Just to comment on the shooting of Grant Kuenzli.
Following this case in the Roundup has been very upsetting. To believe they would order the case to be heard again is unbelievable to say the least.
There is one strong fact that is being ignored - three gunshots to the chest of an unarmed man.
This has made me wonder, why not a shot or two at his knees or legs, or even the dogs? I figure if you could shoot a man at that distance three times, you could have hit the attacking dogs or Grant's legs.
Logically, it makes sense to me. Maybe we should change the definitions of excessive force and self-defense. I go hiking all the time, and this case has definitely made me more aware of my surroundings when I am hiking.
To all other hikers and backpackers, please be careful and aware out there.
Mikie Decker, Payson