JFJames:
The discussion is about ARMED BOUNTY HUNTERS. Period. Al is not a cop, nor is he on the same level as a cop. You dragged cops into it to try and justify arming bounty hunters by trying to equate the two professions. If bounty hunters should be armed, that argument should be able to stand on its own without trying to make bounty hunters into cops. Al is clearly ignorant of many laws regarding bounty hunting, as he seems to think he can go wherever in the world he chooses and arrest people. This is not so. If he is unclear as to the basics of his profession, he most certainly should not be armed while in the pursuit of that profession.

Al cannot dispute that Dog and his family get the job done without guns. They run a successful business and would not be able to hold that business if they did not catch those who skipped bail. This article is all posturing.

Clint is right. Al seems to lack practical experience regarding some of his claims.

Ridiculous of Al to say that Dog is not accurate because he doesn't use a gun. If Dog and his team don't need to carry lethal weapons in order to achieve the capture of a fugitive, then more power to them. Not carrying a gun also eliminates the threat of a fugitive shooting the bounty hunter with his own gun. Seems like Al has had a problem with that.