Puppy shoots man, saves litter mates.

[eric]

From CNN...

Pup shoots man, saves litter mates



PENSACOLA, Florida (AP) -- Nice shootin', Rex!

A man who tried to shoot seven puppies was shot himself when one of the dogs put its paw on the revolver's trigger.

Jerry Allen Bradford, 37, was charged with felony animal cruelty, the Escambia County Sheriff's Office said Wednesday. He was being treated at a hospital for a gunshot wound to his wrist.

Bradford said he decided to shoot the 3-month-old shepherd-mix dogs in the head because he couldn't find them a home, according to the sheriff's office.

On Monday, Bradford was holding two puppies -- one in his arms and another in his left hand -- when the dog in his hand wiggled and put its paw on the trigger of the .38-caliber revolver. The gun then discharged, the sheriff's report said.

Deputies found three of the puppies in a shallow grave outside Bradford's home, said sheriff's Sgt. Ted Roy.

The other four appeared to be in good health and were taken by Escambia County Animal Control, which planned to make them available for adoption.

[imported_Kat]

isn't it interesting the way that justice can work...

[Guest Mutts4Me]

Yeah, I came to see if anyone had posted that yet.

I was just sitting here while my mom was online, and suddenly she reads the flashing headline, "Dog Shoots Man" outloud to me.

"Really? Was it a Pit Bull," I asked... giving my mom a good laugh...

Alas, the poor pups were not pit bulls, but can you imagine if they had been?

[ESSlover]

Go Puppy! It's ya birthday! We're gonna partay likes its your Birthday!


Woops, Sorry, went a little overboard there... :oops:

[Guest Anonymous]

wow!!! :o amazing story, and now you know those pups will all find homes real fast ;)glad that guy got what he deserved!

[Seijun]

I think that if he was unable to find the dogs homes, it would have been best for them to have been killed if it meant sparing them from a horrible life in a world where they were unwanted and uncared for. Would it have cost him anything though to have had the pups taken to a vet to be euthanized?

Also, don't think I am being cruel here or anything, but if done correctly, shooting can be done humanely (i.e.-single shot, kills instantly)... Personaly, I would prefer for an animal to be euthanized by a vet rather than done by oneself with a gun-a weapon with the potential to cause such pain and suffering if not used correctly or in the hands of an inexperienced shooter.

~Seij

[BuddysMom]

I think the idea of shooting just goes beyond what most people can stomach ... beyond our idea of how civilized people act. I mean there is the Old West image of shooting a horse when it's leg is broken, but really ... imagine the scene of terror executing these puppies one by one in this way ... the others had to know what was going on and thet they were next.

I think the vet would have charged to euthanize, at least $20 per puppy.

His first felony was allowing his dog to have puppies to begin with imo.

[__crazy_canine__]

I get what youre saying Seij and I kind of agree... of course I would never have the heart to do that EVER!

Geez you know I sat and thought about this and its all one big HOLE!! Ok first you get a dog maybe rescued it or were just lonely and then you go check out prices for spaying and its too expensive. Cant do it... so then later the dog gets pregnant. Now you have 6 more pups in addition to the mom to feed and take care of, thats a lot of money. You cant afford to have them PTS when you cant find them homes and all the shelters wont take them because theyre full. You dont want them to suffer when you cant feed em. Out comes the gun.

Its all just a big hole I tell you! There needs to be cheaper or even free spay and nueter programs. I mean I know it was the persons fault for getting the dog in the first place if you cant afford it but still... if I was poor I would still want a dog no matter what. Selfish, right? ...but Im dying without a dog and I cant imagine not having one when Im older.

So anyway my point is yes its the guys fault but if things went as I said above, you just keep getting in deeper and deeper when youre poor... gah! life sux! lol

[__crazy_canine__]

Ha haa my rambling was kinda weird there... yeah, umm... did I mention Im REALLY tired! lol :lol: :lol: :lol:

[courtnek]

[quote name='Seijun']I think that if he was unable to find the dogs homes, it would have been best for them to have been killed if it meant sparing them from a horrible life in a world where they were unwanted and uncared for. Would it have cost him anything though to have had the pups taken to a vet to be euthanized?

Also, don't think I am being cruel here or anything, but if done correctly, shooting can be done humanely (i.e.-single shot, kills instantly)... Personaly, I would prefer for an animal to be euthanized by a vet rather than done by oneself with a gun-a weapon with the potential to cause such pain and suffering if not used correctly or in the hands of an inexperienced shooter.

