Like the worthless sombxtxh said...he shoots first. That explains a lot. Mr. Bigshot never thinks....is a danger to anyone and everyone.

And it isn't like this shoot first jerk didn't know the dogs were neighborhood pets.

Now the entire country is aware of this man. Hopefully he's treated as a pariah in that community and anywhere else he does.

Wow, makes you think what if it was the Neighbors kids would he still shoot first ask questions later.

Your an idiot!! He said "I shoot first". They found out the dogs were NOT chasing the sheep by asking this louser and he admitted it. Don't defend a scumbag like this. He just LIKES to kill things! He shot the other dog as it was running away!! Good thing he doesn't live around here! He would have been HAPPY to see police instead of the towns people. We don't tolerate people like him and this is a farm community.

The dogs broke out of their fenced yard, the owner did not just let them run around loose! I love these dogs, Bernese Mountain dogs are a wonderful breed, great with kids and very well tempered. This is horrible! I totally believe in the 2nd Amendment, but this guy is a BAD example of a "respectable" gun owner!! I HATE scums like this!

A true moron at work here. I can not stand individuals like this...gun owner or not. This cretin is a menace to society...Throw the book at it...

Garbageman, if your not a friend, your an enemy. You should rethink your defense of this worthless waste of a human being. There is no excuse at all for shooting a herding dog. It is in their nature to look after livestock, not attack it. Maybe somebody should go up to this scumbag dog killer and shoot him, then ask how he is doing. After all, shooting first is something he would understand. I fully support an eye for an eye for any piece of trash that hurts a person or their loving pets.

garbageman -

the story states he shot one dog in the head - small target area if the dog is chasing sheep, and shot the other dog as it ran away - this is akin to shooting a person in the back; not much of a defense.

I read the actual police report and have been following this story for a week. By his own addmission the dogs were no where near the sheep when he shot them. He saw them in the yard grabbed his gun and went out and shot the male Argus in the face at point blank range. Then Fiona the female was running away from him and the sheep he took aim and shot her. She dropped to the ground got up to try to run away again and fell down and died. There was no threat to his sheep. While I support his right to protect his sheep he acted irresponsibly here and deserves to pay for what he has done. There was a kids play set right on the other side of his fence. He also is no farmer. He has less than 4 acres and that is actually not enough land in his township to be even housing livestock. Please read more on the story before you stand up for this coward. He destroyed a family.

I'm sorry but if someone shot my dogs they may as well be shooting a family member. This man would of found himself in the hospital on life support if he was lucky had I caught him shooting my dogs and for that matter anyone elses dogs that weren't causing any problem. This old bastard is due a good ass whoopin and a lawsuit that would put him under. This ruthless bastards children and grandchildren should get his sorry ass checked into a home if he is so out of control to shoot someones pet.

As to the doge being loose. There was a storm with heavy winds that night. A tree limb fell and damaged the fence in the middle of the night unknown to the owners when they let the dogs out. The dogs were out for a whole 15 minutes total when he shot them and the owner noticed they were gone after 5 minutes and was out looking for them. They were not negligent.

At the very least, this shooter must have his gun license revoked and all guns removed. He is a more than just a menace.

Garbageman here you go:

@garbageman

The dogs got out once so they deserve to die? You want to protect your livestock, that's completely understandable, but is it unreasonable to say that maybe, just maybe, this guy could have made an attempt to catch the dogs and help his neighbor out. I know being a good neighbor and a decent human being is SO out of fashion these days, but these animals were obviously well taken care of and someone's pet. Fire a shot in the air to scare them off, ffs.

Let me try posting the link again. It is not letting me.

media.nbcphiladelphia.com/documents/complaint3.pdf

http: //media.nbcphiladelphia.com/document/Complaint3.pdf

Garbageman, I had to put a space inbetween the : and // so omit that and it should work the site is not letting me post the link.

@thoble6, still didn't work, I pasted it with your correction and it keeps giving me an http error! This is the video hat actually counterdicts your statement : nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Man-Shoots-Kills-Neighbors-Dogs-But-Wont-be-Charged-Cops-192185311.html has the owner saying that they were chasing them, and a neighbor that had llamas and sheep killed a few months ago, by pit bulls that Pilotti shot and killed. I usually just remove the http// and www from the links I post, Thanks any way!

Fawna stray dogs and pets are two separate issues and just a couple of seconds time this old @!$%# could of told the difference. He just didn't want the dogs around his sheep so he shot them without regard. If it were my dogs he shot I wouldn't rest until he had paid dearly and shooting another dog would be the last thing he would ever think of doing again. Major difference between pets and wild animals, he didn't care to identify the difference, that is careless and careless people have no right to carry a weapon.

Some dogs have a natural instinct to herd and these dogs possess that instinct they would never harm the sheep, this was un called for and wrong, the man was over reacting and needs to be penalized, he is a problem and problems need to be neutralized, the pit bulls may have been a different story, a sheep person should know his breeds and those were probably no threat to his sheep they were bred to care for sheep. my opinion is penalize him heavily, would his neighbor have shot his sheep if they got loose and I'll bet they have from time to time. the point is you don't just shoot your neighbors dogs because you think its a good idea especially when those dogs are more valuable then your disgustingsheep. all in all you have to use some reasoning and do the proper thing, to just run out shooting is not the proper attitude, what a idiot, shoot first that's lame brain. I used to ranch and I would never kill my neighbors animals, live stock,work animals, or pets. unless I absolutely had to, and that never happened. anyone that paranoid has to be a liberal. nothing worse then a liberal with access to a gun.

Fawna, the article say NOTHING about these 2 dogs doing anything to this guys sheep or hurting anyone, did you bother to go past the first sentence or did you just read the headline and look at the pictures? All this jerk had to do was fire his shotgun it the air and the dogs would have likely run what a low life scum bag sounds like you run with the same trash, AH!

I am glad that they reversed their initial decision and decided to prosecute this SOB. His attitude clearly showed that he shot these dogs out of meanness, not because they were after his sheep. This breed of dog is a herding breed and is not known to attack livestock. In fact exactly the opposite is true, they would try and herd and protect the sheep, not kill them. The guy's "I shoot first" statement says all you need to know about this guy's attitude and motivations in killing these dogs.

@ garbageman-2736857

Your vehemence towards this 72 year old man is misplaced, as he supposedly killed them to protect his sheep! This is from the humanesociety.org FAQ section:

"How many animals enter animal shelters each year? And how many are euthanized?

The HSUS estimates that animal shelters care for 6-8 million dogs and cats every year in the United States, of whom approximately 3-4 million are euthanized. At this time, there is no central data reporting agency for animal shelters, so these numbers are estimates"

This puts into perspective for you, where your anger should be placed! There have also been some shelters that kill with a bullet, because it is cheaper! You might want to view this video to see that there was a previous incident, where sheep and llamas were killed at a neighbors by 2 Pit Bulls, in the last few months , those dogs were also shot by Pilotti. It also has the owner of the 2 Bernese dogs admitting they were chasing Pilotti's fenced sheep: nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Man-Shoots-Kills-Neighbors-Dogs-But-Wont-be-Charged-Cops-192185311.html

#1.38

good job Garbageman, but these people only read what they want to believe, and that is that this guy killed those dogs for fun.

Never mind he had just recently had to defend his sheep from other dogs. This is after all MSNBC, and one never gets the full story here, only the emotional driven Propaganda they want you to see.

If I were him I would have done the same thing. As much as I love a good dog, they after all, only dogs. And the people here showing such an emotional attachment to an ANIMAL, is quite frankly, disturbing.

I would like to wipe that smile off his face in that DA provided photo, one glance at those two dogs, I can tell they are herders, I had an Australian Shepard mutt for 15 years:-) wonderful dog, she patrolled in front of leash or off leash on any walk go out10 meters, come back, go out and back, miss her, Hey Gabe? get ill soon

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is....a couple of dead dogs.

Jeez, I'm gettin' sick of this whole gun thing.

certainly you take a risk letting dogs run free... but this breed isn't exactly known to be maneaters... seems the guy could have shown a little intelligence....

it's not like they are running up to his 2 year old daughter and he doesn't know what they will do or something

This makes me sick. Violence against animals needs to be taken more seriously. If I were in that family, I would have to move away. There would be too much anger and pain. Yes, some of you are blaming the owners for not keeping the dogs locked up. Bottom line: Accidents happen. Does that mean the dogs, who are completely innocent, deserve death? Nope. I feel sorry for those with so little compassion in their hearts, that they think what this man did was ok.

I've got a 12 pound Rat Terrier, sweetest thing ever, she got away from me one day trying to run up to the next door neighbor to lick him and he tried to stomp her head into the ground.... I'm really lucky I was right there....

people are really screwed up....

@old hamlet, You prove the point, "I am really lucky that I was right there..." There are many people that are in fear of dogs, whether based on rational thought, ie., they have seen/were involved in a dog attack, or irrational thought ie., they don't know dogs, but have heard stories that have them living in fear of dogs. Both will have them both fearful of even a small dog like yours. That is just another reason to be in control of your pets!

@urq196, Again I say, These dogs were pets of the herding variety,not actual working herd dogs! Just because a dog is in the herder family does not exonerate them from chasing and killing livestock, especially if they aren't trained to be herd dogs! They might actually chase them because it is part of their instincts, but not know how to do it properly

The DA was interviewed and it was on NBC 10 in philadelphia this morning. He stated that Gabe admitted the dogs were not in the Sheep pen as he originally reported. They were outside and in no way posed any danger to the sheep. By Gabes account Argus trotted towards Gabe, who was in the pen with the sheep, and thats when he shot the dog in the head. The dog was not able to even get near the sheep. Then he reloaded the gun and shot Fiona as she ran away scared, again she was not in the sheeps pen and was running away from the sheep and Gabe. Garbageman, by this mans own addmission you may want to rethink your stance on his guilt. This "man" is admitting the dogs did not pose a threat at all and therefore he was not justified in shooting them.

garbadgeman... no dog lover could possibly condone the acts of this idiot. You are being dis-honest with yourself or with us. Would you have shot the dogs or fired warning shots? That's what you need to ask yourself before chosing to defend this (hardly) a man.

@garbageman.. i like how you conveniently ignore multiple attempts to alert you to information that claims that a storm damaged the fence that allowed the 2 dogs out. Convenient of you not to respond to that. You dont respond to that because you have no way to explain your way around it. If the dogs were only out for 15 minutes and this was the result of a freak storm.. the shooter then would be nothing more than a heartless bastard. This is not the same thing as defending someone that a shot animals that have repeatedly entered his property. If you believe in no room for any mercy under any circumstance then you are an ahole.

I'm a firm believer in the 2nd amendment but to have people like this guy running around I get nervous. What if it had been some kids out screwing around and he just shoots first and kills one or more of them? ( I really believe this guy would do that)

Nut jobs like this guy are everywhere, we all need to be on our toes at all times to be aware of who has what and what could possibly set them off. Once the shooting starts and a person is shot then everything changes for that person in that they figure they have nothing to lose so they won't surrender and then the @!$%# hits the fan.

A firearm is only as dangerous as its owner/user and that's the problem, not the gun or style of gun involved.

I wasn't present when this all happened but I believe the dogs were no threat to this guys sheep as many in the neighborhood said but he figures that since its his property he can do as he wants to protect it and he used a twisted mind set to get to that decision sadly.

Hopefully the authorities will deal with guy properly and I personally hope he does some time in jail for his actions. If anyone owns a gun they must make absolutely sure of what they are about to do before pulling that trigger. Responsibility is an after thought for some people.

Just in general to this thread, I am with Garbageman on this. My question is why is the bred in "instinct" to be herding ok for this breed. Yet when a pit uses its bred in "instinct" to kill or maul a person, well that's just the way it was raised and it is not the dog to blame but the owner. I had a beagle as a kid and the farmer down the road stopped by one day complaining about my dog killing his chickens. We swore up and down he was never out of the yard and would never do such a thing. Then one day the farmer showed up with the dog catcher (yes that is how long ago it was) they had come for my dog. I was sure he had not even left the yard that day but when I called him he had chicken feathers in his mouth. Now his instinct was to chase rabbits , but it seemed he loved chicken (they say they taste the same).

I can remember a similar incident from my childhood Grandnapper. Two of our neighbor's dogs chased and brutally killed one of my dad's calves, our livelihood. He went to the neighbor's house to talk to him about it. There were the two dogs with bloody faces. The neighbor went inside his house, brought out a gun and killed both of them. They were his pets, but he knew that was our paycheck, he did what he had to do.

More and more people are moving to rural areas. The first thing they do is get a couple of dogs and let them roam for exercise, these animals know no boundaries. It's terrible that these dogs got out of their yard and got in with the neighbor's sheep.

I have owned a herding dog, they love their job. However, untrained herding dogs are nothing but trouble for people with livestock. They chase for sport, it was only a matter of time for these sheep.

I am very sorry this tragedy happened, I'm sorry for the man that killed them and certainly sorry for the family that lost their beloved pets.

The bottom line here is, it's the dogs owner's responsibility to keep his (herding) dogs away from the neighbor's livestock. If my cattle get out on the highway and someone hits them and dies, it's MY liability. I know this won't be a popular post but, it is what it is.

All those that are saying this is justified please go the nbc10 and watch the video of the DA being interviewed. He states that according to Mr. Pilottis most current police interview the dogs were not in the sheeps pen and were no where near the sheep. He states that even though they were not anywhere near the sheep he still opted to shoot Argus in the face as he calmly trotted towards Mr Polotti, he was not rushing him, he was not herding the sheep, he was outside the fenced in area and no threat to Mr. Pilotti or the sheep. He then reloaded and shot Fiona in the back as she ran from the property in fear. I understand protecting your livestock but this was not the case and cooler heads should have prevailed. That is why he is facing charges. Please do the research before you speak to a situation you know nothing about.

Wow; I shoot first?....what happenned to warning first? he should have come to the owner and remind him to make sure the dogs stay leashed; he could have warned that he would shoot them if he see the dogs are harrassing his sheep; he is just an example of irresponsability with a firearm.

even if the we feel treated inside one's home, the law always expect you to do anything in your possibility to deflect the treat, The law does not spell it for you but prosecution will come hard on you on those other choices, even if there are no duty to retreat; other possibilities includes warning and it is for one's credit, unless your life is in inminent danger. Its hard decision but prosecutors would taer your case appart as that is their job so one have to be protected not only with the law but with common sense on top!

I shoot first says a lot of this guy; that was not a war zone, those were domestic pet and there are people around.

He can probably walk out with a good lawyer but what he did is repudiable and I hope it haunts him for the rest of his life; there was no need to shoot those animals, at least not from the information we are getting from this article.

What a stupid dick. There are many whom think like him.Shoot anything that might threaten their stock. Does this mean I can shoot your livestock for busting the fence into my yard?

@thoble 6, Thanks for the followup, but I was not able to corroborate your comment in1.48. I went back to nbc10 and did not see any video of the prosecutor making that statement! Again I ask for your proof. I was able to find 2 written pdf files one of which I believe is what you were referring to yesterday. One is the Police Criminal Complaint and the other is a press release from yesterday 2/22/2013 that was from the DA! Neither have anything in it saying that "HE ADMITS" that the dogs were not chasing his sheep! here are the links: media.nbcphiladelphia.com/documents/Charges+in+Dog+Killings.pdf and media.nbcphiladelphia.com/documents/Complaint3.pdf They were on the side of one of the articles about this case, again, the owner of the dogs is on the video saying they were chasing the sheep! You keep offering proof that is not validating your comments! Sorry my mind hasn't changed, as your proof of your comments hasn't been found by me. Just because someone is charged with a crime doesn't mean that they are guilty of it until they are in fact found guilty!

@Ian1884691, comment 1.50, I have responded to the fact that they were at large in violation of PA laws, and just because a fence is down, legally they are responsible for keeping their dogs secured or under their control. The owners would be liable for any damage while they are at large, no matter the circumstances of how they got loose, the legal point is that the owners are in violation of that law. Read comment 1.23 that has the PA. Code and the link to the PA codes. Again I ask, if a dog escapes from your control and injures or kills a kid, do you think it matters how the dog was at large or simply that you did not have control of your dog? If it injures another pet, , who do you think is responsible? It doesn't matter what the circumstances for them being at large, you would be at fault!

@WyNot We have open range laws where I live and it is up to the landowner to build a fence to keep animals from trespassing, this is one of those laws: "25-2118. Animals on open range -- No duty to keep from highway
No person owning, or controlling the possession of, any domestic animal running on open range, shall have the duty to keep such animal off any highway on such range, and shall not be liable for damage to any vehicle or for injury to any person riding therein, caused by a collision between the vehicle and the animal. "Open range" means all unenclosed lands outside of cities, villages and herd districts, upon which cattle by custom, license, lease, or permit, are grazed or permitted to roam." Another one specifically talks of cattle breaking through your fence:

"Any person having a field of [or] enclosure with a "lawful fence" as described in chapter 1, title 35, **** Code, entirely surrounding the field or enclosure shall have a special lien upon, and may take up any domestic livestock such as cattle, horses, mules, donkeys, sheep, goats or other domestic livestock which break into the enclosure. The lien will include the care and feeding of the livestock and other charges as provided for in chapter 23, title 25, **** Code, in relation to estrays. The lien is not dependent upon possession. It may be perfected by following the provisions of this chapter which are required of the lien claimant."

More PA law at: law.psu.edu/_file/aglaw/Dog_Law.pdf go to the third and fourth page to see the law on Rights of farmers when dogs pursue or attack Livestock.............

garbageman-2736857

@Ian1884691, comment 1.50, I have responded to the fact that they were at large in violation of PA laws, and just because a fence is down, legally they are responsible for keeping their dogs secured or under their control. The owners would be liable for any damage while they are at large, no matter the circumstances of how they got loose, the legal point is that the owners are in violation of that law. Read comment 1.23 that has the PA. Code and the link to the PA codes. Again I ask, if a dog escapes from your control and injures or kills a kid, do you think it matters how the dog was at large or simply that you did not have control of your dog? If it injures another pet, , who do you think is responsible? It doesn't matter what the circumstances for them being at large, you would be at fault!

#1.61

garbageman-2736857

@urq196, Again I say, These dogs were pets of the herding variety,not actual working herd dogs! Just because a dog is in the herder family does not exonerate them from chasing and killing livestock, especially if they aren't trained to be herd dogs! They might actually chase them because it is part of their instincts, but not know how to do it properly

#1.47

kattlekween

I can remember a similar incident from my childhood Grandnapper. Two of our neighbor's dogs chased and brutally killed one of my dad's calves, our livelihood. He went to the neighbor's house to talk to him about it. There were the two dogs with bloody faces. The neighbor went inside his house, brought out a gun and killed both of them. They were his pets, but he knew that was our paycheck, he did what he had to do.

More and more people are moving to rural areas. The first thing they do is get a couple of dogs and let them roam for exercise, these animals know no boundaries. It's terrible that these dogs got out of their yard and got in with the neighbor's sheep.

I have owned a herding dog, they love their job. However, untrained herding dogs are nothing but trouble for people with livestock. They chase for sport, it was only a matter of time for these sheep.

I am very sorry this tragedy happened, I'm sorry for the man that killed them and certainly sorry for the family that lost their beloved pets.

The bottom line here is, it's the dogs owner's responsibility to keep his (herding) dogs away from the neighbor's livestock. If my cattle get out on the highway and someone hits them and dies, it's MY liability. I know this won't be a popular post but, it is what it is.

#1.54

Keep up the good work Garbageman, but I am afraid you are fighting a losing battle. (You too Kattlekween)

Most of these people commenting here are ignorant, selfish city dwellers who have never had any experience with anything other than the family fish, cat or dog. They are completely ignorant of true animal behavior, which why they are "SHOCKED" when a dog attacks a kid or another dog, etc.

And as you mentioned, (I have not found anything yet to confirm it), But was this guys neighbor's animals attacked by dogs, just a few months ago? Did he not shoot said dogs, for his neighbor?

If I were to look out my window and see two dogs in the pen (even if they were "playfully" or "pretend" herding, how am I to know this?) with my animals, knowing how quickly they can kill a small animal, You better believe I am going to shoot first. {And really, who is the moron who tried to compare this with 'children'? REALLY, That is just stupid} And I am going to shoot to be lethal (humane) as quickly as possible. I am not going to allow(fire warning shots) them to run off, so that they may return at night to finish the job.

And remember people KEEP THIS SH...STUFF in perspective, these are Dogs. Mere animals, to attach any more value to them, is simple wrong. You people need to get a grip on reality.

Connecticut State Rep. Diana Urban proposed the bill, known as HB 6310, "An Act Concerning Animal Advocates in Court Proceedings."

For Christ sake, (pardon my taking the Lord's name in vain, but) We need to have a serious reality check. First off, ANIMALS HAVE NO, (NONE, ZERO, NADA, LACKING ALL, KEINE,) RIGHTS and therefore need no representation in court. Animal Rights is a figment of the Liberals mind and agenda. As much as I love a good dog, they after all, are only animals. And that people are showing such an emotional attachment to an ANIMAL, is quite frankly, disturbing.

A cow does not know it is cow and dog doesn't know it is a dog. There is no self awareness.

You people are suffering from what they call a severe case of "Cranial Rectolitis" or "Cranial Rectosis"

*Cranial Rectosis: 1. n. A condition noted by behaving in such a puerile, obnoxious, and moronic manner as to have one's head up his or her ass. Note that things are dark and smelly for someone with this condition.
2. When someone is severely afflicted to the point that his or her shoulders are two-blocked against the buttocks, this is known as "perpendicular cranial rectosis."

The sad thing is, it is contagious among liberals. When conservatives are exposed to it, it can cause "Optical Rectosis" or "Optical Rectalitis" which gives us a shi++y outlook. *The symptoms are everywhere - too much government, failed corporations, discredited government officials and executives, corporate bailouts, public dishonesty, abuse of power, superficial strategies, and failed initiatives.

*courtesy of the Urban Dictionary

Maybe if you all pull your heads out, you might get a fresh perspective.

Oh. and you Dog lovers out there, do me a favor, keep your dogs from barking. Much like a crying baby it may not bother you, but it annoys the hell out of me.

@dumbfarmboy, It is written in this link about shooting the other dogs[pit bulls]when they killed llamas and sheep and shown in a video: nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Man-Shoots-Kills-Neighbors-Dogs-But-Wont-be-Charged-Cops-192185311.html

I hope they take his sheep away so he will not shoot any other dogs. I'd say take his guns away and I knowthat would never happen.

Both parties were at fault, the dogs' owner for not keeping them off the shooter's property and the shooter for killing them.

I think I'd move somewhere else if my neighbor was that trigger happy. As for the dogs, those particular animals might have been gentle, but plenty of people are attacked by dogs. It's up to the owner to control his pets at all times.

And remember people KEEP THIS SH...STUFF in perspective, these are Dogs. Mere animals, to attach any more value to them, is simple wrong. You people need to get a grip on reality.

Wow... we kind of agree on something, DumbFarmBoy!!

I've had dogs and understand how their owners get attached to them, but I have to say I'm appalled at the American obsession with dogs. People have had dogs that killed children and they didn't want to put them down. Some people feed and care for their dogs better than they feed and care for their kids.

Dogs are animals and while they should be treated humanely, they are not equal to human beings.

Girlfriends? I was guessing he was pimping them.

zoofilia lover, hahahahahaha...

Pennsylvania? sheep? You might be right he damn sure was not socializing with his neighbors was he!

Airborne, that is BAAAADDDD :-)

I agree! We need to make animal cruelty laws MUCH more severe!

Animals are like people's children. Can you imagine the outrage if he had shot the guy's kids?

he is a happy triger, NRA beloved son...

I for one, would shoot first. I know I will get nailed for this but for one year I could not safely go into my back yard in a residential area because the neighbor, a so called animal lover who was never home had one nasty dog who kept getting loose and charging at me. I have called the police three times after I was charged by this nasty dog. Please, if you are a pet owner of any kind, control your pets. I'm not talking about a good pet owner who's dog got loose once in ten years, I am referring to those whose pets are constantly let loose, untrained and downright nasty.

baco NRA does not condone irresponsability go and spill your hate somewhere else POS!

@stonepipe: Hmmm...you weren't there....how about you go there and find out exactly how Mr. Pilotti implements his "shoot first" policy? There's a difference between "devil's advocate" and one d-bag defending another d-bag.

Sorry but anyone that knows enough to own a herd of sheep would know those dogs are herders - not predators. My aunt and uncle have a huge flock of sheep and purposely have two Bernese to protect them from predators.

My thought wasn't that the dogs were chasing or herding the sheep since he shot the first in the head with a shotgun. That is a close range shot. Did he go outside see the dogs and then the dogs walked up to him. Is that how he got the head shot in? Not enough info in the story to know. I do think this may be probable since when law enforcement went back out to investigate, the evidence didn't fit the story that had been told.

Garbage man, There was a strong storm that came through that areas overnight and a tree came down and damaged the fence in the back yard of the dogs owners, the owners were unaware of the damage and let them out. They were out a total of 5 minutes when the owner noticed they were gone and started looking for them. They were killed after being loose for a total of 15 minutes. The owners also had an invisible fence in the fornt yard that they would have used had they known about the damage. Please learn more before you pass judgement. I have followed this story for a week and have read the police reports he is guilty!

They were out for 5 minutes before being killed after being loose for 15 minutes, how did the shooter even know they were on his property in the middle of the night? ?

They were not near the sheep G Man. Matter of fact, I would like to meet the man that can hit a dog in the head with a shotgun that is actively chasing sheep.

The only way that could happen, is if the dogs did not see the man as a threat and were either walking up to him, or were already by him when he shot the male in the head. Then for good measure, he shot the fleeing female. Sure doesn't sound like they were dining on any sheep to me.

Also, you're not being censored. You're being collapsed because you're just pasting the same thing over and over.

Lastly, just because you make a statement, doesn't mean it's automatically a valid one.

gargageman: Follow the links in the updated story, and you'll see the papers the DA filed:

http : //media.nbcphiladelphia.com/documents/Charges+in+Dog+Killings.pdf

Remove the extra spaces before and after the ':' above ...

This document has more details:

http : //media.nbcphiladelphia.com/documents/Complaint3.pdf

A previous poster forgot the 's' at the end of 'documents' ...

Let's be honest, here.

He had options. 1) Call local animal control or police, if he's afraid the dogs are dangerous. 2) Go outside and secure the livestock, and call enforcement to pick up the dogs. 3) Go outside and take possession of the dogs, and return them to his neighbors. 4) Go outside and fire his shotgun, to scare the dogs off (he could then call enforcement or neighbors to go look for the dogs). 5) Start by shooting the first dog, and then let the other run away. 6) Be determined that you're gonna shoot both of your neighbor's dogs from the start, 'cause they're on your property, and you know your rights. F*ck the neighbors, you'll show 'em who's boss.

I know it's really tough to know who the neighbors are when you have a massive 4 acre spread to contend with. *sarcasm intended*

I grew up in a rural area, and am all too aware of the one or two gun happy neighbors who are constantly looking for excuses to shoot at something, and whose proximity makes their behavior a constant worry and danger to those families around them. Please tell me this fruitcake doesn't have a rifle.

After having roofers chased off of a relative's house, and bullets whizzing by while trying to swim in our pool because of a neighbor's supposed "hunting", my sympathies lie with the rational neighbors.

Hopefully he won't take any more potshots directed at somebody's house, driveway, or swingset. Justify it all you want, the guy's a sh*tty neighbor. Just because the Pennsylvania laws in this regard are ancient and highly supportive of you killing anything on your property, doesn't mean you're not a creep.

...a country run by the United States of NRA...

NRA...

The NRA is a

Place to learn firearms safety:

http://training.nra.org/

Place for Law Enforcement training and competitions:

http://le.nra.org/

Place to see the National Firearms Museum:

http://www.nramuseum.org/the-guns/featured-guns.aspx

Place to train for the Olympics:

http://www.usashooting.org/membership/youth-programs/youthrifle

Place to go to purchase a WWII M-1 Garand Rifle through the Civilian Marksmanship Program:

http://www.odcmp.com/

.

Instead of blindly bashing an organization you know nothing about, shall we have a real discussion on what seem to be the commonalities and causes of these school shooting tragedies?

.

Bull excrement... I own guns and have never shot first. This guy was a moron and a d-bag for what he did. His action do not represent the majority.

I think you need to re-read your law book concerning when you are able to use deadly force. Your comment "Anyone who sets foot on anyone else's property without knocking or making eye contact first can be legally shot." is totally incorrect in every way. If you want to be a armchair lawyer try reading about the subject first..

Stephen & Gary, gentlemen, I answered the last question of "a guy from Seattle' - not his entire statement - sorry - I should have cut and paste in quotation marks. Yes, the NRA offers solid programs, yes the jerk needs to re-read the details of a persons ability to use deadly force. Look around you - Martin case, several cases in CA, Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, movie theaters, shopping centers, drive-by shootings, shooting in the antique store by a patron unhappy with her layaway terms, , all the other asinine ways people have used guns in just the last several months and now these dead pets. Been around guns all my life. Taught respectful and safe usage of them as well. As with any organization - you have folks who act and think from all walks of life. That said, it appears to me and strictly my opinion, the NRA is currently led by some yahoos - leaders who stand in their first news conference regarding Sandy Hook, gun control, etc. etc. etc. and state that armed guards should be placed on every single school campus in these United States. Gary...THAT is Bull excrement. Stephen - no blinding bashing on my part. How exactly do you test for 'stupid' as this jerk surely would have passed the test in flying colors. SOMETHING HAS GOT TO GIVE. Strictly my opinion and I stand by my explanation and post. Thank you.

Rocket Dog --- you are right on! There are yahoos throughout our society and, unfortunately, they all have access to guns. I'm not sure how one "tests" for sanity, and I certainly don't know how to keep guns out of the hands of someone who is just generally pissedoff and wants to take their anger out on some poor, unsuspecting being (either human or animal). The NRA does itself no favors by being so pig-headed. They could actually end up as heroes if they put on their big-boy pants, stopped whining, and pushed for the consistent enforcement of existing gun laws and the strengthening of gun ownership requirements (such as firearms safety training every 4 years, and firearms qualifying every 2 years). Just sayin"

when you are able to use deadly force

Sadly, too many people do not understand the term 'deadly force'.

the NRA is currently led by some yahoos - leaders who stand in their [sic] first

Do you know why that is?

Because the leadership of the NRA are not politicians to begin with. They never were, actually until people with names you never heard of like "Metzenbaum". began to really push for the abolition of the Second Amendment.

So, give them a break; they haven't been at it that long.

.

Look around you - Martin case, several cases in CA, Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, movie theaters, shopping centers, drive-by shootings, shooting in the antique store by a patron unhappy with her layaway terms, , all the other asinine ways people have used guns in just the last several months and now these dead pets.

You have these sentiments because you are only seeing what the media wants you to see.

So far, in the time since the tragedy in Connecticut, NBC has shrieked like a stuck pig every time someone is hurt by a firearm. The whole nation hears of it in bloody detail.

Here is what I believe to be a legitimate question to be asked:

Do you believe that, if you were exposed daily to the traffic accidents in a 20 mile radius of where you live; I mean the accident scenes, the rush to ER, the drama of losing a life, the unimaginable suffering of the loved ones....do you think constant media exposure of these tragedies would be a public service?"

.

And, now back to Revolver.

.

The album, not the firearm.

Stephen - agree with you on several points - the media drives the country, the attitude and 'reality'(LOL). That said, we are a violent society and boy oh boy does bloodshed sell.

I cut the leaders of the NRA absolutely no quarter. None. Zip. Nada. Respectuflly, the NRA is definitely political - one of the largest most powerful lobbiest groups on the country. If they are leaders - they better damn well lead and know their stuff. To stand before the country and state what they do? Seriously? An armed guard, on every campus, paid for by the US government. Seriously. I cut them not a single quarter. As Wiley in CA posted above, "They could actually end up as heroes if they put on their big-boy pants, stopped whining, and pushed for the consistent enforcement of existing gun laws and the strengthening of gun ownership requirements (such as firearms safety training every 4 years, and firearms qualifying every 2 years).. He would have had my support as a senior spokeperson. He lost his opportunity...just as these pets did....the leader of the NRA 'shot first'....dumb move. John Q Public is left stepping over bodies and animals. Really damn dumb. A total waste of an amazing opportunity to really LEAD with common sense and knowledge, i.e. gonna take a seriously look in OUR house as well as tell you what is wrong with YOURS. PS - Revolver is a great....enjoy.

Steven B, you have GREAT taste in music,too! :) And I agree with everything you noted. The Media is a Liberal sheep! It only follows what progressives/Libs want to hear and wants the rest of us to follow.

Steven B., LaPierre STILL works as a government activist and lobbyist since receiving a M.A. from Boston College. He started working for the National Rifle Association in 1978 as a state liaison in the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). In a 1995 National Rifle Association fundraising letter, LaPierre called federal law enforcement agents 'jack-booted thugs,' and suggested that 'In Clinton's Administration, if you have a badge, you have the government's go-ahead to harass, intimidate, even murder law-abiding citizens,' and that 'Not too long ago, it was unthinkable for federal agents wearing Nazi helmets and black storm trooper uniforms to attack law-abiding citizens.' President George H.W. Bush resigned his NRA membership in protest of the letter, in part, saying, NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre's description of federal agents as " `wearing Nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms' (and) wanting to `attack law-abiding citizens' is a vicious slander on good people." Btw, I wouldn't call someone (LaPierre) who has been with the NRA for 35 YEARS as someone 'who hasn't been at it for 'that long,' unless you're talking 'dog years.'

Jeepgal, kinda difficult to say 'mass media' is 'Liberal,' when Fox News is always crowing how THEY are at the top of said 'mass media.'

Seriously? An armed guard, on every campus, paid for by the US government.

A horrible idea. Ill-presented and not really what is needed.

What is needed is better surveillance and restricted, single point of access schools. Allowing those teachers who already have CCW permits to carry completely concealed is not a bad idea either.

"They could actually end up as heroes if they put on their big-boy pants, stopped whining, and pushed for the consistent enforcement of existing gun laws and the strengthening of gun ownership requirements (such as firearms safety training every 4 years, and firearms qualifying every 2 years)..

The NRA has been asking for the enforcement of the existing laws forever.

Since the NICS system was instituted in the early 90's , thousands of people have been denied after filling out Federal Form 4473:

http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf

Virtually ZERO of these people have been investigated for possible prosecution.

If you've viewed the form, doesn't this bother you?

.

.

#5.10

Thank you for the biography. He's one person, and he's demonized at every step. I imagine he's a father and has children he loves, just like anyone else. By the way, where did you obtain the information on LaPierre? I didn't see a source.

Do you know any of the other NRA leaders, past or present? Some were big war heroes, some big actors, some brilliant men in their time.

Today tens of millions of people with firearms did nothing wrong.

.

Makes one wonder, though, how many shootings we don't hear about. The NRA is making sure of it.

The NRA liberal media is making sure of it.

http://gunssavelives.net/

.

I don't think they'll bother him too much since he has a firearm at the ready.

Toosano: Yeah, because clearly the shoot first mentality is working out for him. And he'd be in no way worse trouble, if he were to even think about brandishing a shotgun at a human, unless they were attempting to inflict bodily harm, or b & e in the middle of the night. Even then, if the intruder were to be shot in the act of fleeing, there'd likely be consequences to that as well.

No i think by law if he is convicted he has to give his guns up so he will not have a gun legally that is

The community has been very outspoken and he will have issues in the community from here on out! Please check our Justice for Argus & Fiona on Facebook!

@Walt: If he's convicted of a federal crime, he automatically loses the right to own/bear arms, except for black powder. That's simply a side affect of being convicted of a felony. The conviction of whatever laws broken, would also carry their own penalties, be they jail time or fines, or both.

He can have it expunged from his record depending on State law, and therefore allowed to carry firearms again, but it typically costs in excess of 2000 (depending on the State, of course. In vermont it's ~2 grandish)

Absolutely agree, my mother originally bred Bouvier des Flanders for quite some time, but when I was in the mid-late teens she opted for a Bernese because they're a very friendly, yet calm dog. Ours was awesome, and I don't think I ever saw it attack other animals.

I could understand if the dog is actually harming your livestock, I completely understand that. But to just straight up shoot them without cause? That's twisted. Sounds like a bitter old man. Hope they burn him for it.

They broke into the sheep pen. That's where they were shot. Think he did have cause.

Clearly he didn't, if the reports of forensic examination are to be believed. Hence the reason he's been charged a few days after the crime. You should read more, a flawed understanding of the legal system can certainly cause you problems in the future.

Or it's the Police appeasing the publics outrage.

Jim Burrill they do not know how the dogs got in. There was no damage to the sheeps fence where they could have broken in. The dogs were not able to jump the fence due to the height and the size of the dogs. We do not know right now how the dogs got in and that is actually a sticking point we are trying to figure out. There is some speculation he let them in to trap them but it is not confirmed.

@Tangeant2: Entirely true, though the Police would risk serious repercussions if they were lying publicly about zero signs of danger to the sheep themselves. Either way, he's probably going to be completely ostracized from his neighborhood, and find living in that area difficult at best. Not that anyone would necessarily physically harm him (though people from all over the country may harass him via phone and online). But simply being shunned from by the rest of the community.

I'd hold him for ya!

I would personally like to beat this stupid old son of a bitch to death.

For being a stupid ass who killed two dogs??

.

Please let me have the first punch! I have shown dogs for 45+ years and have never seen an aggressive Bernise Mountain Dog. I very much doubt these dogs were harrassing the sheep. (I have owned sheep as well, they spook very easily, but if the moron bothered to read their actions, he would have realized his sheep were in no danger!)

Gotta love people:( ha

In the links I gave earlier, the police report indicated that the male dog approached the neighbor in a non-threatening way. Yes, that was the shooter's assessment -- yet he shot it point blank in the head. He reloaded and shot the female dog as it ran away. I get the feeling this guy likes to kill dogs, even friendly dogs. I'm at a loss for words.

Michael-38....

Sounds like you need to register your fists and have a sanity test.

Ditto.

Toosano...most reasonable comment I've read heretofore...

Replace the bodys cost but what about the feelings, the memories, can you replace whit $2,000 dollars ?

My feeling exactly zoob. Luck he isn't in the hospital. Any charges would be welcomed to put this piece of trash where he belongs.

Why ruin your own life by letting your ego get in the way? Hit him where it really hurts, his pocket. Now that he's been charged, the civil suit is that much easier to make. With a little effort and a good lawyer, he's likely to suffer more at the hands of the courts more than you ever could do in 10 minutes.

@GatorChE beating his ass is not for him its for me !!

Warren,

I find the guy as loathsome as the next person--so I get the visceral desire to beat the ever luvin crap out him. Seriously, do you believe that such 'self-sacrifice' is in your best interest (or society's)? There are other ways to make this guy's life total hell and still be within the law. It just takes more planning. In the end, the satisfaction would be that much better.

The dogs got out by accident. These people obviously love their dogs enough to not let them run wild.

Dogs aren't People.

@tangeant

Very astute, however the house is this psychopaths overzealous line of fire contained multiple humans. While i don't think the guy should be shot in the head, he should be placed somewhere safe to protect the rest of society from him, like prison for 10 or 15 years. Make an example out of him for reckless use of a firearm.

tangeant2 - no dogs aren't people - they are much better than people these days.

I chase neighbor dogs from my horse corral all the time when they get in there and I haven't ever had to shoot one. That's not to say I wouldn't if I saw one actually chasing and attacking the horse. It was determined that was not the case here. He deserves what he gets!

Airborne Dad - you did read that he had had to shoot two pit bulls a few months earlier because they did - in fact - kill several sheep and a llama? That was reported int he original news story. With that history, you hear you sheep going nuts and see two more dogs in the pen chasing them... Yeah, I think he probably had cause. While they are chasing the flock is not the time to try to figure out what breed they are, or if they had collars - would that really make any difference? - You save your livestock.

Shooting what you know to be the neighbor's dogs is an appropriate response?

