Authorities last week made an agreement not to prosecute a Northwest D.C. man who used his unregistered handgun to kill a pit bull in order to stop it from mauling a child in his neighborhood.
As part of the agreement, Benjamin Srigley, 39, was required to pay a $1,000 fine but will not have criminal charges filed against him for the three unregistered firearms and the ammunition that investigators found in his possession, said Ted Gest, a spokesman for the office of the attorney general.
via D.C. man won’t face gun charges for shooting pit bull attacking boy – Washington Times.
He did it for the children, literally. He saved ONE LIFE. But he must pay for his good deed. That even prosecutors have the gall to impose him some fine is something that should make your stomach churn.
One of the many things that differ us from from Gun Control Activists is that when bad things happen, we run to the sound of trouble because we really care, while the opposition will rally with banners and demand action by the government while blaming us for the sins of the crazy and the criminal.
You will never see a Gun Control Activist risking life and limb for a fellow human being. Cowardice has very strict limits and a inhumane code of conduct.
And of course that banner waving and demands for ‘action’ ALL occur well after the fact, and NEVER include sanctions against the bad guys (or as in this case dog). Somehow it is magically the ‘fault’ of the concerned (armed or not) Citizen.
This is a bad deal. There are many places that will consider this a conviction if he pays a fine.
He should have lit a candle for the dead child instead.
I don’t know how anyone can stand to live in that shit hole. This man saved a child’s life and gets a large fine and loses his guns, yet David Gregory blatantly violates the law on national TV and gets nothing.
To a Liberal, it would be better if the child was mauled to death by the pit bull than saved by a man wielding a gun.
This is why the gun control crowd doesn’t believe in the ‘good guy with a gun’ philosophy.
Not only do they believe it’s a contradiction in terms, but they strive to break reality under their gavels to make it so, even when confronted with evidence to the contrary like this.
Why wasn’t the owner of the pit bull held responsible for his dog?