Last Updated:November 21 @ 08:52 am

Man Shoots Dogs to Save Boy, Could Face Charges

By GOPUSA Staff

An 11-year-old boy was riding his bike when he stumbled upon three unleashed pit bulls. The dogs began attacking the boy and continued until a neighbor shot one of the dogs with his gun. Since the incident happened in Washington, DC, which has strict gun-control laws, the neighbor could face criminal charges.

As reported by the Washington Post, "Police said a neighbor and an officer shot the pit bulls as they sank their teeth into the boy's legs, arms, stomach and chest."

An uncle of the victim's said the boy was riding a new Huffy dirt bike with orange rims he had gotten for Christmas. The uncle said his nephew emerged from an alley onto Sheridan Street, where he collided with the pit bulls.

D.C. police said the unleashed and unattended dogs attacked the boy before a neighbor who saw it went into his home, got his handgun and fired once, hitting one of the dogs. A D.C. police officer on bicycle patrol heard the shots, and authorities said he shot and killed the other two pit bulls. It was unclear from a police report exactly how many shots the officer fired.

So what is happening to the neighbor who came to the child's rescue? Instead of being treated like a hero, he is currently "under investigation."

The Cato Institute reports that the neighbor "he apparently needs a lawyer because he is reportedly under 'investigation' for violating our capital city's firearms laws! You see - he may have discharged his weapon beyond his property line. Talk about no good deed going unpunished."

Every single day, Americans use guns to save lives but we do not hear about these incidents on the evening news-and that's mostly because the gun only has to be brandished and the bad guy takes flight. Just not considered "news." Another reason is media bias-as the past few days illustrate. Yesterday, CNN had full coverage of a gun crime in Houston. This story-civilian uses gun to save an 11-year old's life-only a few paragraphs back in the metro section of the newspaper.

The story is not flashy, but it shows what can happen and what does happen every single day when people use their firearms for protection. It's too bad the media don't consider it to be "news."

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 9.6/10 (269 votes cast)
Man Shoots Dogs to Save Boy, Could Face Charges, 9.6 out of 10 based on 269 ratings





Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:

45 Comments

  1. whodunitComment by whodunit
    January 24, 2013 @ 11:46 am

    Amazing. Would the cops have preferred that the dogs seriously harmed or even killed the little boy? Where is the common sense here? Thank God that neighbor was quick thinking. Laws are supposed to make the world a better place, not give governing bodies a chance to practice insanity. This situation is ludicrous.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (93 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 24, 2013 @ 1:20 pm

      It’s not the police. A bicycle cop shot the other two dogs. It’s the stupid politicians who couldn’t care less about human life and would like to see this citizen prosecuted because he had a firearm.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (68 votes cast)
    • txjimComment by txjim
      January 24, 2013 @ 1:33 pm

      Sadly, “Common sense is not common in any government”.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (49 votes cast)
    • bf39Comment by bf39
      January 24, 2013 @ 3:26 pm

      Since it’s D.C., let’s watch this close and see which is most important, the gun law, the DOG, or the little boy’s life. It wouldn’t surprise me if it’s the gun law or dog. SAD.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (46 votes cast)
    • anothersonofgodComment by anothersonofgod
      January 24, 2013 @ 4:53 pm

      Maybe our founding fathers made a mistake when they designed our government; maybe we need a body of men that, rather than make laws…UNMAKE laws. Thanks to the efforts of 200 years of “fooliticians leaving their legacy of law” we have quite a stack of bad law on the books. I admit these new laws made by godless liberals are the worst, but the laws that allowed the liberals to make bad law were not made by liberals, were they?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (18 votes cast)
    • lokiswifeComment by lokiswife
      January 24, 2013 @ 4:57 pm

      Isn’t it ironic that someone doing the right thing, even if the law says no, is in trouble with the law, while millions of lawbreakers get a pass for doing whatever they want? I hope the citizens of his area make their views known to the court and the police. I think that most gun owners would have done the same thing, the boy’s life and safety at that point were the most important things.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (28 votes cast)
  2. navywifeComment by navywife
    January 24, 2013 @ 11:49 am

    The gentleman who saved the boy’s life is also under investigation just for owning the firearm as well as having discharged it beyond his property line (carrying a firearm in public). He faces a prison sentence of a year if convicted.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.2/5 (33 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      January 24, 2013 @ 1:23 pm

      Never mind that David Gregory got a pass after willfully disobeying DC gun laws. He did ask permission first, but when he got denied he went ahead and disobeyed the law anyway.

      No justice in DC.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (35 votes cast)
    • sootsmeComment by sootsme
      January 24, 2013 @ 4:36 pm

      JURY NULLIFICATION, folks! 12 Citizens good and true have the power to tell the prosecutor, the judge, and whatever body made unjust laws (as defined by our Constitution) to put it where the Sun don’t shine. If we wish to continue being at Liberty as free Americans, we need to understand this and then to act accordingly…

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (27 votes cast)
    • anothersonofgodComment by anothersonofgod
      January 24, 2013 @ 4:58 pm

      Who sits on a jury anymore? In my experience, everyone sent a summons gyrates to ungodly positions to avoid jury duty. The accused ends up being tried by a group of “people too stupid to avoid jury duty.”
      The question then is, why do we try to avoid it? Because it takes too much time! I like the jury duty like we saw in old western movies! The facts are laid out, the case is tried in one day, maybe two, and the guy walks or hangs.

      If the country or world were made a better place because of liberal courts and laws, it seems that by now it would be a better place.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (19 votes cast)
  3. gopluvaComment by gopluva
    January 24, 2013 @ 11:56 am

    Good the cop heard the shots and finished the job.They should fine and maybe jail the owners of the dogs, Give the guy who shot the first one a medal, also the cop,then change the darn laws to help save lives. What if that man had no gun. The boy could have, probably would have been dead. Our president has no common sense either.HHe should be making a speech about how fortunate the boy is because of a legal gun owner.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (62 votes cast)
    • anothersonofgodComment by anothersonofgod
      January 24, 2013 @ 5:11 pm

      Luva, that would be the smart thing to do.
      That would be the compassionate thing.

      I am in favor of sending the dog owner to God for a personal interview, but then, I don’t have a pathological degree in Pit Bull mentality; maybe orange rims on BMX bike are well known to cause P.B.’s to turn into hockey players.
      There has to be a way the MMMFH (Major Mass Media From Hell) can blame this on Lance Armstrong!

      Seriously, to add to your list of “should-do’s, we should watch the way the judge handles this case. If he rides hard on the shot-gun man, maybe he and the prosecutor should be placed in the interview room with pit bulls.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (17 votes cast)
  4. fallschComment by fallsch
    January 24, 2013 @ 11:56 am

    Any prosecutor who would do anything but dismiss this case after reading the facts is a categorical coward and has aspirations of being a congressman.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (72 votes cast)
  5. Comment by Anonymous
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:07 pm

    If it goes to trial, the Jury has duty to “Nullify” the law.
    This is a legal right because the Law too is on trial.
    Check up Jury Nullification.. The problem juries face is Judges who say the Law is not on trial – its illegal for a Judge to do this, but they do it all the time.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (42 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      January 24, 2013 @ 12:13 pm

      Wasn’t the law determined to be unconstitutional? Why are these overly restrictive laws still in place?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (35 votes cast)
  6. DudleyComment by Dudley
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:07 pm

    In the liberal mind it is better to let the dog eat the boy than use a handgun to defend life.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (57 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      January 24, 2013 @ 12:14 pm

      Well, maybe he would have gotten a pass if it was the President’s kid that he saved. Other people’s kids are disposable. That’s why Obama doesn’t want armed security in the public schools and doesn’t seem to pay any attention to all the violence against children in his home town of Chicago. Poor, black kids aren’t as important to the Democrats as white kids in Connecticut.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (45 votes cast)
    • rattlerjakeComment by rattlerjake
      January 24, 2013 @ 12:32 pm

      @txgoatlady – They don’t care about the white kids in Connecticut either. It’s only because it was at a school and the nutcase was targeting the kids and teachers at the school for no reason (he had no criminal background), and that the gun laws are not strict enough there so they can cash in on it. In cities where crime is rampant and there are extreme gun laws, it wouldn’t benefit them to say anything. Concentrating on a couple of people killed in the hood (where most of the victims are criminals too), is different than say, Zimmerman confronting a suspicious black teen in a predominantly white neighborhood. There is no point of pushing laws in areas where the only people with guns are the criminals, and the victims are too.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (18 votes cast)
  7. Grouchy OneComment by Grouchy One
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:14 pm

    There are laws in many, many cities against discharging a firearm inside the city limits. I’m assuming that this was one of the crimes the man was charged with. We would be better served if there were laws against owning pit bulls!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.3/5 (34 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      January 24, 2013 @ 12:31 pm

