Vicious Dog Attack Thwarted By....Armed Citizens!

[Richard G]

Ponder this, then ask yourself how long it would take the police to arrive:

By SEAN C. LEDIG sledig@tampatrib.com
Published: Feb 1, 2003
TAMPA - Teresa Castellano knows that some folks saved her life. She just doesn't know who they are.

Castellano, 25, her daughter, Alysa McBride, 6, and her daughter's friend, Kaitlyn Green, 8, survived a recent attack from two Rottweilers and a pit bull.

It is an amazing story of horror and heroism.

Castellano said it began while she was watching the girls at Kaitlyn's home on Jan. 18. Kaitlyn's father, Sean Green, had stepped out for 10 minutes to run an errand.

Castellano, of Land O' Lakes, said she and the girls laughed at something on television, and that apparently sparked the dogs to start barking and growling. She soon realized the dogs were not playing, and she sensed it might get worse.

She asked the girls to quiet down so the dogs would relax.

It never happened.

The dogs attacked.

``When [the Rottweilers] saw the fear, one of them started biting Kaitlyn,'' Castellano said. ``I told them to stop screaming because they were making the dogs upset.''

Castellano said she laid on the girls to try and protect them from the dogs. She then tried to block the dogs to give the girls a chance to escape to a bedroom.

Nothing was working. The Rottweilers were going wild.

So Castellano and the girls bolted outside the house at 8126 Bay Drive. The girls ran to safety in a neighbor's house while Castellano distracted the dogs. The pit bull, Petey, joined in the attack.

The commotion outside attracted the attention of neighbors and a motorist passing by.

John M. Anderson and his wife were in their car and leaving a friend's house nearby when they passed by and saw three dogs attacking Castellano, according to a Hillsborough County sheriff's report. Anderson drove into the driveway and began blasting the horn and yelling out the window, trying to scare the dogs and allow Castellano to get into the car.

It seemed to work. The dogs stopped biting Castellano, but she couldn't make it to his car.

Anderson, 22, was about to get out of his car when he looked over his shoulder and saw a man toting a pistol. He kept honking his horn and sped away to get his friend, Justin Turner, who lived nearby.

The man with gun was Winston H. Harr, a next-door neighbor. He had heard screaming outside and grabbed his Kimber .45-caliber pistol. His wife, Deborah, came, too.

Harr said he saw Anderson's car moving back and forth in the driveway, and three dogs attacking a woman. Harr fired three shots into the ground to try and scare the dogs. They screamed at the dogs, but it didn't seem to matter. Deborah Harr called the dogs by name, and they stopped momentarily.

Then, without warning, the dogs charged at Harr. The pit bull bit him on the leg before Harr trained his pistol and fired, hitting the dog in the head. He also fired at one of the Rottweilers, and it fell to the ground.

Harr, a librarian's assistant at Jimmie B. Keel Regional Library near Carrollwood, said he fired the rest of his bullets at the third dog, and it seemed to back away. He bolted for his house for more ammunition and a flashlight.

Turner, who had heard the screams and was told by Anderson of the attacking dogs, grabbed his Glock .40-caliber pistol and ran to the scene. He was told there were three dogs, and only one was dead.

Turner, 33, told deputies he positioned himself between the wounded Castellano and the Rottweilers. When one of the dogs made a move toward him, he fired. Deputies believe it was his bullet that wounded the dog.

At that point, both Rottweilers retreated into the house.

Also arriving at the scene was neighbor George Lease, a Tampa police detective. Carrying his 9mm pistol, he found Harr and Turner at the house with their guns.

While Deborah Harr and Anderson comforted Castellano, the three armed neighbors searched the house and found the dogs, one wounded and on a couch and other other laying on the living room floor.

The wounded Rottweiler was euthanized later that night at Florida Veterinary Specialists, said Dennis McCullough, an investigator for Hillsborough County Animal Services.

The other Rottweiler was placed under quarantine at Animal Services until Wednesday, when it was euthanized.

Alysa was released from St. Joseph's Hospital on Jan. 26; Castellano remained hospitalized this week due to infections from the bites. Both mother and daughter needed more than 100 stitches each to close the wounds on their bodies.

Kaitlyn's injuries required 20 stitches, said her mother, Jennifer Harvey of Town 'N Country.

Sheriff's spokeswoman Debbie Carter said no one will be charged in the incident.

For Castellano, she said she doesn't know who fired the shots that spared her from the dogs.

``I thank them with all my heart. They saved my life.''

http://carrollwood.tbo.com/carrollwood/MGAIHP0ZMBD.html

 

[iain]

Ah yes, more policy by anecdote. Why bother with data, when we can base all our political opinions on a few anecdotes, selected specifically to support the point we are trying to make?

 

[Richard G]

Because the street, and in homes, is where the rubber meets the road. One can theorize, speculate, and brainstorm all day about policies. A hard sober look at the real world serves us much better.

 

[Denise]

By the way, I agree with Richard. Big surprise I know...

Anyhow, what is with people that keep dogs that have bit their children?

A male coworker of mine says if a dog did that he would take them out hunting. In other words, there would be an "accident" and they would never come back. What is with people these days?

 

[shanek]

Ah yes, more policy by anecdote. Why bother with data, when we can base all our political opinions on a few anecdotes, selected specifically to support the point we are trying to make?

Well, the gun control advocates ignore the statistics, so what else are we left with?

It's still a lot better than the extreme hypothetical examples gun control advocates are forced to resort to, even though they can't point you to any actual examples of it happening.

 

[iain]

Well, the gun control advocates ignore the statistics, so what else are we left with?

It's still a lot better than the extreme hypothetical examples gun control advocates are forced to resort to, even though they can't point you to any actual examples of it happening.

Shanek,
I expected better from you

I'm sure you realise that having different statistics is not the same as ignoring statistics. In these sorts of debates everyone can find some statistics to back up their case and people have to make intelligent decisions as to which are appropriate and accurate. Not easy, but then what is? Trying to claim that your side of the debate have all the "real" statistics and everyone else just ignores them is oversimplistic, as I'm sure you realise.

As for "what else are we left with?" - well words almost fail me. You are saying that because people disagree with some "good" evidence you have presented, that justified trying to present anecdotes as evidence instead.

A cynic might suggest that you've had to fall back on anecdotes because your "good" evidence hasn't been strong enough to convince people. But I wouldn't say that of course.

 

[corplinx]

Some people on this board don't live in "rough" areas. I used to live in an area where pit bulls outnumbered brokerage accounts if you get my drift.

I would see people go for a walk and take a stick. I would laugh inside thinking of what a pit bull or rottweiller would do to their stick.

 

[shanek]

I'm sure you realise that having different statistics is not the same as ignoring statistics.

I mean ignoring statistics—like when I closely examined statistics from a source provided by one of the gun control advocates and demonstrated that they showed the opposite of what he was claiming. That fell on deaf ears.

Or the oft-repeated statistics showing hoe much more often guns are used defensively than they are to commit a crime. The only time gun control advocates don't ignore them is when they use ad hominem attacks against the sources, but they never refute the numbers directly.

And let's not forget the repeated tactic of the gun control advocates to post one anecdotal story after another and then, when we respond in kind as a means of showing balance, get rebuffed for the exact same thing.

It's just like trying to convince woo-woos.

 

[Jedi Knight]

Ponder this, then ask yourself how long it would take the police to arrive:



http://carrollwood.tbo.com/carrollwood/MGAIHP0ZMBD.html

American heroes. That is what they are.

JK

 

[iain]

I mean ignoring statistics—like when I closely examined statistics from a source provided by one of the gun control advocates and demonstrated that they showed the opposite of what he was claiming. That fell on deaf ears.

Or the oft-repeated statistics showing hoe much more often guns are used defensively than they are to commit a crime. The only time gun control advocates don't ignore them is when they use ad hominem attacks against the sources, but they never refute the numbers directly.

And let's not forget the repeated tactic of the gun control advocates to post one anecdotal story after another and then, when we respond in kind as a means of showing balance, get rebuffed for the exact same thing.

It's just like trying to convince woo-woos.

I agree that a pro-gun-control anecdote is no more convincing than an anti-gun control anecdote and I am sure that no more people are convinced.

As for statistics, the opponents of gun control have done just the same thing you are accusing the advocates of. I recall a number of threads a couple of months back on crime in the UK where crime statistics were quoted which I and others showed were either entirely fictitious or completely misinterpreted by the opponents of gun control. I don't recall the opponents of gun control acknowledging this despite being provided with the original official crime statistic sources.

(I think the truth is that gun control has been done to death in this forum. Each side has had their say and then some. Anyone who has followed these debates and still holds a firm view is pretty unlikely to be persuaded otherwise).

 

[OBgac]

A few thoughts from someone who was in the same position a few years ago:

Firstly a quote from above:

"Turner, who had heard the screams and was told by Anderson of the attacking dogs, grabbed his Glock .40-caliber pistol and ran to the scene. He was told there were three dogs, and only one was dead."

Did he have his gun lying around or locked away? If locked away how long did it take to get it? Would he not be faster grabbing something lying around the kitchen/toolshed?

I used a shovel and a coat on a rottweiler once who was attacking (my dog I admit, not a kid ) . The coat was thrown on him to confuse and blind him and the shovel to beat the daylights out of him until he retreated. No shovel? Baseball bat, kitchen rolling pin, big metal cooking pot etc etc.

If the point of this thread is its good to have guns then, I think there must be better examples that this. Brave guy though, no question.

 

[shanek]

As for statistics, the opponents of gun control have done just the same thing you are accusing the advocates of. I recall a number of threads a couple of months back on crime in the UK where crime statistics were quoted which I and others showed were either entirely fictitious or completely misinterpreted by the opponents of gun control. I don't recall the opponents of gun control acknowledging this despite being provided with the original official crime statistic sources.

I think it was more than a couple of months ago, but I did make such an acknowledgement of some statistics I had cited (although if memory serves those were Australian statistics).

(I think the truth is that gun control has been done to death in this forum. Each side has had their say and then some. Anyone who has followed these debates and still holds a firm view is pretty unlikely to be persuaded otherwise).

Well, I at least have tried to bring new information into the subject. It's only when the gun control advocates resort to the same old same old that I have to trot out with the old rebuttals.

 

[shanek]

Did he have his gun lying around or locked away? If locked away how long did it take to get it? Would he not be faster grabbing something lying around the kitchen/toolshed?

Faster, how? Will the few seconds it takes to unlock a gun cabinet really make much of a difference here, especially considering he'd have to get closer to the animals with another instrument? At least with the gun he had a chance of being able to stop the dog from a distance and when the dog did attack him had an efficient means of stopping him.

I used a shovel and a coat on a rottweiler once who was attacking (my dog I admit, not a kid ) . The coat was thrown on him to confuse and blind him and the shovel to beat the daylights out of him until he retreated. No shovel? Baseball bat, kitchen rolling pin, big metal cooking pot etc etc.

I can tell you from experience that none of those will work if the dog is rabid.

 

[Underemployed]

I love anecdotes too! Here's a good one from the Associated press 24/1/03 as seen in the UK publication Private Eye:

"It seems that Raymond Poore Jr telephoned his wife at work, and told her he was going to kill the family dog," a police spokesman told reporters in Winchester, Virginia." She was distraught and begged him not to, because it was only a small dog. But he said the animal had bitten him, and had to die, so he was going to kill it with his shotgun. Then he hung up.

"She rushed home as quickly as she could, expecting to find her beloved pet Shar-Pei dead. But instead, she found her husband lying on the floor unconscious in a pool of blood, with a gunshot through his abdomen, and with the dog standing beside him. She called an ambulance, and he was rushed to Winchester Medical Center, where he was pronounced dead on arrival.

"We have examined the shotgun, and found that the stock of the weapon was damaged, and that there was blood and dog hair on it. At present, we're working on the theory that Mr Poore must have tried to beat the dog to death with the butt end of the gun while holding the barrel. But there was a cartridge in the breach, and he hadn't put the safety catch on, and we presume that the gun must have gone off on impact, fatally injuring him in the process. An animal control officer has now taken custody of the dog, which has a few superficial injuries, but seems otherwise unharmed."

Fewer people are killed by accident than I thought, though.

 

[corplinx]

Fewer people are killed by accident than I thought, though

I am reluctant to call most fatal unintentional gun incidents "accidents". Most of these are pure negligence of the the sorriest kind. Modern firearms are designed with a firing pin safety so that even if dropped, they will not fire.

Basically, there is no accident about pulling a trigger.

 

[FFed]

A male coworker of mine says if a dog did that he would take them out hunting. In other words, there would be an "accident" and they would never come back. What is with people these days?

My friend used to own three Rottweilers. One of them went nuts one day and attacked him. He ended up having to have surgery done on both his arms. He got rid of the two dogs that did nothing, and we took the one that attacked him out in the bush and shot it. No need for a dog like that.

 

[shanek]

I love anecdotes too! Here's a good one from the Associated press 24/1/03 as seen in the UK publication Private Eye:

"It seems that Raymond Poore Jr telephoned his wife at work, and told her he was going to kill the family dog," a police spokesman told reporters in Winchester, Virginia." She was distraught and begged him not to, because it was only a small dog. But he said the animal had bitten him, and had to die, so he was going to kill it with his shotgun. Then he hung up.

"She rushed home as quickly as she could, expecting to find her beloved pet Shar-Pei dead. But instead, she found her husband lying on the floor unconscious in a pool of blood, with a gunshot through his abdomen, and with the dog standing beside him. She called an ambulance, and he was rushed to Winchester Medical Center, where he was pronounced dead on arrival.

"We have examined the shotgun, and found that the stock of the weapon was damaged, and that there was blood and dog hair on it. At present, we're working on the theory that Mr Poore must have tried to beat the dog to death with the butt end of the gun while holding the barrel. But there was a cartridge in the breach, and he hadn't put the safety catch on, and we presume that the gun must have gone off on impact, fatally injuring him in the process. An animal control officer has now taken custody of the dog, which has a few superficial injuries, but seems otherwise unharmed."

Did they have any kids? If not, was he nominated for a Darwin Award?