I grew up around livestock and have seen what dogs and other predators can do.

My grandfather never found it necessary to shoot the neighbor's dog when he (a German Shepard) got into the chicken coop and slaughtered almost every bird. He simply leashed the dog, returned it to his neighbor and presented a bill for the dead chickens. The neighbor apologized and paid the bill.

Jim,

Did YOU read the current article? The police reported that when he shot the dogs, they were not actively chasing any livestock. One was standing in front of him and the other was running away (after he shot the first).

@ jim

Yep, and you put the words dog and livestock and every farmer turns into rambo. BTW, slight difference between pit bulls and mountain dogs.

Jim, The owner who said that Gabe said "I shoot first" was quoting a voicemail Gabe left on a neighbors answering machine the day he shot the dogs so he did quote the man. Gabe also said this to the cops and it is in his statement to the police that led to charges. The dogs according to Gabe's statement werer not chasing the sheep when he shot them. Argus was trotting over to Gabe and was no where near the sheep when he shot him in the face at point blank range. Fiona was running scared away from gabe and the sheep towards her home when he shot her in the back of the head. They were of no threat when he shot them and could have easily been removed from the pen with no lives lost. This is all according to the statement to the police the Gabe gave. I have read it.

And yet, cars and alcohol kill people in numbers that dwarf firearms homicide.

.

But, don't let the FACTS stand in your way.

.

Jack,

Assuming from your comment you are a responsible gun owner too. I couldn't agree more. It's morons like this guy that keep giving us a bad name!

@Steven B Hey, Steve, before you go off quoting from the NRA Handbook again let me just point out something. People do indeed die in cars, but they are called "accidents" for a reason. People do die from alcohol but they do it to themselves and most of them don't intend to die from it. Guns were invented to kill people.... DELIBERATELY. Comparing victims of gun violence to accident victims or those who die from substance abuse is completely illogical. Believing everything the NRA tells you is more than illogical... it's stupid.

Mountainlady,

A gun is a tool. Nothing more. Used appropriately and responsibly it makes our lives safer and more enjoyable. Targeting the tool and not the user (and the reasons these people misuse guns) is why we have these problems. Murders will still be murderers, psychopaths will still be psychopaths, and gangs will still be gangs. With or without guns, they will still commit their crimes.

If this guy didn't have access to a gun, he would have found another way to kill these dogs.

@Steven B Hey, Steve, before you go off quoting from the NRA Handbook again let me just point out something. People do indeed die in cars, but they are called "accidents" for a reason.

Yes, they are called "accidents". But the legal term is "crash".

We have sterilized the phrase, now so routine as you listen to your radio that you've immunized yourself from the tragedy that takes place when someone isn't paying attention and causes a fatality 'accident'.

Are you telling me that, as a responsible adult (a presumption on my part) "I wasn't paying attention" is a reason to kill people?

I can assure you, how someone dies unexpectedly and suddenly has no impact on the grief of the loss.

.

Guns were invented to kill people.... DELIBERATELY.

My firearms haven't killed anyone. Are they defective?

Sadly, I must assume that you have probably never held a firearm, let alone operate one.

.

before you go off quoting from the NRA Handbook

No, the only NRA literature I see pertains to the safe use, care and storage of firearms. Oh, and information about local area competitions (including those for law enforcement types).

I retrieved this information from places like:

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6089353/ns/health-addictions/t/alcohol-linked-us-deaths-year/

and

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1103.pdf

.

Feel more like you can trust these sources?

Mountanlady, and the yearly average of over 9000 people killed each year in drunk driving crashes - those were accidents? No, these are not accidents. These are intentional criminal acts. No different than shooting randomly into a park and hitting a kid, killing them. They may not have ment to shoot the kid, but they intentionally pulled the trigger. Just like the drunk driver did not intentionally mean to kill the father and his five year old, but they intentionally got behind the wheel impaired.

What a jerk! Why in the heck didn't he just call or go over to his neighbor's place to let them know their dogs were loose and in his yard. I swear, people are becoming stranger and stranger every day!!!

airborne_DAD - so what are the solutions proposed by responsible gun owners? Gun owners, responsible and otherwise, don't like any of the suggestions the rest of us come up with so - what are responsible gun owners willing to do to help keep the rest of us safe? I'm not being sarcastic - I really want some workable solutions that the majority of people on both sides of the issue can maybe get behind and actually accomplish something.

Impressive.

Are you one of those "understanding, tolerance and inclusion" liberals I've read so much about?

.

Steve we get it, you love your guns.

I'd be willing to bet more than half the people posting here would be happy to "take your guns from your cold dead hands".

.

Steve we get it, you love your guns freedom.

[ignore death-wish]

.

Garbageman

Everything you have said, is true and to the point. It's sad the dogs were shot. However my father raised sheep and he shot, what turned out to be a pet dog, but when the man retrieved his pet, its mouth was full of wool. Two dogs may unintentionaly cause harm to sheep, in a four acre lot, by the fear they generate among sheep. The sheep owner, chose the best defence for his sheep. A 72 year old is abit more limited in their responce.

Daniel, garbageman there is no use arguing with people that won't listen and only want to condemn because the man shot 2 dogs. I am an avid dog and cat lover and I also work for the municipal animal shelter in my area. I can tell you the majority of states have leash laws, that means even out in the country your dog is to be confined to your yard or on a leash at all times!! That farmers are allowed to shoot your dog if the animal is doing any harm to the livestock, that includes even chasing or harrassing it. I had a gentleman 3 yrs in a row have various dogs come on to his property and kill all of his sheep!!The livestock that are killed by dogs is the livelihood of the farmer and now that person has lost part of their income due to the dogs killing or stressing the livestock. Yes you are responsible if your dog goes off of your property and does damages to another that is part of the responsibilities of being a dog owner. Yes it is a shame two lovely dogs were killed but the dog owners must take responsibility for allowing the dogs to get out of the yard.