      The problem with pitbulls is typically the owners, not the dogs. Why were these dogs running free? Were they trained to be vicious? While pitbulls have characteristics of size and strength that increase their danger, other breeds have similar characteristics. They are usually mean because their owners train them to be mean.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (27 votes cast)
    • rattlerjakeComment by rattlerjake
      January 24, 2013 @ 12:44 pm

      @txgoatlady – You are way off base. Aggressive behavior is a genetic trait. This is why some animals are bred for passiveness and others for aggression. These dogs were initially bred in England, and arrived in the United States with the founders. In the U.S., these dogs were used as catch dogs for semi-wild cattle and hogs, to hunt, to drive livestock, and as family companions. Some have been SELECTIVELY bred for their fighting prowess and the problem is that most pit owners do not know which line they came from (Aggressive or non-aggressive). My neighbors have two pits and several other dogs; two or three times a year they have incidents where they must take one of the other dogs to get sewn back up because one of the pits attacked. I have gaots, horses, ‘working’ dogs, and poultry on my farm and they are already on notice from me that if one of these two dogs is found loose, I will shoot it on sight!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (26 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      January 24, 2013 @ 1:20 pm

      I have known plenty of gentle pitbulls. Out in the country, dummies tend to let them run loose. Dogs running in packs tend to behave differently than individual dogs. There are 5 dogs that look to be heeler or aussie mixes (not pitbulls) that one of my neighbors lets run loose. They like to harass people’s livestock and bother people on bicycles or horseback. If I catch them on my property when I am armed, they will be shot.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (15 votes cast)
    • Grouchy OneComment by Grouchy One
      January 24, 2013 @ 1:37 pm

      I agree that ANY breed of dog running in a pack is dangerous. My sister lived in an area where all the people let their dogs run loose. We couldn’t go visit her because those packs of dogs wouldn’t let people out of their vehicles who didn’t live there.
      But I also know that Pit Bulls are dangerous enough so that even though I know some gentle ones, I don’t trust any of them. Pit Bulls killed my friend’s Boston Terrier. Pit Bulls have killed a lot of old people and small children. It happens too often to deny that they are inherently dangerous animals.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (16 votes cast)
    • odayterrenceComment by odayterrence
      January 24, 2013 @ 2:18 pm

      There is one HUGE difference between guns and pit-bulls (or dogs of any breed). The gun is an inanimate object. The dog is a living creature. The gun can’t function by itself…the dog can.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (15 votes cast)
  8. braines57Comment by braines57
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:46 pm

    This is yet another example of why it is so important for all of us to rigorously defend our 2nd Amendment Rights – even if we don’t have any personal firearms! I live in TN where we do not have such restrictions. Several years ago, when I was 3 months pregnant with my youngest daughter, my oldest daughter who was not quite 4 at the time and I were walking our border collie in our neighborhood when we were attacked by a pit bull. My dog was on a leash but still did his best to defend us; however, the leash wrapped around my wrist and I was unable to let it go because I was trying to shield my daughter from the vicious pit bull. I kept yelling for help and finally my husband came and hit the pit bull on the head with a rock to make him let go of our dog. Our dog ran home and my daughter clung to her daddy for dear life, terrified. I went back to our house, got out our shotgun and a box of shells and went to look for the pit bull with the intention of shooting it dead; however, I couldn’t find it (the dog’s “owner” had put it back in their house.) When our sheriff arrived, he told my husband and I that had I found the dog and shot it, I would have been within my rights because the dog had attacked us. He then went to the people’s home who had the dog (they claimed it was a stray that they were just feeding!) and confiscated the dog so that it could be put down. Our dog ended up requiring surgery, costing over $200 in vet bills (today, that would be double, but well worth it considering that our dog had saved my youngest daughter and I from being attacked. Not long after that, in another town, a boy the same age as my daughter was not so luck – a loose pit bull nearly severed his right arm and did permanent damage to the rest of his body. He lived, but had to have multiple surgeries and a long recovery. I’m sure that his parents would rather have had a neighbor see the attack and shoot the dog instead of what their son ended up enduring. This is just one more example of a government gone amuck – interfering with our daily lives and taking away our freedom – and those required to “administrate” said government are no longer allowed to exercise basic common sense because the government “knows best”. If I were the man and I were charged, I would arrange to bring the pit bull into the courtroom and set it loose – maybe that would get the point across!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (29 votes cast)
  9. M TomComment by M Tom
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:46 pm

