charged. He lied to the police.

[the OlLine Rebel]

You are absurd.

How do you tie in “not seeing a gun ever” to “not seeing it BECAUSE HE ALREADY HAD IT OUT”?

It’s perfectly feasible for someone never to see a device at a distance when the angle is wrong; doesn’t matter if he had it out or had to move it out.

You’re truly amazing.

[Uncle Chip]

How do you tie in “not seeing a gun ever” to “not seeing it BECAUSE HE ALREADY HAD IT OUT”?

A 22 is a pretty small weapon. It can easily be held in the palm of a hand without anyone noticing it even if they are looking right at your hand.

However the action of reaching into your pocket and then pulling it out would be quite noticeable.

If he reached into his pocket and pulled it out, the gun might not have been seen but the action would have been noticed as that of someone pulling out a gun or something.

How did the witness miss him reaching his hand into his fanny pack and pulling out the gun or something??? How did the witness miss that part???

He never said that he reached into his fanny pack and pulled something out. And he also didn't corroborate his claim that he yelled at the dogs to "get back" either.

The witness didn't corroborate them because he didn't do either of those two things. The dogs would have been "across the street" and on him too quickly. The only way he could have shot that dog before it got to him, unless it stopped, is to have already had the gun in his hand and ready to fire.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

Not really — but exposing prefabricators is.

As I say, reading comprehension isn't really your strong suit since you seem to have missed my own self-correction in my post #132 to you.

Did you see the words “fanny pack” in there anywhere???

Did you even read my post #132?

The only one here pulling anything out of his fanny pack is you.

#132?

[eartrumpet]

How did the witness miss him reaching his hand into his fanny pack and pulling out the gun or something??? How did the witness miss that part???

Most people will watch the two snarling, attacking dogs instead of the man when the attack happens. The movement focuses their attention and it is a unique event to see.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

There is good and bad in every breed of animal.

I have been around Boxers for fifty years and have yet to see one that goes on an unprovoked rampage.

So, which is it? The two stories I posted discussed Boxers going on unprovoked rampages. Just because you've never seen it, doesn't mean it never happens.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

He either had it in his pants or jacket pocket where he quickly grabbed it, or had it in his hand which may have been in his pants or jacket pocket, or he had it in his hand the whole time.

Just because you're slow, clumsy and a terrible shot doesn't mean everyone shares your shortcomings.

For all we know, Gross had lightning-fast reactions, nimble hands and was a crack shot.

[Uncle Chip]

That is indeed a possibility.

However given that he was "across the street" from the house, odds are that he already had the gun in hand before they started charging.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

I wonder why the dog haters come out in droves when a story like this is posted.

In your opinion, who caused the entire incident, Bustamante or Gross?

[the OlLine Rebel]

I’m sure many long-experienced German Shepherd breeders have never personally seen a rampage by GS, but they’d be damned fools to deny it never happens.