Just because a Pit bull attacks another dog in the street, don't assume it's aggressive. It was probably just trying to nanny the other dog.

Nor should she. She was defending her small dog from an almost certain death. If anything, be mad at the owner of the pit bull who wasn’t responsible enough to control her dog. Shame it came to this.

This one was wildly cut and dry.

The dog owner is responsible. I am forced to carry bear spray & a hunting knife when walking in the park because people don’t control their animals.

The dog owner is responsible. I am forced to carry bear spray & a hunting knife when walking in the park because people don’t control their animals.

She had every right under Pennsylvania law to shoot, and people who said otherwise were talking out of their ass

this case seems like she was in the right, but citizens are (justifiably) hyper-sensitive because LEOs so often kill innocents with impunity

had me there for a sec

Pennsylvania law is very clear:

"any person may kill any dog which he sees in the act of pursuing or wounding or killing any domestic animal, including household pets, or pursuing, wounding or attacking human beings, whether or not such a dog bears a required license tag. There is no liability on such persons in damages or otherwise for such killing."

It's just a love maul. He does it to every baby he sees.

FBI isn't a leo

Doubtful

[deleted]

The agent owned the dog being attacked and is allowed to carry a firearm under federal law

Which is incorrect. Only on duty.

Nope. Look up LEOSA.

(36 C.F.R. §§ 2.4(e) & (h), 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)) allow for individuals carrying concealed in accordance with the laws of the state in which the federal park or GFSZ is located to carry concealed in them*; however, an individual carrying under LEOSA is carrying under FEDERAL LAW and not in accordance with the laws of the state they are in. What this means is that you are NOT exempted from carrying a concealed firearm in these areas UNLESS you are on official duty or possess a valid and qualifying state issued concealed carry permit.

Link NRA

Pleasantly surprised but even if she was charged never would have been convicted.

https://philadelphiapa.permitium.com/ccw/application?permittype=new

You can concealed carry in Philadelphia.

Not the issue we are discussing. Thanks though

Not a gun free zone. Enjoy the downvotes.

I'll enjoy every single one.

1000+ feet from every school is a school zone. Sounds like all of Philly 😉

Illegal unless on duty even driving past a school "JUST" claiming Leosa

What parks are you walking in? The Alaskan wilderness? Get a grip

There’s a school every 1000 feet? Damn. No wonder the district is underfunded. Do you even live here. Gtfo

You're obviously unable to comprehend what a school is, or ever been in Philadelphia. Glad to hear your input though! Thanks for adding nothing to the conversation buddy!

Yes, as a lifetime resident I don’t know anything about Philadelphia. Goodnight troll.

Good night my fair citizen of Grandiose delusions

Then what do you call someone with “law enforcement responsibilities”?

Not the FBI. They are Investigative Agents. Different

So they just lie in their website?https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/is-the-fbi-a-type-of-national-police-force

Yes

So even wikipedia is lying? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation

Federal Bureau of Investigation

>The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is the domestic intelligence and security service of the United States and its principal federal law enforcement agency. Operating under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Justice, the FBI is also a member of the U.S. Intelligence Community and reports to both the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence. A leading U.S. counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and criminal investigative organization, the FBI has jurisdiction over violations of more than 200 categories of federal crimes.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

It's the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Not the Federal Bureau Of Policing

I don't understand what you're not comprehending about the definitions defined by words that should not be difficult to understand.

Hahahah you are mouth breather. The title of the organization is not the only way to define something. Generally speaking you dont use the same word to define itself. Please for the love of all things do not procreate.

You do realize folks actually are arrested by fbi agents they dont just investigate and then announce findings. Please lay off the crack.

Congress said it's Investigative.

If a possible violation of federal law under the jurisdiction of the FBI has occurred, the Bureau will conduct an investigation. The information and evidence gathered in the course of that investigation are then presented to the appropriate U.S. Attorney or Department of Justice official, who will determine whether or not prosecution or further action is warranted.

Where is the FBI’s authority written down?

