Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trooper Shoots Family Dog

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • quote:
    Originally posted by Mike Tx:


    It's against the law to point a weapon at someone not commiting the crime of putting you in danger of death or serious injury. The fact that the police did not know they were dealing with the law abiding is irrelevant.

    Mike I have to back Frank on this one. You have no idea what you are talking about. I would bet every state and D.C. has a law on the books to exempt "brandishing" when carrying out police action.

    The fact of the matter is every day police officers have to go into situations often with little more than what they are told by 911 dispatch. Notice I said, what they are told by 911 dispatch, not what 911 dispatch is told by a caller. Prior experience with the same address or individuals that may be involved in the run can assist with the planning every officer makes enroute to a run.

    It is very easy to sit back and repeatedly view a video without the "benefit" of a lack of information or the adrenaline rush of a felony stop.

    You cannot properly judge the officers actions with all the facts, you must go with what they knew at the time.
    Do your best, do what is right

    Comment


    • quote:
      I guess I just don't see the high risk in this stop.
      Would you see the risk if all you had to go on was the report of a robbery? That's all the officers had to go on.

      quote:
      What luck are you talking about?

      That you couldn't hang them on some weapons charge that doesn't apply LEO's performing their duties.

      Comment


      • I'm not trying to hang them. My whole intent before the cops attacked and started cussing me for asking questions about this was to try and understand what happened and see what could be done to avoid this in the future. Instead what I see is the vast majority of the police here do not want to do that, are not concerned with the rights of the victims of their mistake, and don't really want to see they are wrong.

        I posted a pretty bad post the other day that DK removed, rightfully so, and I apologize for that. I really don't hate any of you, but I do hate what you have made me become by your words and actions in my attempt to simply understand why BS like this happens and how to avoid it.

        It's like this to me: Many times the police ask for help from "us" and many times it has been stated that the police need "us" to do their jobs. But in this case you can see what happens when we try to help. I get treated like garbage on this forum. So in the real world, I would never attempt to help the police for fear of invoking their "officer safety" gun in the face procedures. In other words my "civilian safety" procedure takes over and I avoid you, and getting involved in anyway with the police like the plague.

        Sorry, but that's what it's come to. I realize you don't give a damn what I think because I'm just another idiot civilain POS in your eyes, but many of "us" do know what we are talking about and at one time or another in the not to distant past, we/I/they did respect the police.

        Comment


        • quote:
          Originally posted by SpecOpsWarrior:
          quote:
          Originally posted by RoadRunner440:

          Actually it's spelled stereotype, not steriotype.

          And I also think your theory on stereotyping is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard! Simply because I am more apprehensive around pitbulls, does not mean I'm going to be applying the same standard to groups of people based on their race. To suggest that is totally asinine!

          The fact you buy into any sterotypes(sorry) scares me if you wear the badge. The law is not supposed to discriminate, and that applys to the dog as well. The dog was the property of that family and I don't think ANYONE has the right to destroy anothers property when they are innocent. You are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, yet I see people on their knees with cuffs on and a dead dog. The officer who shot the dog even said he was surprised when they were uncuffing the family, he had automaticaly jumped to the assumption that they were a guilty party.

          [ 01-12-2003, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: RoadRunner440 ]

          Comment




          • [ 01-12-2003, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: RoadRunner440 ]

            Comment


            • I, for one, cannot believe that all this came about because someone did not have the decency to secure their dog.
              Ours is prone to run out of the truck, IF, she has no lease on. With it fastened, she can still get comfy in her seat, but will NOT run. Take it off, though, and she's like greased lightning.

              I realize that this is a simplistic, at best, respsonse. However, the comment that was made about the 3-yr old child made sense to me, and I feel it should have applied to a dog as well, at least to one that is well loved enough to take on the family vacation.

              Let me also reiterate the underlying theme of just about 97% of all LEO responses herein: If you weren't there, you can't judge.
              I say that 'cause I assume I automatically say I would've shot, too. (Can I ride the fence any more? )

              Seriously, though, do any of Y'ALL restrain YOUR dogs in the truck?
              What about the ones that ride in the bed of the truck?

              Out
              American by Birth, Aggie By Choice, TEXAN by the grace of God...

              "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, what matters is the size of the fight in the dog."

              Comment


              • Heaven forbid they saw someone in the car fiddling around with the leash and seatbelt and took these "furtive movements" as a sign of aggression!! I can't blame the family for not securing the dog when there were a bunch of cops out there for no reason as far as they knew, pointing pistols and shotguns at them and screaming (?) at them to get out of the
                ve-hic-le.

                [ 01-12-2003, 04:37 PM: Message edited by: Frank Booth ]

                Comment


                • Frank,

                  quote:
                  Originally posted by Frank Booth:
                  Heaven forbid they saw someone in the car fiddling around with the leash and seatbelt and took these "furtive movements" as a sign of aggression!! I can't blame the family for not securing the dog when there were a bunch of cops out there for no reason as far as they knew, pointing pistols and shotguns at them and screaming (?) at them to get out of the
                  ve-hic-le.

                  Well said, I couldn't agree more.
                  Retired

                  Comment


                  • Ditto.

                    Comment


                    • Sam,
                      My point was this, just because the dog was wagging his tail does not mean that it was playing or being friendly. I used my AmStaff as an example.

                      PS. Brutus (RIP) did show aggression towards humans on a few occasions, but only when he perceived them to be a threat.

                      edit:
                      I have not seen any of the footage and have gathered my info from here and the original link.

                      [ 01-12-2003, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: MadMax ]

                      Comment


                      • I have to agree with Pig.
                        I'm wondering why they didn't secure them in patrol cars seperately. They were all in a bad position between the cars like that.

                        From what I know about dogs, the dog's body language suggests it was aggressive - not BEFORE when it exited the car but as it came back into camera view attacking Officer Hall, It's teeth were showing, it's ears appeared to be back, and it seemed to be snarling. It seems that the poor quality of the video combined with the dog going off camera really leaves it open to different interpretations. The snarling I heard could be anything considering the poor audio quality. Then again dogs do sometimes play in a manner that appears aggressive, Which can frighten anyone who doesn't know the dog. But I seriously would wonder why the dog would be playing with a bunch of ppl who have his family on the ground screaming and crying. Pitbulls are very visious animals, abuse may play a big role as well as selective breeding but then again pits have been known to pull their owners out of burning cars too. I would suspect the best doggy would defend his family, And since the dog has no way of knowing these are the popo I'm sure he could easily believe them to be in danger and protect them.
                        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


                        • quote:
                          From what I know about dogs, the dog's body language suggests it was aggressive - not BEFORE when it exited the car but as it came back into camera view attacking Officer Hall,
                          The dog never attacked anyone. It was killed.

                          quote:
                          But I seriously would wonder why the dog would be playing with a bunch of ppl who have his family on the ground screaming and crying.
                          Perhaps the dog wasn't versed yet in english and was just trying to "sniff out" what was going on. Or maybe he was just waiting for them to pass out the donuts.

                          quote:
                          Pitbulls are very visious animals, abuse may play a big role as well as selective breeding but then again pits have been known to pull their owners out of burning cars too.
                          I wonder if they use glass breakers and seat belt cutters?

                          quote:
                          I would suspect the best doggy would defend his family
                          If that's true maybe they need to carry full auto weapons.

                          quote:
                          And since the dog has no way of knowing these are the popo I'm sure he could easily believe them to be in danger and protect them.
                          Shoot the dog, if that's the case.

                          [ 01-12-2003, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: Mike Tx ]

                          Comment


                          • quote:
                            Originally posted by p01ic3m4n:
                            quote:
                            Originally posted by Mike Tx:
                            I guess I just don't see the high risk in this stop.

                            you're told that a car is driving down the road at 110 mph with money flying from it and that's not what you consider high risk? i sincerely hope you aren't this naive.

                            at 17:20:31, the driver mentions he has a dog in the car.
                            at 17:20:37, the dog exits the car.
                            at 17:20:39, the dog is shot.

                            the dog went out of the car, circled to the left side and was headed straight for the officer. if you can put a firearm down and grab pepper spray in 2 seconds, give me your doctor's phone number because you're going to get bitten.

                            i think this would have been a nightmare, not only for the people who were stopped, but the officers involved. i don't see any fault in the officers though.

                            I have seen the tape...many times now.

                            At 17:20:37 the woman starts screaming because she sees the dog is out. At 17:20:38/39 the dog can be heard growling aggressively. I had to turn the volume way up because the mic is on the trooper standing near the other side of the car...not the best sound quality, but it can be heard (the growling is low pitched).

                            I have been bitten many times...perhaps thousands...it's what I do for a hobby (no, I'm not crazy). Granted, the dogs I usually work with are used for sport/police work, and we are actively trying to manipulate a dog's drive and it's responses to various stimuli. The drives and instincts are the same...no matter the dog. Some just display it better than others.

                            Dogs CAN AND DO wag their tails when biting/attacking.

                            Dogs CAN AND DO have their ears up when biting/attacking.

                            That dog was going in to bite.

                            Can any of the critics of this Officer say that they have been bitten? Not just bitten, but bitten badly.

                            How many of these critics have gone through the treatment for Rabies because the dog's owner/s have not kept up on the dog's shots?

                            How do you know if the dog is or is not up to date on its shots when you have all of three seconds in which to react?

                            I would have shot the dog.

                            Comment


                            • A family dog in the car with them, with rabies? That's stretching it don't you think?

                              quote:
                              you're told that a car is driving down the road at 110 mph with money flying from it and that's not what you consider high risk? i sincerely hope you aren't this naive.
                              Why didn't they get a speeding ticket?

                              [ 01-12-2003, 08:49 PM: Message edited by: Mike Tx ]

                              Comment


                              • quote:
                                Originally posted by shooter1201:
                                Where did the 110mph come from? 110/70 is a MISDEMEANOR traffic violation....NOT worthy of a Felony Stop in itself. I drive I-40 a LOT. The NORMAL speed on I-40 is 80-85mph. I'd like to know WHAT mini-van, fully loaded, would do 110mph? I may have to give this whole 'mini-van thingy' another thought.

                                LMAO... minivans.... so shooter are you saying I should've sued the CHP for drawing on me, a sweet innocent juvenille (I was 17) who was only speeding? If I knew then what I know now, maybe I would've had the sense to actually be afraid.
                                Have you ever noticed? Anybody going slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac.

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 4671 users online. 314 members and 4357 guests.

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

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X