Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Police Shoot Dog - Justified Or Not?  
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13509 posts, RR: 62
Posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2776 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Apparently this occurred last week; a man was placed under arrest by police in Hawthorne, CA. During his arrest his pet Rottweiler jumped out of the car and attacked one of the officers, who responded by opening fire.

See the video (WARNING - graphic and disturbing) for yourself and you decide; justified, or not?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9fCK6Y0bu4

My take? It sounds like the arrest may not have been justified, however once he was under arrest and that dog attacked the officer, there was no other option but to put the dog down with force, especially since the officer tried twice to get control of the dog's leash and it lunged at him.



(side note - read the closed captioning; how the hell did that person get their job?)


"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
65 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRomeoBravo From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2013, 1419 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2761 times:

I saw this a few days back and my initial reaction was that the officer was a complete and utter tool - of course watching a video is not being there. On top of that it was horrible seeing the dog get shot and the owner's reaction.

[Edited 2013-07-09 01:48:18]

User currently offlineAirstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2628 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2759 times:

I didn't watch the video and expect I shan't, but quick question: Don't stun guns work on dogs?


Pancakes are delicious.
User currently offlinenighthawk From UK - Scotland, joined Sep 2001, 5126 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2743 times:

Quoting Airstud (Reply 2):
Don't stun guns work on dogs?

I would have thought the dosage in a stun gun would be set to incapacitate a human. Such a dose would probably be fatal to a dog.



That'll teach you
User currently offlineAirstud From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2628 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2735 times:

Quoting nighthawk (Reply 3):
I would have thought the dosage in a stun gun would be set to incapacitate a human. Such a dose would probably be fatal to a dog.

I thought about that too, but my thinking is still, better to use the stun gun and risk killing the dog, than to use bullets and do it definitely.



Pancakes are delicious.
User currently offlinegreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3078 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2689 times:

Both probes from a taser have to make contact. As they leave the taser they start to spread out. in a "v" therefore most likely a dog coming at you will produce two small of a target for both probes to make contact with. One misses and the taser is completely ineffective. So no a taser is not an option.

Plus this is happening really fast and it is really easy to critique a video when you are not standing in front of the dog.

Plus remember this dog sees its owner being attacked and is not running up to them to lick them. He is a Rotti and is in attack mode.

So you taser and miss and the dog chomps onto you. What do you do now? His partners cannot now shoot the dog for risk of hitting the officer. The officer is now fighting off the dog and he cannot get his gun out.

I have a doberman and if anyone attacks me it will give up its life to try and save me i suspect,

I the same situation I would also shoot the dog,

This is the owners fault for putting the dog in this situation.

gs

[Edited 2013-07-09 05:04:31]


Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5344 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2660 times:

Let me preface this by saying I have had at least one dog, sometimes multiple dogs, in my home for the last 20 years. I have had Dobermans, Labradors and mutts. They have all been members of my family and I have treated them as such.

But, if one of my dogs attacked a police officer, I expect that police officer to put the dog down...it would save me the trouble.

I have had exposure to Rotts. They are loyal to a fault. They are strong, agile and can be vicious when they are in danger or their family is in danger. A dog can not distinguish between a police officer doing his job and an asshole.

Quoting greasespot (Reply 5):
This is the owners fault for putting the dog in this situation.

  

[Edited 2013-07-09 06:45:17]


When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
User currently offlineAeri28 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 705 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2649 times:

Unfortunately there are a lot of stories of dogs attacking people. I remember about a month ago a story of some woman jogging in the woods and being attacked by dogs,

and did you all see this recent story of a woman news reporter being attacked by a womans two dogs? Never mind the reporter confronting the woman in the first place, that is not the issue here (same as with the Hawthorne arrest), the issue is with using a dog as an attack weapon. I understand the dog owner went to jail over this.
since she was a reporter and had a crew, it was caught on tape.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9adcLjqjlY

It's funny, after hearing of a few of these stories, I was walking at night from the gym down a downtown street, and here in Honolulu, downtown, there is a store that was once Macy's and is now unused (soon to be a Walmart but that s not the story lol), but there was this homeless-ish man sleeping in the door/entry way which was semi lit from above. Okay, so I am walking home from the gym, it's about 10:30 pm and I see hiim and his dog slee;ping next to him. I get close, about 15 feet away as Im on the sidewalk and he/the dog is in the doorway to old Macys, and I sort of say "hello doggie" as I am p;assing and the dog starts snarling and barking very aggressively, the guy is asleep, but then the dog starts running towards me and I get worried, but realize, oh, the leash will stop him. Thing is, there is no leash, then I get worried and that dog is seeminly in attack mode. I yell out to the guy "Hey, get your dog away" or soemthing to that effect and he wakes up and yells for the dog who comes running back. I am a bit shaken and am seriously at the point where I want to call someone and get this dog off the street, but I don't. I jus want out of that situation.