The FBI has a range of legal authorities that enable it to investigate federal crimes and threats to national security, as well as to gather intelligence and assist other law enforcement agencies

Learn to read.

r/confidentlywrong

PA has the Uniform Firearm Act which establishes firearm laws for the entire state to include Philadelpia. Philadelphia is not gun free zone neither in law or in practice.

https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=18&div=0&chpt=61&mobile_choice=suppress

6106 (2)(b)5 allows federal agents to carry concealed anywhere in the state.

Also, LEOSA doesn’t require officers to be on duty. Among other things, it allows retired law enforcement officers who by definition can’t be on duty to carry concealed anywhere in the US.

I do know how to read and i also have reading comprehension skills which clearly you dont have. Enjoy failing!

Next thing you are gonna tell me is that detectives don’t investigate crimes.

You're arguing with the NRA not me

https://le.nra.org/understanding-leosa/off-limit-areas/

I'm not telling you anything you're telling me stuff.

After an investigation for federal law violation sure, or a felony committed in front of an agent sure.

You're the only crack I need

I asked you a question you told me your wrong answer. I then tried to correct you and showed you the correct answer on two different areas. Did you suffer a TBI or something because if so then i will be patient and try to help you learn.

Have you asked yourself why you keep landing with the negative upvotes on this topic?

No, mostly cuz It shows positive on my end 🤷

Oh dear lord “The Department of Justice (DOJ) is responsible for most law enforcement duties at the federal level.[5] It includes the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), the United States Marshals Service, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), and others.[6]” taken from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_States#Types_of_police

You need to refresh because now im at even since you went and downvoted me

So now a district attorney is a Leo?

No because they dont have arresting powers way to go. But someone can can be a law enforcement investigator and law enforcement officer. Similarly to every square is a rectangle but not every rectangle is a square.

That last sentence is the only thing you have said that makes sense.

Whole departments aren't Leos, only people with arresting powers.

I'm a civilian, I provide an information to magistrate and commence a citizen's arrest.

Am I always a LEO?

Is arresting power vested in the information provided to the judge after the investigation. Or is the arresting power arrested until a judge signs off or investigation is complete?

You answered it yourself a citizen’s arrest. You are acting as a citizen and not law enforcement officer. A police officer off duty cab make a citizen’s arrest but they will typically make an arrest under their law enforcement title because they can and it currently provides legal protections a citizens arrest cant.

So then someone who "can" arrest isn't exactly a LEO. Like a FBI agent. Thanks

No you are doing mental gymnastics. Can you even try to provide any shred of outside documentation stating they are not law enforcement officers in any capacity?

Wow. That's not crazy. Forced to carry bear spray 🤣.

If the agent had a PA carry permit, which is easier to obtain than it is to obtain a residential parking permit, would your opinion be different?

Absolutely

It's like I kill a dog with my Ford fiesta and because I'm a Ford employee, they don't check if I can drive. If they had a permit, no issues, but the fact you asked is a bigger discussion that it took this long for someone to ask that simple question which would squash all other dissenting opinions

Fair enough. I don’t really support LEOSA or law enforcement in general but I believe legally many law enforcement officers are able to self activate into being “on duty”. Not sure if it applies to an FBI agent defending her dog tbh though.

I agree.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_officer

"prosecutors (who are law enforcement officers but not peace officers)" Isn't a prosecutor a DA?

TY. i was not to about to engage this stupidity. probably a little blue stripe sympathizer.

good bot

The federal agent wasn’t carrying pursuant to LEOSA. She was carrying under 6106. The federal gun free school zone allows states to license individual to carry in those areas. PA law allows people to carry in those areas pursuant the Uniform Firearms Act. Firearm possession on school property is covered under section 912 of the PA crimes code. There is no distance buffer in 912.

Your claim that Philly is a gun free zone is dead wrong. As is your claim that she is covered only on duty. Section 6106 has her covered.

Just because I think the article might be confusing, when it says that she shot "the other dog", they're not referring to the one of two dogs passing by that didn't attack. She shot the attacking dog, which was a pitbull.

