Massachusetts Dog Attack Shows need for Home Carry

Gun Watch ^ | 11 January, 2018 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Image fromnecn.com

A father in Massachusetts was horrified when the family pet pit bull attacked his one year old daughter. He initially retrieved a pistol to shoot the dog, but the pistol was unloaded.  Firearms stored in the home are required to be locked up in Massachusetts. From boston.com:

The Boston Herald reports that according to Falmouth police the child was playing in the kitchen Sunday morning when the family pit-bull terrier attacked her, biting her in the face causing major trauma.

The father tried to pull the dog off but couldn’t.

Police said the father got a pistol from a nearby room, but realized it wasn’t loaded.

He then grabbed a knife and started stabbing the dog, which was fatally injured.

The Massachusetts law is claimed to be constitutional, because you can carry the firearm on your person or under your control. If it is in one of those conditions, you are not violating the law. If a minor has access to the firearm , it is another violation of Massachusetts law.

Fortunately, the father was able to access a kitchen knife and kill the dog, stopping the attack. The one year old was taken to the hospital.

©2017 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

[marktwain]

The dog was not aggressive until it was.

[circlecity]

"Firearms stored in the home are required to be locked up in Massachusetts."

That's a law I wouldn't obey.

[Celerity]

“”Firearms stored in the home are required to be locked up in Massachusetts.”
That’s a law I wouldn’t obey.”

None of these laws should be obeyed.

[Delta 21]

I am (not) violating that law at least 4 times just sitting here drinking my coffee.

Kansas is nice.

[upchuck]

Glad I don’t live in MA. I’d have to break the law daily if I did.

[PAR35]

the family pet pit bull attacked his one year old daughter.

Why should anyone be surprised with that outcome. And should anyone with a pit bull be permitted to own a firearm. One deadly weapon in the household should be enough to protect the crack house, or meth lab, or whatever else is being protected by the pit bull.

[Delta 21]

That would be a messed up situation. A one year old locked onto by a PitBull. Thats ‘Danger Close’ for ending it with just about any kind of weapon. Anything more than a .22 to the dogs head is gonna increase the chance for further injury to he child, plus time was a key factor. The longer the dog is attacking the child the worse the injuries. A PitBull grabbing an infant or toddler and shaking hard could snap the child’s neck.

I bet the father never thought in a million years that he would be able to stab and kill his beloved pet, until it tried to kill his child.

[marktwain]

Here is a picture of the family house where the attack occurred:

[RandallFlagg]

Colorado, too.
I’m never more than two seconds away from having a loaded gun in my hand, in or out of my house.
Hopefully, we can get rid of a few idiotic anti-gun laws here this year.

[onedoug]

Fork the State!

...And pit bull owners.

[Paine in the Neck]

Shooting a dog in the process of mauling an infant seems like it would be fraught with its own dangers. I’d prefer a knife for that situation.

[Celerity]

I don’t understand these states. I moved from a state like this, to a state that is -becoming- like this.

I learned in public school, throughout years, that the US Constitution is the ruleset by which all states must adhere. States rights can establish other things, but the constitution is sea to shining sea.

Yet these states and their residents allow this, and sometimes even applaud it. And the courts can’t seem to understand the very, very simple way this works. Whatever is in the Constitution is not a state’s call. Period. The states can do anything else they want - they can legalize abortion, pot, speedlimits, all sorts of crap but the US Constitution is not to be touched.

And yet here we are.

They have established through their corruption that they aren’t part of the United States. And as such, I can hardly call their residents US Citizens.

This is why, much to the objection of other Freepers, I call out people who live in NY, CT, MA, NJ, MD, CA and pinpointed cities as trashy foreigners. And when it comes to NJ for some STRANGE reason every town that touches NJ becomes NJ (Read: Philly who doesn’t agree with national law OR state law)

New Orleans, Denver, Chicago, Seattle, Providence.. the list keeps growing. These places don’t agree with the laws, so they simply reject them.

So reject their laws. They’ve shown that it’s all fair game anyway ! They’ll send police after you of course under the guise that they are protecting the masses but the truth is in another post at this point.

[Fresh Wind]

Philly is actually West Camden.

[whistleduck]

Freedom in the heartland.

3 violations here

but many in compliance but not at the ready

Waiting for ex ag Holder to pay me an unannounced visit

nothing but pleasantries exchanged in the warmth of the moment!

Justice is coming to that crowd. Slowly asleep at the switch govt officials are being forced to stare corruption in the face, even when they dither and turn away.

Slime them all.

[rlmorel]

I was thinking the same thing. Butcher knife, in the kitchen...readily available...through dog’s rib cage.

[Bonemaker]

“Firearms stored in the home are required to be locked up in Massachusetts.”

Sounds like another Romney cluster law.

[bigbob]

Unless you just don’t have potentially viscous dogs in the house. Can’t remember hearing of a border collie or golden retriever going after a kid.

[marktwain]

It happens. It is quite rare, though.

[AlaskaErik]

My Glock 23 is holstered on my hip as I write this. Magazine inserted and round chambered. Otherwise, it’s as useless as the one that father had and needed when his daughter was being attacked.