~Seij

I disagree entirely. Puppies get adopted much faster than adult dogs.
If you have to down one, I would hope its an old dog who could no longer cope. a bullet to the brain directly is a merciful death, but not for a puppy. They can find homes.

[Horsefeathers!]

I absolutely cannot justify putting a bullet in a dog's head (adult or puppy) as a means of birth control. I don't care how good a shot someone is or how quickly it's over. Somehow, I doubt this guy had these puppies' best interests in mind when he was shooting them and probably wasn't really worried about it being "humane." He was merely disposing of a nuisance.

Poetic justic would be that he gets to live long enough to sweat while listening to his children discuss how to "place" him when he's old and a nuisance.

[Seijun]

Courtneck.. I never said anything about drowning puppies. Anyway, true, puppies do get adopted faster, but we don't know the whole story. We have no idea how crouded the shelter was, or if there was even a shelter near him, or if he had a car/truck to travel with...
The shelter near me gets puppies all the time, last time I was there, there was an entire litter of puppies scheduled to be PTS soon. Puppies do get adopted faster, but that doesn't guarantee that they will be adopted. I just don't feel I know enough about this situation to pass accurate judgement. A single shot to the head is just as quick, and no less painful than a needle (if done right). I know the second we hear about someone shooting an animal, we start thinking up all these horrible scenes, but if you go down to the raw basics, euthanasia by needle and euthanasia by gun are exactly the same-in each case, the dog will STILL die quick and painlessly. The only difference between the two is the phyciological impact each has on people. Shooting a puppy sounds a LOT worse than "euthanizing" a puppy, even though the dog still dies painlessly each time. (Don't get me wrong, I deffinately prefer euthanasia by needle over euthanasia by shooting, because you can't guarantee that the person will shoot right on the first try. There is no way I could ever shoot a puppy, and this guy was deffinately irrisponsible for letting the puppies 'happen' in the first place, but I just don't know enough about his situation to judge his ultimate decission).

~Seij

[Horsefeathers!]

I don't give a rat's *ss about his situation, if there was no shelter nearby, if he had nine starving children at home, or if he was an expert marksman. I'd be just as furious if HE were attempting to euthanize with a needle. The fact is that if he weren't committed to following through with the upkeep and maintenance of these puppies until they could be homed, he should have spayed his dog. He had a responsibility and to dispose of them by killing them by ANY means is wrong, wrong, wrong. I don't care about the nitpicky crap of how well timed and well placed the bullet is, or comparing it to, say, bludgeoning, drowning, beheading, or whatever. Lobbing off someone's head can be painless if done "right" as well, but I don't reckon I intend to learn the "right" method of doing it.

It disturbs me greatly to see people think this *may* be an acceptable means of birth control since it *may* not be painful as long as it's done "right." Once again, personal responsibility is going right out the window. SPAY the d*mn dog and then disposal of puppies would be a non issue.

[Seijun]

I'm not saying that ANYONE should euthanize a dog just because they don't want it or can't keep it, but I DO think euthanasia should be accepted if the alternative would have been to dump the dog (or puppies) on the street to starve, have them grow up on a chain in the back yard, or give them away "free" and have them end up in abusive or neglectful hands. I think a lot of us forget sometimes that no matter how hard we try, not every dog can be adopted. With the number of dogs in the USA currently needing homes, even if every person adopted one, there would still be thousands needing homes. Of course now with the publicity the pups are getting they will be adopted for sure, but what about before? What would have happened to the puppies if the owner hadn't decided to kill them? They might have ended up in good homes, or they might have ended up on the street, or they might have grown up to produce even more litters.. There are just so many "might have's" in this situation. Again, I am not saying I agree or disagree with this person's actions, I am just prompting thought here. No need to get angry about it, everyone is entitled to their own opinions…

On the subject of newspaper articles, one of the BIG reasons I am not taking sides is because of the inaccuracy news articles can have when they are dealing with ANY sequence of events. When you read an article, you assume it is all or mostly true. Half the time though, the article is riddled with half-truths and outright lies. As one example, I once saw a news story claiming a wolf had escaped from a man who had lived in an apartment with the wolf and who had also owned a Labrador. According to the newscasts, the wolf was to be "rehabilitated and released into the wild." I was given a chance to talk to the man and also some others who knew the story first hand, and it turns out the wolf was actually a high percentage wolf hybrid. The man did NOT live in an apartment and he did not have a pet Labrador. His "wolf" was not going to be released into the wild (this would have been impossible anyway) but it was actually going to be sent to a sanctuary. A lot of times, when reporters go out to do a story, they will go to neighbors or “friends” of the person to find out what happened. These people probably don’t know about most of what is going on anyway and they will just make guesses or assumptions as to what happened. These guesses and assumptions end up in the news story as “facts”.

~Seij

[bk_blue]

Good points Seijun. I understand what you are saying. And no, I do not condone the "euthanasing" of these animals, however it may have been done by this heinously irresponsible person. It is impossible to judge what method of euthanasia is more or less painful to a dog since we do not have the capacity to imagine from a dog's viewpoint, only our own.
Anyway, the dumba*s caused his own injury essentially by not getting his animals neutered. Wish it had shot off his nuts instead. :evilbat:

[ESSlover]

bk_blue napisał(a):

Wish it had shot off his nuts instead. :evilbat:

That makes 2 of us :evilbat:

[Rowie-the-Pooh]

Wow, that's incredible. It really is karma! Way to go puppy! :wink:

Also, although I see where some of you are coming from, shooting a puppy still seems inhumane to me. Instead of a quiet, calm room it feels fear and watches its littermates die. The last thing it hears is a gunshot. I'm still inbetween...I'd rather a dog at the rainbow bridge then a dog wandering homeless in the streets.

BUT shooting a dog will just become another "sulotion". By making shooting a puppy seem humane, people will just look at it as an alternitave to get ride of their puppies. "Aww, its allright. If we can't afford 'em when they're bigger, we'll just shoot 'em!" AND, if a person DID find a dog wandering the streets and decided to keep it, that person should STILL be held responsibl, poor or not. If that person couldn't afford a dog, then it shouldn't have kept it. I'm sure an Animal Rescue would love to help find it a home. Or, that person could have raised money to get it spayed, or put up posters, or anything. There are a lot of ways to get out of it...

[courtnek]

I'm going to take a part of the downside here. I do not believe that puppies should ever be shot, there are too many people willing to adopt them. But what if you had an aged dog, with real issues, and the vet said
"its time to put him down". but you cant afford the euthanasia. Its not cheap. I have had a number of dogs euthanized. over many years. its very expensive. a bullet to the brain will do the same thing. Thats hard for
people to understand, but its over quickly. the dog doesnt suffer. he dies instantly. Since he was going to die by injection, anyway, why is this more wrong? either way, it's a painless death. Isnt that what we want for our pets?

yes, you can hold them prior to injection. you can do the same thing, prior to being shot. they dont feel it either way...

[BuddysMom]

ut what if you had an aged dog, with real issues, and the vet said
"its time to put him down". but you cant afford the euthanasia.

This to me is the Old West version of shooting old Hoss' when his time has come.

One dog, one bullet, done right ... probably OK IMO. (Not to mention more environmentally benign ... )

I repeat about this puppy thing though, shooting a bunch of them one by one it would be terrifying to the ones "in line".

You know how, in many areas they have the "abandoned baby" laws that say you can leave a baby at a safe place (church, fire station, or police station) without prosecution ... can we have the same thing with puppies???!!!

[Seijun]

Not entirely sure that the following post will bode well with you all, but I will post it anyway..

On the subject of the puppies having that "next in line" feeling... I don't know how old these puppies were, but let's face it, would an extremely young puppy really be able to comprehend what was going on when its sibling is shot? The dog is not exposed to its dead sibling, therefore it could not know that the dog was dead, nor would the dog understand what the gun was actually doing or that it was "next in line". This is under the assumption that these puppies were very tiny. Now, an older puppy might be able to comprehend something like this, or it could be that very young puppies do posses a 6th sense allowing them to understand what is going on.. BUT, all that I have seen in animals, and even in humans, has shown that most very young creatures do not understand death OR would not realize another animal was dead just because they heard a *pop* noise and the next second the other animal was lying on its side "sleeping". In the old west babies were sometimes taken during wagon train raids. The babies would have their entire family shot around them. Although these babies were upset by the noise and confusion, they did not understand the meaning of "death" and they grew up with no memory of what had happened.

Once again, let me stress that I am not trying to completely justify this man’s actions. He could be extremely poor guy, living in a trailer, and who was feeding a stray dog that he might have considered “his” and who became pregnant. Or he could be some rich snob who was too lazy to get his dog fixed and was too lazy to take the pups to a vet for euthanasia.

~Seij

[StarFox]

Gah..what a complete moron. I agree to bad he didn't get shot in the nuts..or the head.