> Roh said surveillance video indicated that Maguire had been sitting on a bench when the pit bull rushed forward and pulled the dog off her lap, causing Maguire to intervene and try to separate the animals before drawing her weapon and shooting the pit bull in its hindquarters at close range.

From The Inquirer.

That would have been nice to have in the original article. Dogs lunge all the time when walking past other dogs.

Thanks

That or get attacked by some off leash out of control antisocial dog.

Fairmount park & Forbidden drive.

Lmaoooo right? The hunting knife cracked me up, like alright Dwight Schrute

Forbidden drive during the summer owner swim their pups in Wissahickon creak off leash. My dog was attacked by a group of loose dogs and injured. After that I won’t go there without being prepared.

This dog was no angel and had a history of violence

Everything you just said is wrong.

First, if it was a service dog it never would have left the owners side. But that doesn't matter because the agent isn't going to say "pardon me, is your dog that's currently mauling my dog a service animal?"

Second, having a gun in Philadelphia is perfectly legal for anyone, all you need is a conceal and carry permit. I'm not sure what other dogs on leash has anything to do with that.

Third, I don't know if you know this, but when a pitbull attacks it's almost impossible to make it stop.

What you should be asking is why was the owner of the pitbull ignoring it's violent behavior. Neighbors of the dog said this wasn't the first attack.

Good. Fucking people need to control their animals.

Dog people are weird.

Anyone can, if they have a permit. Nothing said they did. Never even mentioned it. And what you're referring to was a direct quote from the article...

Even if she doesn't have a permit?

>not even talking about how illegal having the gun in Philadelphia that is

This you?

The dogs. That's quoted from the article. You asked what that had to do with it. It was from the article, and again, it never mentioned her having a permit.

[deleted]

6106 exempts her from permit requirements. I pointed you to the section.

Duly authorized federal employees are exempt from permits. Duly authorized doesn’t require her to be on duty. Merely being authorized to carry by her agency is sufficient. Have badge; can carry

I carry bear spray and a taser every time I take my dog for a walk. She’s been attacked twice by off leash dogs with zero recall. Last one nearly killed her and cost the owner quite a bit of money. That dog lost its life cuz of a crap owner that couldn’t control their dog.

They detect them, they don't investigate them. It's right there in the name.

Don’t they apprehend people?

I mean… it’s right there in the name

Be aware that Philadelphia has some crazy laws about knives. It's mostly illegal to carry one within city limits. I spent most of my life with a Swiss Army Knife in my pocket, but that's a crime here, and I'm not relying on Krasner's discretion to avoid trouble.

From the city's Municipal Code:

§ 10-820. Cutting Weapons in Public Places. 269

   (1)   Definition.

      Cutting Weapon. Any knife or other cutting instrument which can be used as a weapon that has a cutting edge similar to that of a knife. No tool or instrument commonly or ordinarily used in a trade, profession or calling shall be considered a cutting weapon while actually being used in the active exercise of that trade, profession or calling.

   (2)   Prohibited Conduct. No person shall use or possess any cutting weapon upon the public streets or upon any public property at any time.

      (a)   Exception: This restriction shall not apply to the use and possession of cutting tools by emergency personnel of the Philadelphia Fire Department, whether on or off duty. 270

   (3)   Penalty. The penalty for violation of this Section shall be a fine of not less than three hundred dollars ($300) and imprisonment of not less than ninety days.

Okay, no, I follow you. If federal employees are exempted from permits then why is there distinction in LEOSA - which you said didn't apply -

• (36 C.F.R. §§ 2.4(e) & (h), 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)) allow for individuals carrying concealed in accordance with the laws of the state in which the federal park or GFSZ is located to carry concealed in them*; however, an individual carrying under LEOSA is carrying under FEDERAL LAW and not in accordance with the laws of the state they are in.

• What this means is that you are NOT exempted from carrying a concealed firearm in these areas UNLESS you are on official duty or possess a valid and qualifying state issued concealed carry permit.

