D.C. Man Who Used Gun to Save Kid from Dog Mauling May Be Charged

NewsBusters ^

[chessplayer]

While liberal journalists like David Gregory and liberal politicians like Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)* are able to bend and even break District of Columbia gun laws in service of promoting more stringent gun control laws, it's a far different story for apolitical Good Samaritans who use their guns to save lives.

Andrea Noble of the Washington Times noted yesterday that a D.C. man could face numerous gun charges related to his discharge of his gun on Sunday to save an 11-year-old boy from being mauled to death by three pit bulls.

D.C. police are investigating whether a man will face criminal charges for shooting a pit bull that was attacking a child in his neighborhood.

The incident unfolded Sunday afternoon, after three pit bulls attacked an 11-year-old boy as he rode his bicycle through the Brightwood neighborhood of Northwest, according to a police report.

When the man, a neighbor, saw the boy being mauled by the dogs, he went inside his home and got a gun. The man killed one of the dogs. The gunfire attracted the attention of a police officer in the area near Eighth and Sheridan streets, where the attack occurred. The officer responded and shot the other two pit bulls as they continued to attack the boy.

The police report, which did not identify any of the people involved, said the boy suffered severe lacerations. The Washington Post, which first reported the details of the shooting, quoted the boy’s uncle as saying the boy was also shot in the foot.

Metropolitan Police Department spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump said Wednesday that the entire case, including whether the man legally owned the gun he used to kill the dog, is under investigation.

While public opinion might be supportive of the man’s actions, he could still face significant charges depending on the outcome of the investigation, criminal defense attorney Daniel Gross said.

“I’ve seen cases where people used weapons in defense of others, but the U.S. attorney’s office is not always so understanding,” said Mr. Gross, who represents many clients charged with firearms-related crimes in the District. “There are certain defenses one could try, like self-defense or defense of others, but that wouldn’t really go to whether they charge you.”

Also to be taken into consideration is whether the man was within his property line when he fired the weapon — a small but significant distinction. Mr. Gross said it could mean the difference in whether he could be charged with carrying a pistol without a license.

*Update/Author's Note (18:32 EST): Feinstein received permission from and coordinated with the District's Metropolitan Police Department, so technically she is not at threat of prosecution as David Gregory was. That said, I am highly skeptical that the D.C. law in question was designed to grant such exemptions for political purposes. The point remains that D.C.'s attorney general has not prosecuted persons in possession of banned weapons and ammunition magazines when the purpose has been advocating stricter gun control measures.

[digital-olive]

Please ping me as well.

[Peet]

He saves a child and his property line is an issue?

No good deed goes unpunished.

The elites would rather we go back to the days of Kitty Genovese than defend ourselves and each other.

[ronnyquest]

"When do we move against the tyranny we supposedly own guns to prevent?"

I have been asking the same question for years, to no avail. I don't think it will ever happen. Militias, which are the key as they represent significant numbers, are not interested and any lone citizen who stands up is signing up to be a martyr.