Yet one more story of a "chupacabra" shot and killed. This time in Texas, by a 13 year old, who killed because he didn't know what it was:
"Carter Pope, 13, said he walked toward the four-legged fanged animal shaking, not sure what it was before he fired off three shots;" [italics mine]
Photos look like all the other photos of hairless animals shot and killed around the U.S., primarily in the southwest. No one is sure what these animals are; canines with mange or some related disease, hybrids, ... but "chupacabra" or monster, they're not. Meanwhile, people, as is their wont, are running around shooting anything looking unfamiliar, which makes these animals suspect.
I wonder at these people who want to think these animals are "chupacabra?" Are they willing to believe chupacabra exists, but not UFOs or Bigfoot or ghosts? What I mean is, they see an unusual animal, are quick to decide it's a "monster" and kill it, without (seemingly) any knowledge of the chupacabras legend and history.
Would those who are so quick to shoot at something they don't recognize do the same if they encountered a Bigfoot?
Are they accepting of tales of UFOs in the area, or at all? Why accept one fringe bit of lore over another? Is it because, in the face of the unknown -- in this case, hairless weird looking animal -- a supernatural tinged explanation is the only one that makes sense, which then gives them the reason they need to act both aggressively and defensively by shooting at it?