Because if they DON'T have a license, LEOSA which is the authorization to carry by the Federal Government, for federal employees, then they would need a permit to carry in those zones in the states that require Concealed Carry being off duty is not in the employees authorized capacity?

EDIT: PA CSA 18. 912(c) - I'm assuming you're referring to " * or other lawful duty"

if they don't have a pa permit and are not in the scope of their duties, do they have to observe federal law or state. Meaning do they need to carry under federal law with LEOSA because they don't have a permit in the state and are subject to the laws of the state they are in, and are NOT exempted from GFZ with LEOSA?

Oh you mean the “Gun-Free School Zone Act” which was deemed unconstitutional in the 90’s?

Stop making shit up.

Is Democratic People's Republic of Korea (aka: North Korea) democratic?

How is that different from other police agencies?

Uh.. well, I don't exactly know what parts were found unconstitutional, but it's still on the books

I’m getting sovereign citizen, flat earther, big Alex jones fan vibes

LEOSA exists mainly for state and local police to carry off-duty or retired in all states but that has limitations. It’s fairly new and federal agents were carrying all over the place prior to it being enacted.

She was carrying under 6106. LEOSA doesn’t enter into because she’s legally carrying under PA law. She’s carrying legally by being a duly authorized federal agent. She is a duly authorized federal agent 24/7/365 until she separates employment

PA does not have a buffer on school zones. That was the purpose of referencing 912. Federal gun free zone law says the buffer is 1000ft but people can carry within that border if states allow it. PA only excludes the actual property of the school from carrying. It does that through 6106 and 912 because 6206 authorizes people to carry and 912 has no buffer.

Yeah dog attacks happening left and right 🙄

I like dogs enough but it’s the dog culture people I can’t stand anymore.

They project Disney animal emotions on their dogs and expect everyone else to do the same.

“He’s a person just like us!” The fuck outta here, it’s a goddamn dog you clown shoe.

When I read the title I was ready to be outraged.

Of course no charges!! I’m glad she was carrying.

Good to know, I usually carry a leatherman when bike riding. My other knife is a sheathed sailing knife designed for quick deployment. Guess I’m in violation.

Yeah, it's weird. Guns are fine, with a rudimentary permit, but no knives. I had to find a bladeless multi tool to cover the basics.

Maybe a quick google search would’ve saved you and helped prevent an ignorant take which ignores the details of the law.

Unconstitutional Gun-Free School Zones Act

Ballotpedia

I know. I wish newspapers would act more responsibly when writing their article titles. Many times I have discovered that a title totally misrepresents what actually happened. And I know that a lot of people (me included sometimes) only read the title.

Pit-bull advocates always stress that they are complete sweethearts and I have met many pit-bulls that are sweet. I think the problem is that every dog breed has a subset of animals that bite. Even if the subset for pit-bulls is the exact same percentage as the subset for Yorkshire Terriers the damage inflicted by one pit-bull bite is likely much more than one bite from a Yorkie. Pit-bull owners do the breed no favor by ignoring the fact that some pit-bulls do bite. And before you jump on me for this observation I just want to say that I was the owner of a German Shepherd for 11 years. While my GSD showed no signs of aggression I was always mindful that others could be afraid of him.

[deleted]

They don’t it doesn’t happen everyday…. It’s not a common occurrence at all.

[deleted]

Please refrain from blaming owners or advocates of the breed, that is a very unfair statement to make. Why punish the dog for the deeds done by humans? These dogs end up aggressive & unsocialized sent to shelters & euthanized more so than any other breed… and yes because of poor owners- humans…. They are subjected to Dog fighting, Baiting, Backyard breeding, Abuse, Statvation & Torture…… etc. THOSE ARE THE MONSTERS WHO NEED LEGAL CHARGES & PUNISHMENT BUT OUR LAWMAKERS HAVE NO LAWS IN PLACE TO PROSECUTE THEM…. Like we SHOULD. 💔😭

I thought it was just the atf that killed dogs

It’s easy to obtain if you’re background is clean

Good for her

Pitbulls should be banned

Charges should have never even been a consideration.