You are absurd.
How do you tie in “not seeing a gun ever” to “not seeing it BECAUSE HE ALREADY HAD IT OUT”?
It’s perfectly feasible for someone never to see a device at a distance when the angle is wrong; doesn’t matter if he had it out or had to move it out.
You’re truly amazing.
A 22 is a pretty small weapon. It can easily be held in the palm of a hand without anyone noticing it even if they are looking right at your hand.
However the action of reaching into your pocket and then pulling it out would be quite noticeable.
If he reached into his pocket and pulled it out, the gun might not have been seen but the action would have been noticed as that of someone pulling out a gun or something.
How did the witness miss him reaching his hand into his fanny pack and pulling out the gun or something??? How did the witness miss that part???
He never said that he reached into his fanny pack and pulled something out. And he also didn't corroborate his claim that he yelled at the dogs to "get back" either.
The witness didn't corroborate them because he didn't do either of those two things. The dogs would have been "across the street" and on him too quickly. The only way he could have shot that dog before it got to him, unless it stopped, is to have already had the gun in his hand and ready to fire.