Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fso301
In such close quarters situation, the fox wouldn't be large enough to place the womans life at immediate risk. Either shoot from point blank with the muzzle practically on the animal or, don't shoot.

Is it really going to be any easier to hit a wildly-moving target at zero range? I would think that the amount of uncertainty related to motion of the object between the trigger finger's command to fire and the arrival of the bullet would be relatively independent of range, at least up to 50' or so, and control of the weapon would be much easier if one's target is moving over a smaller angle. Rifles are not meele weapons.

As for the woman's life being at risk, she'll probably want want to get rabies shots whether or not she was infected (the fox by the sound of it most likely was) but I would think that allowing the fox to continue to bite her would elevate the risk of infection. Not that a .22LR bullet wound is going to help, but I wouldn't consider his actions unreasonable.

31 posted on 07/26/2008 7:42:01 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: supercat

No. The poster wanted the husband to place the muzzle against the fox and then pull the trigger. Failing that, don’t shoot.


32 posted on 07/26/2008 7:45:39 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA - Vote against the dem party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: supercat
Is it really going to be any easier to hit a wildly-moving target at zero range? I would think that the amount of uncertainty related to motion of the object between the trigger finger's command to fire and the arrival of the bullet would be relatively independent of range, at least up to 50' or so, and control of the weapon would be much easier if one's target is moving over a smaller angle. Rifles are not meele weapons.

I can imagine the woman was thrashing around and hollering quite a bit. In such case that a person is in a state of panic, even clubbing the fox would be a challenge due to the uncertainty as to where the wifes leg will be.

As I previously mentioned, my aunt used her garden hoe to kill a rabid fox that attacked her while she was working in her garden. I've noticed over the years that a surprising number of rabid fox -vs- human encounters involve the fox being clubbed/hacked/impaled with a garden tool either by the intended victim or a rescuer.

As for the woman's life being at risk, she'll probably want want to get rabies shots whether or not she was infected (the fox by the sound of it most likely was) but I would think that allowing the fox to continue to bite her would elevate the risk of infection.

She'll for sure need rabies shots, antibiotics and who knows what else. According to the article, the fox appears to have clamped down on the woman rather than repeatedly biting her as the paramedics had to pry the jaws loose so, it doesn't sound like she suffered a severe mauling.

Not that a .22LR bullet wound is going to help, but I wouldn't consider his actions unreasonable.

I agree. Since I don't have all the facts, I can't sit in judgement seat. Perhaps he shouted for his wife to hold still and just as he fired, she moved. Who knows? In such a melee, one shot in the wifes leg and seven in the fox is a pretty good outcome.

34 posted on 07/26/2008 8:59:21 PM PDT by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson