Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trooper Shoots Family Dog

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Oink,

    quote:
    Originally posted by Oink:
    err, Just because I'm a pig doesn't mean I'm a cop...

    No, I have not sampled EVERY TV newscast, radio newscast, newspaper, and magazine in the US. Just because the media reports some non-biased news some or even most of the time doesn't justify slandering of police that is all too common.

    I have no problem with news that is presented in a non-biased manner, what I object to are emotionally charged reports about how evil the police are.

    In this case it is difficult to get a balanced story since it is not balanced, police officers are the authority, even though the stop was a mistake they still had every right AND RESPONSIBILITY to make that stop on the information they had.

    Tell me though, I'm really curious, Why do so many reporters have it in for cops, What did they get too many speeding tickets?

    Hate to break this to you, but there are some evil LEO's, and there are some who wear a twenty pound badge on their shirt. There are some just waiting for the opportunity to abuse their authority, which happens all too often.
    Retired

    Comment


    • #47
      Well, tell them to stay far from me. [Eek!]

      How about the media finding these evil cops, instead of attacking the good guys. But this is just not how I see the cops involved in this incident, if they were evil I would be demanding they get fired too. But that's just not the case.

      Now everyone is saying the dog wasn't attacking at all but was just playing. If that is really the case then I think that officer needs to spend time around dogs and learn to guage their body language and such better. But it really did look like it was attacking to me, I would have shot it, and if it WAS really just playing then I would have made the fatal error. [Eek!]
      All of god's creatures are entitled to live without fear of "gun violence" except for you and your family. - <a href="http://www.handguncontrolinc.org/selfdefense_quiz.htm" target="_blank">Source</a>

      Comment


      • #48
        quote:
        Hate to break this to you, but there are some evil LEO's, and there are some who wear a twenty pound badge on their shirt. There are some just waiting for the opportunity to abuse their authority, which happens all too often.

        Unfortunately you're right. The sad part to that is, with biased media reports of incidents similar to this one (I'm not necessarily saying they're right or wrong in this incident), the media can make the majority look real bad.

        Biased media happens all of the time and really shows itself in subtle uses of words. Throughout this board are many examples of this as some of the members have posted news articles on this same topic.

        Comment


        • #49
          There is no room for evil cops, We have to many good ppl who want to be cops. I think it must be really difficult to find ppl with all the qualities needed; courage, integrity, compassion, anylitical reasoning, observation skills, etc, etc...

          With my luck I'd wind up with a really evil partner, Every time we're on our way to a call lights and sirens driving real fast(Code 3?) He would sit beside me and give me speeding tickets...Every now and then he would OC me then say in a sqeeky voice "GUESS WHO!!!!" [Eek!]
          He'd play all kinds of practical jokes on me, hide my gun and let me go all frantic looking for it! Wack me on the back with his night stick and say "there was a bee on your back, no really there was!!!" [Eek!]
          All of god's creatures are entitled to live without fear of "gun violence" except for you and your family. - <a href="http://www.handguncontrolinc.org/selfdefense_quiz.htm" target="_blank">Source</a>

          Comment


          • #50
            quote:
            Originally posted by Mike Tx:
            What the police need is a method to determine if someone is actually breaking a law before they "interact" with them.

            Good idea....let's get some psychics together and have them do some ride-a-longs!

            I'm anti-media as well. It's just what happens after seeing them repeatedly criticize and second guess law enforcement whenever someone cries foul. Yes, they should report the facts but they should not take other people's "theorys" on what happened and why and make them appear as what actually occurred!

            Now, to add a little more fuel to the fire, I happened to mention this incident to one our our troopers today. He said that a relative of his was on his way back from Gatlinburg recently when he was stopped by TSP and the local sheriffs office. Apparently he (and/or his car) matched the description of a robbery suspect. He was pulled out at gunpoint, handcuffed, his car thoroughly searched, and detained for 45 minutes until THE sheriff arrived and basically said, "It's not him...let's clear the scene". Thank goodness he didn't have a dog with him . He's not thinking of suing anyone over the incident and his opinion of law enforcement has not changed in the slightest.

            [ 01-10-2003, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Deputy757 ]

            Comment


            • #51
              "Watch your PIO work someday when we ask for "your side of the story." It would be very educational for you to hear what they tell us. Also surprising, I think."

              I have a collateral duty as PIO, so I don't think I'll find it too damn educational. I KNOW what I say, then I SEE what they print.

              Before I ask you which part of "we don't want you here" you don't understand (since you were banned once already), I'll post a few of your quotes so people can see just how "fair and impartial" you are. And I'll do it in the typical style of the media....... no context.

              "I've seen my share of... macho Jethros who get off just being an auxiliary deputy at a county fair."

              "we report the truth about some idiot cop shooting a family pooch during an unjustified traffic stop."

              "The reporters smacking on cops are doing it because of attitudes like yours. Take off your badge...let your puffed chest get back to normal size and grow the hell up."


              And you made them under the User name of Rodney King

              Say good-bye again. Next time you re-register after being banned, I'll send a notice to your ISP regarding your violation of the TOS.

              [ 01-10-2003, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: Niteshift ]

              Comment


              • #52
                quote:
                Originally posted by TV News Director:
                Watch your PIO work someday when we ask for "your side of the story."

                Maybe they tell you that I'm not a cop, I don't know if I have a PIO, If I do I have very little idea what one is. But in reguard to Night's statement I have to say that I would be VERY interested in hearing what the PIO has to say before the media twists it into something sinister. [Eek!]

                Furthermore, Let's forget about anybodys side of the story, How about the truth? Why should the poor sheeple have to go around afraid of their protectors because they trust every little opinion the media expresses? The fact that hero cops don't make front page news indicates that it's just too common, After all, we wouldn't want the sheeple not getting their fix.
                All of god's creatures are entitled to live without fear of "gun violence" except for you and your family. - <a href="http://www.handguncontrolinc.org/selfdefense_quiz.htm" target="_blank">Source</a>

                Comment


                • #53
                  I actually just read the press release from the THP. As I said before I read it, it is now clear that it was a dispatcher error. The communications sergeant is gonna prolly get his/her *** chewed and sued.
                  Oh... Oh... I know you di-int!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    For those of you who expressed concerns about the media affording the cops the opportunity to give their side of things, you may be interested to know that WTVF in Nashville interviewed Eric Hall, the Cookeville officer who shot the dog, and aired his account of the incident. An excerpt:

                    quote:
                    "As the dog came out, he came right at me. I yelled at the dog as I was backing up and I yelled at it to get back. I screamed at it
                    and it kept advancing, barking in an aggressive manner. I believe the dog to be a full grown pit bull and it's unfortunate what had happened after that."

                    HALL SAYS HE SHOT THE DOG, NOT IN THE HEAD AS DESCRIBED BY THE SMOAK FAMILY BUT IN THE SHOULDER, KILLING IT. MOMENTS LATER HE LEARNED THE ENTIRE STOP WAS A MISTAKE. THE SMOAK FAMILY HAD COMMITTED NO CRIME AND NOW THEIR DOG WAS DEAD.

                    "If you could feel what I feel after the whole incident was over and I realized the trooper started letting the family out of the patrol cars and taking the handcuffs off. One of the state troopers had walked over to me and I asked
                    what's going on? They told me that there had been some kind of mistake and I thought oh, my goodness how unfortunate for that family."

                    HALL, A SEVEN-YEAR VETERAN WITH A FOLDER FULL OF COMMENDATIONS, SAID HE WAS SHOCKED BY THE PUBLIC REACTION. HE WAS TRYING TO DO HIS JOB, HE SAID, AND NOW HE'S RECEIVING DEATH THREATS.

                    "It's affecting my family and three daughters. We're all affected."

                    A COOKEVILLE POLICE INVESTIGATION FOUND THAT HALL DID NOTHING WRONG. HE FOLLOWED POLICY. STILL, HALL SAID HE WISHES THINGS WERE DIFFERENT.

                    "Sure you do, but with the knowledge I had at the time I was so limited. I felt I just did what I had to do."

                    To be clear, the words in CAPS are what the reporter said on the air, with soundbites from Hall's on-camera interview in-between.

                    I'm quite surprised this guy talked, or that he was allowed to talk. It is quite unusual, and I guarantee you that the station is very happy to air his side of the story. Further, it doesn't sound like the media is out to get this guy to me. On the contrary, they only wanted to present the most balanced story possible, and did so as soon as Hall was available.

                    For those of you in the Nashville area, I'm sure they'll run the story again tonight on the late news. Channel 5, WTVF, CBS.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      There are several videos, including the interview with Officer Eric Hall. Scumbags are actually sending him death threats!

                      Catch the videos Here.

                      [ 01-10-2003, 08:34 PM: Message edited by: Oink ]
                      All of god's creatures are entitled to live without fear of "gun violence" except for you and your family. - <a href="http://www.handguncontrolinc.org/selfdefense_quiz.htm" target="_blank">Source</a>

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I just watched the tape. And since I learned about the five uses of force earlier this week I cant really see another way of stopping what he thought was a threat. But than again, I am also young and new to Law Enforcement.

                        And this is coming from a person with five dogs. But I dont think anyone should be deciding on if he keeps his job or not. Because there is not enough information on what happened. But I dont believe the cop just decided to walk up to the dog and shoot it. From what I saw it was by the book.

                        (Granted I dont know alot of "The Book" yet.) That is my personal opinion.
                        It is easy to be critical when you are not the one who is forced to reacted in seconds.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          quote:
                          Originally posted by retired:
                          I don't know if the officers had time to clear the vehicle prior to the dog shooting or not. I would think that since they had all three occupants out of the vehicle, it should have been cleared.

                          One of the reports I read did indicate that the vehicle had been cleared prior to the incident, after the people had been removed from the car.

                          What I want to know is: How could this incident have been prevented? Just what else could this family have done (other than request the doors be closed to keep the dogs inside) such that this killing of their pet did not occur? What had they done wrong that they should have their dog shot? I will remind you that in some states in this country the family dog may rank higher in esteem than the children--not that I agree with this attitude, but it is true. Unless you are able to dictate a set of procedures which will likely prevent another incident of this type from happening, then the process has failed and nothing was learned from this tragedy. (And yes, it was a tragedy for that family!)

                          I agree with one of the earlier posters--that family will win in court and there is nothing the state can do about it. The general citizenry is not going to put up with this type of heavy-handed law enforcement, no matter how well justified the action might be.

                          I have not looked at the videos but I am willing to accept the testimony of those who have. When the officer shot the dog, just how close to the line of fire (beyond the dog) were the members of the family, who supposedly were in front of the officer and handcuffed on their knees on the ground. Could this action in any way be viewed as reckless endangerment? Firing a shotgun in a hurried response like that could easily put the shot someplace it was not intended to go.

                          No flame, but a lot of concern.

                          DaveInTx
                          Texan By Choice, not Accident

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            In the video, The officer is clearly firing in a direction that is away from the suspects and the other officers. He was firing AWAY from the road, the dog had circled and came at him from off the road. I'm trying to imagine what would have happened if he didn't fire, and I'm sure he would have been attacked. He has a clean record, commondations and no disipline ever. This is not a bad guy, anybody in that situation would either of fired or been attacked.
                            All of god's creatures are entitled to live without fear of "gun violence" except for you and your family. - <a href="http://www.handguncontrolinc.org/selfdefense_quiz.htm" target="_blank">Source</a>

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              quote:
                              The communications sergeant
                              LOL! What makes you think Cookeville's PD has a Communications SGT? Few Southern LE agencies(in my area) have any sort of command structure within dispatch. Most DO have '911 Supervisors', but they RARELY(at least in my experience) 'get involved' in actual communication issues.

                              Recently one of my supervisiors mentioned he was going to recommend that dispatch be allowed the authority to assign officers 'response codes' when responding to calls. I couldn't stop laughing.....
                              "When you guys get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a *****."
                              -Commanding General, 1st Marine Division

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                quote:
                                Originally posted by DaveInTx:
                                I have not looked at the videos but I am willing to accept the testimony of those who have. When the officer shot the dog, just how close to the line of fire (beyond the dog) were the members of the family, who supposedly were in front of the officer and handcuffed on their knees on the ground. Could this action in any way be viewed as reckless endangerment? Firing a shotgun in a hurried response like that could easily put the shot someplace it was not intended to go.

                                No flame, but a lot of concern.

                                DaveInTx
                                Texan By Choice, not Accident

                                Actually, from the video, the Officer that shot the dog was facing away from the vehicles, toward the shoulder of the road, and the angle from which he fired was high enough that the shot wouldn't have carried very far at all. The dog was almost on him (within a few feet) when he fired.

                                (edited for spelling)

                                [ 01-10-2003, 08:56 PM: Message edited by: JKT ]
                                Optimistic pessimist: Hope for the best, but expect the worst.

                                Jack

                                [email protected]

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 4646 users online. 317 members and 4329 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X