Sorry I think that the idea that shotting a dog in the head is "Humane" is a bunch of bull. If it's so humane why don't vets shoot the dogs instead of giving them injections. And how do WE even know it dosn't hurt? Even if it was humane and totally painless how many people would actually know how to shoot accuretly, probably 1% of the population. Sorry but shooting a dog in the head and seeing brain matter come out the other side of it's head dosn't seem to humane to me no matter how you put it.

Realy I can't belive some people are ok with this. All this -what if he didn't have the money..bull. Take the dogs to a shelter. Wow that cost you what a couple of bucks in gas. At least the dogs would have a chance of living a decent life before getting euthanized.

Shooting a dog is against the law for a reason. It is not an acceptable method of eutahnizing an animal in the laws eyes or mine.

Since he was going to die by injection, anyway, why is this more wrong? either way, it's a painless death. Isnt that what we want for our pets?

Sorry Court, I don't agree. What I want is for an animal to have a fair chance at life before it dies. Does it always happen, no of course not. But thoes three dogs that he killed could have had a fair chance if he would have just taken responsibility for his dog getting pregnant.

[ellieangel]

I think it's the violence of shooting that is horrifying to most people,there is absolutely no excuse for this a***holes behaviour,I can't imagine any reason that he could have that would justify it.

On the subject of the puppies having that "next in line" feeling... I don't know how old these puppies were, but let's face it, would an extremely young puppy really be able to comprehend what was going on when its sibling is shot?

I would beg to differ here,I have read a lot about the dogs that are eaten in some other countries and articles have stated that the other dogs "know" when one is killed and all start to panic. :(

It's just sad he wasn't shot BEFORE 3 were already dead :cry:

[Seijun]

Sorry I think that the idea that shotting a dog in the head is "Humane" is a bunch of bull. If it's so humane why don't vets shoot the dogs instead of giving them injections.

Because, when someone mentions "shooting a dog" people invision these horrible scenes of the dog writhing on the ground being shot to death. "Shooting a dog" has been labled in this country as socialy unacceptable.

And how do WE even know it dosn't hurt?

I remember two stories, one where a man was stabbed in the head with a knife, another where the guy had a 3" long nail driven into his forehead. It happened very quick, neither man reported feeling pain until several seconds, or even minutes after the objet entered their head. A bullet to the head would kill instantly, the dog most likely would feel no pain, or at the most, just a quick stinging sensasion, lasing only a split second. Needles hurt to you know...

I would beg to differ here,I have read a lot about the dogs that are eaten in some other countries and articles have stated that the other dogs "know" when one is killed and all start to panic.

Those were older dogs though, these were just very young puppies. Like a human baby, they most likely would not realize what was happening, especially if they were not exposed to the other dead puppies in order to realize that the other puppies were dead.

I think it is important though that as a general rule, shooting a dog should be considered abuse by law if no one was there to make sure that the animals died on the first hit. For all we know, this guy might have had to shoot each dog several times to kill it, or he might have thrown them in the grave while still barely alive. We just don't know. I think it is important that shooting a dog NOT be accepted as an ok way to dispose of any animal you don't want because there is no way EVERYONE would be a good shot, and it would allow for people to just shoot their dog whenever they felt like it, and however they felt like it.

~Seij

[courtnek]

Seij, I didnt say "drown", I said "down".....like the old west expression to
"down" a horse when it was too badly injured to save. Back then, a broken leg could not be fixed on a horse (its extremely expensive and difficult to do now) so to shoot them was the kindest thing to do. and to everyone else, I am NOT saying that what he did was right. I am glad he got his just rewards for it. Especially since they were puppies. Now, I am an excellent
shot. I could, physically, put an animal out of its misery by shooting it if I had to. I couldnt do it emotionally. The three dogs I have had to put down
were all done by a vet.

[imported_Debbie]

I too wish the little pup had aimed lower :lol: , then that guy would've been neutered !! Don't need him spreading his evil seed either....... :evil:

On the subject of shooting a dog wheter it be old/sick/ whatever....
I know some country/farm people that do that to unwanted pups/old/sick dogs.....I personally could not/ would not do it. :(
I just couldn't look into the eyes of my faithful companion and pull that trigger......
It was bad enough having my girl of 15 yr. PTS with an injection........That was 3yr. ago and I still cry about it today. :cry:
If she had been shot in the head I'd probably be institutionalized. :oops: :cry:

P.S That's how I got my girl, she was the last pup left and no one wanted her......they were going to take her out in the woods and shoot her.
I took her home and she gave me the best 15yr. of my life.......... :cry:
R.I.P Nakita :angel: