pitbull musta been wearing a mustache and glasses.
Doogle
Officer Aims For Pit Bull, Accidentally Shoots FORMER Fiance
Perhaps the pit bull was "affixed" to the fiance's leg and the woman was jealous?
It's all the man's fault.
Obviously, not many of us have fired a weapon in a tense situation. Trust me, it's easy to miss.
About 20 years ago in DC a man got on an elevator and tried to rob a veteran FBI agent at gunpoint. The agent drew and emptied his weapon as did the purp. The worst injury was a powder burn.
Tough to be accurate, especially when your target is moving.
Did she get the dog?
So is the dog dead or did it complete it's attack and kill this terrified female cop, did the killer dog get diverted and finish off the wounded and bloody civilian? The bigger concern may be her judgment, not her gun skills.
"Witness accounts support her statement that the dog was attacking her,"Since she missed the dog, she must have been bit? Or maybe the sound of the gun scared the dog into aborting its attack? Or maybe the reporter just got tired and couldn't think anymore. It's hard work putting more than five words on a screen at one time. Whew!
I read the headline wrong and thought it said, "Accidentally Shoots France."
I've just read all these posts and I am amazed at the number of dipples who can't read!!
To all: THE SHOOTER WAS THE WOMAN, NOT THE MAN. THE MAN GOT SHOT.
Just JEEEZZZZZZ!
Same city Michael Jackson is from.
Same city where they just arrested
Fourth Graders for making counterfeit money.
Makes you think....
If?
Oh No! Not Again!
I agree she needs to be retrained (or restrained)on the use of firearms. I would also suggest she be given a refresher on the "Shoot / No Shoot" course.
Happens to me all the time......
Let's clear up one thing--the word "fiance" comes from French, and in French, nouns have gender (fiancé is masculine, fiancée is feminine).
This distinction has been retained in the English language, and Webster's gives the following definitions:
Fiance = a betrothed man
Fiancee = a betrothed woman
I won't comment on the outright stupidity of some of the replies other than to make three points:
1. It's far more difficult to shoot accurately under duress than a lot of people seem to think.
2. The article was woefully vague about exactly what happened.
3. There really is a difference between being funny and being stupid (misogynistic comments fall in the stupid category).
Notice they don't mention where the fiance was standing in relation to the attacking do. Was he wrestling with the dog, or ten feet away, or running like the wind? Had the two been arguing about the wedding plans earlier in the evening?
Firearms training? Maybe they need to reconsider who they allow to be an auxiliary officer.
So did she shoot her own fiance, or the pit bull's?