    Along with ObamaCare, we’re starting to resemble more and more like Britain, where their laws also effectively prohibit self-defense, and any attempts to defend against criminal behavior, whether from two leggeds, are met with the victim being charged with crime (already happening here on the southern border–see internet articles on Ramos and Campion, and other (American Hispanic) Border Patrol officers being criminally charged for doing their jobs, with the actual criminals being given immunity to testify against them)). Is there a pattern here, both nationally and internationally? These kinds of governmental patterns, both federally, state, and locally, seem to have a consistent thread of human-design to them. But the states, and some localities, like Kennessaw GA (like Switzerland–or why Hitler didn’t try to take them, look up Kennesaw and Second Amendment defense), by and large, appear to break some of this pattern.
    http://rense.com/general9/gunlaw.htm for Kennesaw

    May need another Heller SCOTUS case to deal with this aspect of DC anti-self-defense law, if not going up the federal court ladder already. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

    One blogger long ago on GOPUSA mentioned that the liberal progressive mind set and world view was “inconsistent, contradictory, hypocritical,” and then “totalitarian dictatorial,” and finally, “suicidal” as long as they take all of us with them.

    VA:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.5/5 (16 votes cast)
  10. Grouchy OneComment by Grouchy One
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:50 pm

    Txgoatlady, while that may well be, that the owners are at fault, and I have my doubts, it is still a bad idea to let people own a dangerous dog that even MIGHT get out to run free. And allowing one household to own more than one dangerous dog of any breed is a really bad idea. I lived in a city where 2/3 of the people in my neighborhood had some kind of a dangerous dog. You couldn’t walk down the street for fear that one of those dogs would jump the fence and come after you. Not one week went by in that city that someone wasn’t attacked by a pit bull. So, no matter whether the owner is at fault or the fact that the dogs are dangerous based on their size and strength alone is good enough reason to outlaw the breed entirely as far as I’m concerned.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
    • rzraickComment by rzraick
      January 24, 2013 @ 7:16 pm

      Perhaps a better idea would be to enforce the leash laws. If an owner allows his dogs to run free and they harm someone, the owner must be held responsible.

      In concept, banning dogs is very similar to banning guns. People need to be held personally accountable for their actions.

      This is true for bankers and politicians as well.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  11. juanmotieComment by juanmotie
    January 24, 2013 @ 1:01 pm

    So, Washington D.C. is run by democrats, and has been so for years. Does this mean democrats care more about pit bulls than the children a pit bull may attack? And where is the democrat outrage over pit bulls? Shouldn’t they be all over the media demanding a ban on assault pit bulls?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (20 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      January 24, 2013 @ 1:21 pm

      That’s funny. Since this was DC, it was probably a black kid that got attacked. Liberals care more for dogs than they do black kids. That’s why they put abortion clinics in black neighborhoods.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (16 votes cast)
    • nmleonComment by nmleon
      January 24, 2013 @ 9:39 pm

      “Shouldn’t they be all over the media demanding a ban on assault pit bulls?”

      That’s actually a very good question Juan. Though there has been a major push-back in recent years against BSL (Breed Specific Legislation), there are many towns that have banned pit bulls.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (3 votes cast)
  12. odayterrenceComment by odayterrence
    January 24, 2013 @ 2:15 pm

    To those anti-gun people who think this citizen should be punished, I say this: YOU tell the parents of the young boy that your hatred of guns is more important than the life of this child. Yes, indeed…YOU tell that to the parents. Then you can enjoy the benefits of Obamacare…because you’ll need it!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (16 votes cast)
  13. bigjohn555Comment by bigjohn555
    January 24, 2013 @ 3:47 pm

    Democrats have proven in the past that they do not care about “unborn” children, “partially” born children, and “just born, but unwanted” children. Now, we find that their love for Gun Control Legislation far exceeds their love of 11 year old children. WOW, what a shocker?
    A real shocker is that the Animal Rights people are not calling for this guy’s hanging for illegally murdering a dog.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  14. powertothepeopleComment by powertothepeople
    January 24, 2013 @ 3:52 pm

    Not surprised here….there was a case in Florida a couple of years ago where a home owner shot an alligator that had entered the house via the dog flap to attack the small dog. The authorities fined the home owner for killing an animal without a permit. Trust in government to your own peril!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
  15. sootsmeComment by sootsme
    January 24, 2013 @ 4:18 pm

    A couple points:
    1.Shoulda shot the owners- the dogs were obviously not trained, nor were they properly supervised. Having animals requires Stewardship, which includes responsibility. Most unruly dogs are kept by brain dead or masculinity challenged owners.
    2.JURY NULLIFICATION: when either a prosecution, or the laws under which it is entertained are not just, it is the right and the sworn duty of jurors to acquit, regardless of whether the defendant has violated the letter or the spirit of the “law”. This idea of nullification applies to any “law” that in any way over reaches or contradicts, in any way, the US Constitution. Our Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that “laws” that do not follow the specifics or the general limits to government authority spelled out in the Constitution are worthless from inception.
    If we wish to continue to be free American Citizens, we need to act like it and put our “public servants” back in their proper place…the sooner the better!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.4/5 (7 votes cast)
  16. CharieComment by Charie
    January 24, 2013 @ 4:24 pm

    Grouch, I’m thinking if you got close enough to the dog attacking the child, it might turn on you and then you could shoot it without fear of hitting the child.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)
    • Grouchy OneComment by Grouchy One
      January 24, 2013 @ 4:31 pm

      One can only hope, Charlie. When I lived in a neighborhood full of pit bulls years ago, I used to play out in my head what I would do if one of those yelping creatures managed to jump the fence while I was walking my dog. My plan involved turning my dog loose and hoping she (a chihuahua) would run home, wrapping my coat around my forearm and punching the daylights out of the pit bull. I know of people who kept a loaded weapon nearby who would have shot any put bull who ventured into their yard after their dog or their kids. All of us had fenced yards. I hated to have to live inside a fence to protect myself and my dog but that was the way it was.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
  17. stormymonday2Comment by stormymonday2
    January 25, 2013 @ 3:19 am

    So, does Washington D.C. have leash laws? Shouldn’t the owner of the dogs be fined and held responsible for the injured boy? The boy probably would of been maimed much worse, or possibly killed if that man hadn’t had a gun to shoot the dog. Good thing the officer shot the other two dogs.

    The man who shot the dog deserves recognition and a medal. No reason to investigate him. Don’t make a criminal out of him for doing the right thing, unless he is already a felon in possession of a handgun he shouldn’t have. Either way, he deserves credit for helping the boy. Ridiculous Liberals in D.C.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (4 votes cast)
    • pistol packing mamaComment by txgoatlady
      January 25, 2013 @ 11:03 am

      You know, even if he were not able to legally own the firearm for some reason, the judge would need to take into account the fact that he risked being prosecuted in order to save somebody else’s kid.

      Of course in D.C. nobody has a right to legally own a gun in the opinion of the ruling class.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  18. vComment by v
    January 25, 2013 @ 4:56 am

    My sisters elderly neighbor open her front door and started to walk down her front walk to retrieve her morning newspaper! She didn’t make it! Her neighbors PitBulls were loose and attacked her they nearly killed her before they were beaten off her! A PitBulls jaws are extremely strong and once they latch on it is difficult to get them off someone! If they had gotten to my sisters 3year old we would of had a funeral!
    These dogs are bred to be agressive and are unstable…this woman lived next door to these dogs and had never harmed them!
    The jerk city atty that is harassing the person that shot this dog should have some turned loose in his yard!
    Sick of STUPID!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  19. gavinwcaComment by gavinwca
    January 25, 2013 @ 10:13 am

    There is no sence in being stupid if you can not show it. The D.C police are stupid and are showing it.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  20. Pingback: Freedom is eroding (four stories) | Western Free Press

  21. Pingback: Man Arrested In D.C. For Saving Kid From Dogs «

  22. rattlerjakeComment by rattlerjake
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:17 pm

    So true!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.0/5 (9 votes cast)
  23. Grouchy OneComment by Grouchy One
    January 24, 2013 @ 12:43 pm

    Drug dealers like Pit Bulls and Rottweilers. One by one, cities are outlawing even owning one or forcing the people who do to buy extra insurance. Some insurance companies will not write policies to people who own dangerous dogs.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
  24. Grouchy OneComment by Grouchy One
    January 24, 2013 @ 2:21 pm

    That is NOT to say that I don’t think that the guy who shot the dog was wrong in any way or that he should be punished, by the way. If I were a good enough shot to hit the dog instead of the kid, you can bet I’d have done the same thing.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (9 votes cast)
  25. sootsmeComment by sootsme
    January 24, 2013 @ 4:24 pm

    Practically any dog, civilly and fairly trained and handled, is a benign creature unless provoked. Rottweilers and Pit Bulls, and the rest of the “bad” breeds du jour, are no more dangerous than Lassie, given half a chance. If your experience is much different, consider who the dog(s) spend their time with…

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 2.5/5 (8 votes cast)

Leave a Comment





Fresh Ink Archives

  • November 2014
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • Reference Pages

  • About
  • Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer