Quote:
Originally Posted by wutamess
No sir... Now I think you're a little anal just to be spiteful.
Why only stop at one if he just "missed"? Assuming it'd take another 3-4 secs to get to the backyard from inside the house why would the officer be at a stare down with the dog instead of just continuously firing until he HIT this target if his intent was to kill the dog?
The 1st shot was a warning... Not an attempt to hit the dog.
Please tell me your reasoning skills aren't that off.
|
Quote:
|
"The officer pulled his pistol and fired, missing the dog as it lunged"...
|
And to think, you're the one that's questioned
my reading comprehension...
Find me an officer that says they've ever been trained to fire a warning shot.
Every single cop in the world will tell you that, if they fire their pistol, it's with bad intentions.
Otherwise you've just put a bullet in the air in a residential neighborhood in order to scare an animal with the reasoning skills of an infant child. Hell, even if I give him credit for a warning shot, that's even dumber than shooting at the dog would've been. At least at that point discharging a firearm in a neighborhood was done in self-defense.
So the report on the story, the training of the officers involved, and simple common sense suggests that this was not a warning shot.
Please tell me you're not that hell-bent on defending this moron.