Delete comment from: The War on Guns
Follow this and I quote:
"There is no evidence to suggest the officer confused the hunter with an animal," Hunter said.
I didn't know the officer was hunting that day. Or was he and was told to get off the private property. The officer felt that he could do any darn thing he wanted and the old man told him he would shoot him if he didn't get off his private property so the officer killed him for that. Being the head guy said the officer was hunting I bet the property owner was out protrolling his property to keep the hunters away.
I'll quote on:
"It appears, from all information gathered, the officer was protecting himself. And I don't know any further details than that."
So the officer was protecting himself. Which makes it clear he was hunting and was told to get off the private property. He refused and the old man said get off or I'll shoot you. The pig killed him and knowing there's only one side to the story.
If this pig was hunting its clear he wanted to hunt on private property and refused to leave and the situation got out of control.
Anyone want to bet on this one?
first:
Apr 14, 2009, 10:32:00 PM