I've seen some amazingly ignorant assumptions in this thread.

"Why was the cyclist on a cul-de-sac he didn't live on?"
The cyclist may have been riding through the cul-de-sac because there was a MUP entrance on it. Or maybe he just made a wrong turn. Or maybe he was exploring. It doesn't matter; last I checked, you didn't have to have a 'good reason' to ride on a public street.

You don't know; I don't know. Asserting that he had some nefarious purpose for being there is both ignorant and dangerous to your own liberty. Next time you're riding in traffic, and some idiot left-hooks you, do you want to have to defend your presence on that particular street at that particular time?

"The Cyclist must've been gunning for the dog because he drew 'so fast'

The article makes no mention of what may have occurred before the gunshot. The only side of the story we have is of the dog owner, who is absolutely not going to mention whether he heard his dog barking or if he heard any yelling beforehand.

In short, nobody here knows what may have happened before the gunshot, or how long it took. There's only one person who saw it, and neither his testimony nor his identity has been released.

Also, unless you ARE a gun guy, you probably have no idea how slow or fast it takes to actually draw a weapon from a holster. Since there are documented cases of people drawing and firing when somebody else is pointing a gun at them, I can assure you that with training, some people can draw, aim, and fire pretty darned fast.

The article mentions that the dog was in whimpering and took a few steps when the owner came out. Does it mention where the dog was shot? Does it mention where the dog died? No and no. Everybody assumes the dog was in the yard when he was shot, because the owner claims he was playing in the yard earlier. Bad assumption based on what's in the article.

What we DO know is that it was still on it's feet and walking when the owner saw him. How many steps he may have taken before then is unknown, or even where he was when the owner saw him.

"Why didn't he just ride away?"

Try out-sprinting a dog. Not gonna happen, except in the 41.


It's unlikely that dog would have attacked anyway.

And... you know this, why? Because the owner claimed "Scooby would have never harmed anyone?"

A dog-owner saying that is like a mother saying "Billy was a GOOD kid", then trotting out his high school prom picture for the evening news after he was gunned down by rival gang members.

I know this is the road cycling section, and many of the readers don't do much time riding in the countryside. But out there, lots of people let their dogs run free, and free-running dogs are a serious concern for cyclists riding out in the middle of nowhere. Just go ask about dog problems in the long-distance cycling forum, and I bet you'll get a much different response there than you get here. I know several cyclists who've been attacked, at least one who was hospitalized by a dog, and I guarantee it ain't fun.


"People who carry guns are scared pseudo-tough guys."

Sure. Tell yourself whatever you want if it helps you sleep at night.

If you don't get scared when you get circled by 3-4 aggressive dogs who are roaming the streets or countryside, you're an idiot.

If you DO get scared by that scenario, and you don't take precautions to either make sure it doesn't happen, or you have something to defend yourself if you do, then you're a different sort of idiot.

Hoping that something bad doesn't happen isn't much of a plan. Plenty of people's epitaphs have been their neighbors saying "This is a good neighborhood; things like this don't happen here."


I've been circled by a pack of dogs two different times. The first time, I was not 500 feet from the front door of my home in a 'good neighborhood' in one of the five safest cities in the nation. Reaching for a cell phone while I tried to keep from being completely surrounded, I resolved never again to have a cell phone be my 'best' line of defense.

The second time was just last weekend, on a bicycle ride out in the country. I didn't have to shoot any of the dogs, but the thought crossed my mind.


I have a concealed weapons permit. That is to say, I've passed extensive background checks, training on both firearms safety, accuracy, and the law on permitted use of deadly force.

It's my responsibility to protect myself. It's not yours, and according to several rulings by the US Supreme Court, it's not the responsibility of the government.

I don't magically have to give up my right to self-defense simply because I swing my leg over a top tube.