Previous Post
Next Post

Kenny Woodburn (courtesy

It’s possible that the dog called “Tank” charged Kenny Woodburn [above], who shot the canine in self-defense. It does not, however, seem likely. “A Maryland man shot dead his neighbor’s dog after it wandered on to his property, and then posted a picture of its body on Facebook,” reports. “Before killing the one-year-old dog Kenny Woodburn had posted a warning on social media saying if it strayed in his yard again it would die.” Specifically, “Hey going to dye today.” The spelling mistakes don’t help Mr. Woodburn’s case. Nor, of course, does the Facebook posting. But what makes him a poster child for firearms irresponsibility is the fact that . . . [Note: picture of Mr. Woodburn posing with the dog he killed after the jump]

Kenny Woodburn poses next to the dog he killed (courtesy

He could have dealt with a dangerous dog in any number of ways short of shooting it.

To review: you can only use deadly force on another person when you or other innocent life are in imminent danger of death or grievous bodily harm. The threat must be credible and imminently imminent (i.e., in the process of occurring). The same standard applies to family pets. Obviously. Which is why Mr. Woodburn posted that “The f***** came after me … so I put him down.”

The police, prosecution judge and/or jury will have to establish the validity of that expletive deleted claim. But the prior warning indicates that Mr. Woodburn could have called the owner before or during the incident, dialed animal control, used pepper spray on the pet or tried to make friends with his supposed four-legged nemesis.

For that failure of foresight and planning that led to the I’m-thinking-enitrely-unnecessary death of a beloved dog, Mr. Woodburn get the IGOTD nod. While owner Richele Ince gets a rebuke for letting her dog wander freely and our deepest condolences for the loss of a family friend.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Oh yeah, because pit bulls are so friendly and a perfect choice of breed to let run wild and be around kids.

    The PETA fruits are already screaming for this guy to be executed, to make the point that killing is wrong.

      • Here is what we know for certain: If this was a cop seeing this pit bull unleashed anywhere, he/she almost certainly would have shot it.

        • Or the current standard for law enforcement: Pretty much any breed of dog on private property behind a fence or on a leash may be considered an imminent threat and summarily executed… even if it is the wrong address or in the vicinity of the address of the call.

      • I think its interesting how volatile the PETA types get when a dog is shot, but how mute they are over something like this:

        • Did u happen to notice the TWO knives in his hands when they came up to cuff him? What do you suppose he was going to do with those? Impress the officers with his apple carving skills?

        • Wow, didnt get to watch the vid un edited until now.

          EDIT: cant see the knives at all in 720 tbh until they really close in.

        • So, Rydak, the 21 ft rule applies when he’s running away, thus the bullet wounds in his back?

        • RonGR…it applies at all times, And he was NOT running away. Cops point guns at you and say “Your under arrest, well take you to a hospital if that’s what you want”…for hours…and he pulls not one but two knives. The officers who were close to him saw this…the camera didn’t, thats why they shot. Not until they get up on him after the shooting can you see a knife clenched in each hand. I dont see a single wound to his back.

        • That was really disturbing. Everything that I saw in that video says the police murdered that man. Has this gone to a grand jury yet?

        • Rydak, at 16 sec in you clearly hear the man say that he’s gonna walk, we are going to stick to our agreement, the officer responds “alright, alright”, where’s the part where the officers tell him he is under arrest and can go to a hospital, in another video? I did not see or hear this part at all, please refer me to your source as it does change the situation.

          I still strongly believe these Seal team 6 Tactical Wannabe’s (seriously, you gear up like that to go to homeless encampments?) wanted a kill, nothing like shooting down a homeless mental man to get credibility. What’s this s#*t about the militarization of our PD again? Though, I’m sure certain members of the PD has been eliminating vagrants under the radar for many years, whether on teh mob payroll or Deathrow Records payroll, psychos exist in all parts of our society, it’s just unfortunate when they are the people who are supposed to “Protect & Serve”… oh wait…

      • Delbert, maybe you missed the part where the guy “only illegally camping in the foothills of New Mexico” had knives in both hands when they shot him?

        • The guy openly states in the video he doesn’t want an altercation, though he does state that if they didn’t have badges he would have a right to defend himself as a free American as the PD are posing the threat, seems to think he’s reached a verbal agreement to carry on though, picks up his gear, and proceeds to go his own route. But that ain’t good enough, he may be a threat to the rocks and cacti, hell, he’s probably mentally ill too, so APD did the right thing by executing him, huh? Nice.

          So now in America you get executed by Seal Team 6 wannabe’s for illegal camping. Honestly, that’s how those APD guys go out after illegal campers, tacticooled the hell out… gee, I wonder if they were feeling just a little bit trigger happy. Yeah, the guy had knives, hell, his “house” was right there.

        • They had non lethal options, plenty of manpower. Notice they didnt beanbag him until after he was bleeding out on the ground. Maybe they even peed on him when the camera was off? And your type cries over a dog LOL

      • You can always count on it, like sunrise and sunset. “Blubberblabber, GOOD SHOOT!”

    • Pit bulls should be banned. No dog needs to have that many assault features. A dog weight limit of 10lbs will ensure the safety of communities across the country. Dog nuts who raise pit bulls are killing our children.

      End of sarcasm.

      • LULz, I’m glad you put that last line in, because you know someone’s going to knee jerk otherwise.

    • Actually, Pitbulls are very friendly and terribly loyal – they are fantastic with kids. But they have a very good strength to weight ratio – and like anything with potential to hurt (ie, a car, a tall ladder, sharp objects) it needs to be treated with respect. A dog, any dog, is still an animal that when pressed or mistreated, can hurt or kill. I would trust my pitbull around anyone’s kids and not worry (as long at the dog isn’t being mistreated) – it’s the ignorant, scared people hurting my dog I’d be worried about.

      • I consider people who let pit bulls around children child abusers. Not that I care about their children, its Darwinism at its finest.

        • Please allow me to post photos of my last four pit bull type dogs in various poses and types of repose with my children.

          Those dogs are dogs. Nothing more nothing less.

          Call me a child abuser. I’ll give you my phone number and let’s have a live, synchronous conversation about it.

          • The Brits used to call Pit Bulls “nanny dogs” since they were so good with children. Probably still do.

        • Paul G: I love the sentiment I really do.

          But truly, they are just dogs like any other dog.

          No more, no less.

        • There is a lot I could say, but I will summarize thusly: that is not a fact, science or evidence based opinion.

          You are kind of like the heir to people 300 years ago who wanted to make the world safe from witches.

        • Such insightful comments, tell us more about how isolated cases prove that all of a certain type are dangerous. I’m sure you’ll say that all black people shouldn’t be allowed near children, since black gangbangers kill so many other “children”.

          The ignorance practically drips from your comments.

        • Delbert, your lack of cognition is both world-encompassing and stupefying.

          We rescued a pit bull a few years ago. Or as the AKA likes to call them, an American Staffordshire Terrier.

          My pit bull is routinely jumped on and tussled with by 13 grandchildren. She sighs and walks away when she’s had enough. That’s more than some people I know would do.

          And the canine corpse in the picture looks to me like a beagle, not a pit bull.

        • Jus Bill: Love the story and it’s awesome. Just keep in mind: without papers, ancestry information or breeding history what you have is what I like to call a super cool mutt with a medium build, stocky body, short coat, blocky head who loves kids. 🙂

          I love ’em, too, I have two: both rescues, both mutts.

        • My pits mix is best dog I’ve ever had, without contest.

          Smart, loveable, great with the kids, great with other dogs, and doesn’t have a mean bone in his body.

          He’s scared of my daughter’s cat, he cowers when it hisses at him, he’s a huge puss.

        • now replace “pit bulls” with “guns” and enjoy sounding like the average anti-gun type you’d probably rail against

          • “now replace “pit bulls” with “guns” and enjoy sounding like the average anti-gun type you’d probably rail against”

            Your analogy breaks down when you realize that vicious dogs have volition, and can spontaneously attack. Guns don’t.

        • “Your analogy breaks down when you realize that vicious dogs have volition, and can spontaneously attack. Guns don’t.”

          Rich, here’s where your logic breaks down. Both owning dogs and owning guns have one big thing in common: OWNER RESPONSIBILITY.

          If a dog owner is responsible a dog does not get out of the owner’s control (like a gun) and a dog will not attack a person without provocation (like a gun in my hand.)

          Dog ownership and gun ownership are exactly the same thing. Saying that a dog can snap and attack a person any time is exactly like saying a gun owner can snap and shoot a person any time.

          No dog is INHERENTLY vicious. Period. All science supports this fact and it can be backed up by the millions of dogs of this type across the country that don’t attack people every day. These types of dogs are one of the top 5 most popularly owned dogs and have been for over 100 years. Surely dog attacks would be legion if these dogs were inherently vicious and they’re not – dog attacks are very, very rare.

          • “Saying that a dog can snap and attack a person any time is exactly like saying a gun owner can snap and shoot a person any time. ”

            No it’s not.

            A dog is a living thing. A gun is a machine. A dog can go feral. A gun can’t. A dog doesn’t need a person or a drawstring to pull its trigger.

            And I have, at least once, been attacked by a loose dog without any provocation, other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

            I admit, the chance of it happening are astronomically small, but it’s not zero.

            • No, Rich… dogs do NOT “go feral” as long as they are under the influence of human beings. There are outliers on occasion, but by and large, they only go feral if they are abandoned and left to their own devices.

              And even then, the vast majority of abandoned dogs will not go feral.

        • Rich: you miss the point. A loose dog is still not a DOG problem its a dog OWNER problem.

          The fact that it’s anti-social enough to bite a human it encounters while loose is an escalation of the owner problem.

          Dogs are domesticated animals. They are property to be maintained by the owner on the owner’s property. If a person is unable to control their dog on their own property they should not have dogs. Simple as that.

          • “Rich: you miss the point. A loose dog is still not a DOG problem its a dog OWNER problem. ”

            Yes, and negligent discharges are not a GUN problem, but a GUN OWNER problem.

            But if you leave a gun lying in a dark alley somewhere and abandon it, there is zero probability that when it gets hungry, it will take a sample bite out of some nice succulent infant.

            • “Succulent infant”. Wow, that was WAY over the top.

              That’s what’s coming back to bite you on the ass during your campaign.

        • Actually all throughout the 19th and 20th century, the American Pit Bull terrier were dependable part of the family. These dogs, when raised well and not damaged from too much inbreeding are very quite, tolerant pets. They are also great hunting and home defense dogs. Physically they are gifted with strength and endurance, strong will and spirit. You are obviously not a dog person, to have such an opinion of what really is an exceptional breed. It’s because of the dogs tenacious spirit that makes them desirable for those who would abuse animals in the name of ‘sport’. But it is not the dog’s fault that people are cold, heartless and ‘inhumane’ in our treatment of each other and animals. So please stop with the slander and breed bias, American Pit-Bull terriers [Pit Bulls] are some of the best dogs you can have.

    • Why to go! First comment out of the box shows the ignorance full force …

      Yes, pit bull dogs maligned and heavily politicized just like assault weapons. No difference.

      • I value property rights more than a dog. And, umm, dogs arent mentioned in the 2nd, or any, amendments. Apples and oranges. Just saying.

        • Hey, if a threatening dog comes on my property I have no problem shooting it regardless what breed or type it may be.

          Denigrating an entire breed or type based on the fact that some individuals mismanage it is wrong.

          9th Amendment.

        • Just when we thought you’d said the stupidest possible thing, you go and prove us wrong.

        • Oh my such derision how will I ever endure? Your internet scorn has transmogrified me. No more eating BBQ pit bulls. How much more can I give up? Next you will want my moldy Hustlers, since they are harmless and friendly and kids love them!

    • They are friendly, they dont run around just killing or biting things. Dumb ass people raise dumb as kids, or dumb ass dogs. This dude just wanted to shoot a dog and was too retarded to figure out coyote hunting.

      The big problem is people that are brainwashed by an old news theme. The breeds of dog that bite most often, and have the strongest bite are NOT pitbulls or rots.

    • They are, and mine loves kids. We trained him not to react to what foolishness children do. Sounds like you’ve drank too much of the anti-pitbull koolade. PS. we don’t let him run wild, heck! he won’t even go outside when I sometimes leave the yard gate open.

      As you’re taken the flaming dive from the clouds, enjoy the scenery

  2. In other words, he decided to commit a criminal act, and posted all about it on Facebook beforehand, thus assuring he can’t say it was a spontaneous and righteous act.

    Nice going, douchebag. You don’t belong among your fellow citizens; you need to be put behind bars. And the “good shoot!” twits don’t have as much as a leg to stand on.

    • You were there? Unless you witnessed it you dont know if he was threatened or not. Therefore all the knee jerk reactions that he is a “criminal” are pure speculation, ignoring the fact pit bulls in all their variations can go from docile to hostile at the drop of a hat, even with their owners. Google “pit bull attacks.”

      Control your animals, especially known killer breeds, or they might get shot. Cops dont hesitate why should a homeowner?

        • Legally speaking, pit bulls are mentioned under Breed Specific Legislation as dangerous, much like “assault rifles” are carved out for anti gun legislation as specifically “more dangerous.” The obvious difference being an assault rifle cannot run onto your property and go off maiming you or your family. The assault rifle has to be used by a person, whereas free roaming pit bulls regularly maim and kill people, other pets, and livestock. I stand for property owners rights to neutralize any invading man beast or otherworldly entity, including aggressive pit bulls. That is where we differ, you wish for certain exemptions to my right not to be harassed by you or your animals. You expect a homeowner to respect your private property as you allow it to invade his private property. Please refrain from the overreaching argument “you cant shoot every dog or cat that enters your property, they dont know what they are doing its not their fault.” Obviously its the pet owners fault, however if this guy felt threatened by a large breed animal and shot it, without other evidence to the contrary he is lying, you must respect his private property rights. Hope you can grasp the distinction and thanks for your support.

        • I always love to watch the ignorant gun owners talk spank about the dogs and then defend to the 9th degree their right to an “assault weapon”.

          If you understand that the Liberal media lies about guns, lies about assault weapons, lies about gun owners, but tells the truth regarding everything about “pit bull” type dogs — well, you’re just a special kind of stupid, aren’t you?

        • Uh, Delbert, that crap is being overturned in court.

          Are you Kenny’s roomie or something?

        • Wanna know what I think about you? You are a


        • Go out and come back when you can stop holding your breath, kicking your feet and rolling your eyes.


      • His actions after are what prove he’s a scumbag. Nobody takes a picture smiling with their victim if it was defensive, they head to the authorities or a hospital. If I “defended” myself from a mugger with a firearm then took a grinning picture with the text “look what dun,” that throws my self defense argument out the window. This man deserves the same fate that he imparted on this animal.

      • Any beast can go from docile to feral in a short period, including those dastardly 2 legged varmints. ALL dogs behave according to how their HUMAN counterparts train them, Im sorry you have a dislike of certain breeds.

        Kind of odd cities wanting to ban a certain breed of animal, sounds kind of like someone wanting to ban a certain kind of firearm. Hmm, what a puzzler.

      • I’m gonna say this nice and slow, so as to not confuse you unduly:


        • Maybe the dog had been aggressive before. I’m more likely to believe he just decided to shoot the dog for fun, but the facebook post doesn’t necessarily prove it.

        • Nothing will happen. There are no teeth whatsoever in the humane laws of most states.


          IMO this person should be drawn and quartered by a four horse team.

        • True, Mina, but if the fence in that picture of Kenny is the lot line fence and he lives in or bordering what’s now a subdivision, he’s going to jail for discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a dwelling. The inevitable animal cruelty charge is just so much more icing.

          • Which suggests to me the cops know it wasn’t a legit case of “puttin’ down that killer dog”.

  3. I don’t have any respect for people that shoot animals because they don’t like them. A wandering dog isn’t a threat. This guy is a db.

    • Wandering dogs are NOT a threat? Where did you grow up? Why do you think every city in America has a leash law? Why are there so many stories of people walking their dogs who are attacked, or had their pet attacked, by a wandering dog? Didn’t you see the movie “Babe” and the threat posed by wandering packs of dogs to humans and animals alike–an issue that is present in America as well? why do you think Governor Perry carries a pistol when he goes running? The fact of the matter is that wandering dogs do indeed present a threat. they will chase anything that runs, whether it is a person, another animal , a kid on a bike, a car….

      I am not saying that this guy isn’t a douche, all I am saying is that your assessment of wandering dogs fails to accord with reality. Are all dogs a problem? Certainly not–not one of my dogs who has gotten out has ever been a problem to anyone or any thing else. But that does not apply to all dogs, not by a long shot.

      • There are further articles on this. This guy had a criminal record. The 1 year old pitbull was the pet of a 4 year old girl and would regularly wander over to the daycare to play with her and the other kids. It was also shot in the back, and supposedly the guy lured it to his property with treats. This guy was familiar with the animal enough to know that it clearly was not a threat.

        • Right. So I was going to say if I had a maruading dog that was threatening me or my kids … yes this is a dog that will eventually meet its maker when it comes on property and gives me any trouble at all.

          On the other hand I live in farm country and there are always outliers who like to let their dogs roam free. I don’t agree with it, I think dogs should be under an owners control at all times but if it’s friendly, doesn’t do anything bad or threaten anyone what’s the harm? Better to have long term good relations with your neighbors IMO.

          • Kenny doesn’t seem much concerned with neighborly relations. And it’s a bit too late now.

        • Agree, that’s what makes him a douchebag.

          He knew the dog was 1. friendly and 2. a loved pet of his 4yo neighbor.

          Guys like this meet Karma eventually. Clearly he is lacking enough brain cells to comprehend what he has done. I am sure his knuckles are raw from the way he drags them when he walks.

  4. The probability of a prosecution is slim, and of a felony conviction even slimmer. If he gets charged, it will be pled down to a misdemeanor, since defendant is the only witness to the shooting. The owner can sue in small claims court for the value of the dog–the monetary value (cost to acquire) only, and not any emotional distress damages. Dogs are, in law, chattel, and you get to sue for the loss of the value of the chattel the same as you would for any other property, but no more.