Next thing the man is slapping up the dog and I have a bit of smile on me. I will admit, had that dog gotten any closer to me I would not have hesitated to bash its head in with my gym bag filled with heavy crap. I love dogs too. This was not a poodle, or terrier but a sort of dog that I would associate with being rottweilerish or pit bull-ish, hence my alarm.
This incident made me begin to consider some sort of pepper spray or mace for these situations. I never did get that far, but I still am considering something for future purposes.

Anyway, tbats my story. I symphathize wiith the police and anybody who has to deal with an out of control dog. I actually blame the owners and people handliing these pets and training them poorly. That is an issue, but the animal sadly, will pay the consequences for his owners errant ways.

[Edited 2013-07-09 07:01:08]

User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2609 times:

Quoting greasespot (Reply 5):
This is the owners fault for putting the dog in this situation.

What exactly should he have done differently?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineiowaman From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4364 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2585 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

I don't see what the huge uproar over this video is. The owner appears to be walking around several police cruisers, with his music playing loudly in his vehicle with his windows down. Then when he won't leave, the police finally come over to him after he puts the dog in the car, with the windows still down. The owner should have never been screwing around that place to begin with. When the dog jumped out and appears to try to attack, the police officer shoots it in self-defense. I'm not sure what they arrested him for, but the loud music and interference with official acts is probably a good start. I doubt many other police officers would have reacted much different. I do computer repair service house calls and have had two different dogs run up on me, and the thought of a large aggressive dog regardless of the breed biting your hand and also possibly transmitting rabies is nothing something I would want to deal with. People need to be responsible with their pets and responsible for themselves in general.


Next flights: WN DSM-LAS-PHX, US PHX-SJD. Return: US SJD-PHX, WN PHX-MDW-DSM
User currently offlineArmitageShanks From UK - England, joined Dec 2003, 3609 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2577 times:

Quoting Airstud (Reply 2):
Don't stun guns work on dogs?

I have seen it work on dogs before and it does not kill them. The only issue is how they react after the shock. Most of the videos I've seen of dogs getting tazed they run away but some dogs might become even angrier.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7803 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2576 times:

It is sad but putting down threatening dogs is nothing new. There is a lot of coulda-woulda-shoulda involved, but we all know hindsight is 20/20. The SOP is the same for people--if an officer thinks his/her life is in danger and a human is coming at the officer threateningly, the result would be the same. I'm surprised the officer didn't shoot earlier to be honest.

Still is sad though   I don't think it was directly the owners fault, nor do I see the police using excessive force. It's just a sad situation.

Also, every police jurisdiction is different. The SOP might not allow for the officers to use tasers on dogs, it might be as black and white as "shoot a threatening animal"

I hope that before the outrage comes pouring out people at least learn the facts before rushing to flawed, emotional judgement



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2568 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I agree with the male commentator. The guy was clearly trying to annoy the cops and, more importantly, distract them from the armed stand-off that was taking place. That is obstruction, and he shouldn't have done it. As for the rest, they were right to shoot the rottweiler trying to attack them - I sure as hell would if I had the gun and it was coming for me.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2567 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 11):

I hope that before the outrage comes pouring out people at least learn the facts before rushing to flawed, emotional judgement

Not a chance.

"Committing no crime", yeah, like playing music that loud is totally legal... especially when you're doing it in front of cops that are looking for armed suspects.

When a dog attacks a cop (or anyone, for that matter), they're just supposed to sit there and take it?


Oh well, even the mother of some (now dead) punk who tried to shoot a cop claims her son was innocent... even though it was all caught on film.

You're just not going to reason with some people.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDFWHeavy From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 560 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2522 times:

If the dog next door doesn't stop barking real soon, he may be tasting one of my bullets. It's so wrong that people let their dogs bark and bark and bark with disregard of those around them.


Christopher W Slovacek
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26361 posts, RR: 76
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2484 times:

This was a disgusting incident. There was no need to shoot the dog.

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 14):
If the dog next door doesn't stop barking real soon, he may be tasting one of my bullets.

I hope you go to prison if you actually do that.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2474 times:

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 14):
If the dog next door doesn't stop barking real soon, he may be tasting one of my bullets. It's so wrong that people let their dogs bark and bark and bark with disregard of those around them.

I guarantee you that if you shoot a dog who is doing nothing more than barking, you will end up in jail.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
This was a disgusting incident. There was no need to shoot the dog.

How so? What do you think was going on, and what would have been your course of action?



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7803 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2469 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
This was a disgusting incident. There was no need to shoot the dog.

There are precedents to shooting dogs, officers have been attacked before. And trust me, I LOVE dogs. Are you mad at the officer or the SOP? I do not know this departments SOP but I'd bet $20 the officer did not do wrong according to the SOP



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineHorizonGirl From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 807 posts, RR: 16
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2462 times:

I love dogs, I think this was a horrible, awful incident, and it should not have happened. However, I believe in this circumstance, the officer had no choice but to shoot the dog. What bothers me the most is, in the videos I've seen, it seems as though the dog is not killed immediately and is suffering after being shot. The officer should have shot the dog at least once more to end his pain. As far as I see it, acting out of self defense it understandable, but causing undue suffering is not.


Devon



Flying high on the Wings of the Great Northwest!
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7803 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2456 times:

Quoting HorizonGirl (Reply 18):
The officer should have shot the dog at least once more to end his pain

In the department I worked with, mercy shots were not instantaneous... a single shot in the heart. Perhaps that is why he didn't just shoot the dog in the head in the end. Cops are trained to shoot center mass, and maybe the cop did shoot the dog in the heart.

Also, consider that cops don't really want to shoot unless they have to, especially with people all around. Shooting the dog to incapacitate it was needed, despite the people around (in the officer's eyes) but a mercy shot with all those people around may have been too risky

Cops are more regulated in what they can/can't do than most people realize. They often get in crappy situations that are lose-lose, like this one. Every department is different with it's rules, so it's hard for me or anyone to say what the cop could have or should have done



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinemdsh00 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4124 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2453 times:

It almost look like the dog wasn't about to jump and maybe the officer was a little too quick to shoot. That being said I may have done the same thing in his shoes.

What everyone in their cop-hating angle doesn't acknowledge is the owner being an idiot. He DROVE over to the scene of police activity and kept distracting the police (you can hear him saying stuff and videotaping with his phone). He really had no reason to even go there and put his dog in that situation.



"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2440 times:

Quoting HorizonGirl (Reply 18):
What bothers me the most is, in the videos I've seen, it seems as though the dog is not killed immediately and is suffering after being shot. The officer should have shot the dog at least once more to end his pain.

Unfortunately, then you would get the already rabid anti-cop gang screaming "OMG he executed that poor puppy!   "



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineKaiGywer From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 12214 posts, RR: 35
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2438 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

We had a similar incident where I work just a few weeks ago. The dog attacked an officer and was shot. It was taken to an emergency vet, but died later from the injuries. Completely justified.

For those wondering if a Taser (what some call a stun gun) works...watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-Itfr_V424



911, where is your emergency?
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5344 posts, RR: 14
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2372 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
This was a disgusting incident. There was no need to shoot the dog.

And how exactly would a police officer(s) deal with a dog that is tipping the scales somewhere north of 100 lbs? A dog that thinks its owner is being attacked? A dog that has been bred for protection and if not properly trained, a dangerous, unpredictable animal? And, if properly trained in protection, a potential deadly weapon?

Have you ever tangled with a large dog? Really tangled with an angered dog defending its own? I've seen the results of what happens when you do that.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 19):
Perhaps that is why he didn't just shoot the dog in the head in the end. Cops are trained to shoot center mass, and maybe the cop did shoot the dog in the heart.

I don't know of anyone that trains on a dog silhouette. Training for most 'beat' officers is center mass shooting at a target that is 'standing' up. I've seen some officers at my local range fire from a crouch or prone position, but they are always firing up at the target. The physics changes when you are aiming down at your target. Throw into the mix a moving target, and the situation changes.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7803 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2331 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 23):
I don't know of anyone that trains on a dog silhouette. Training for most 'beat' officers is center mass shooting at a target that is 'standing' up. I've seen some officers at my local range fire from a crouch or prone position, but they are always firing up at the target. The physics changes when you are aiming down at your target. Throw into the mix a moving target, and the situation changes.

My point is they aren't shooting at the dog's head for a quick death or at its legs to immobilize it. They're just shooting at the dog, towards the center more or less (and I didn't mention movement calculations or the angle up or down, I meant the officer aims wherever to get the bullet into the dog even if straight down the sights is not exactly center mass)



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5344 posts, RR: 14
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 weeks ago) and read 2334 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 24):
My point is they aren't shooting at the dog's head for a quick death or at its legs to immobilize it.

I was just making a general observation and used your post to bridge into it. Anyone who suggests that the officer should have gone for a 'kill shot' or an 'incapacitation shot' clearly doesn't understand the dynamics of such a shot.

Officers train center mass. Always fire at the largest area the target presents.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 26, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2301 times:

Quoting mdsh00 (Reply 20):
What everyone in their cop-hating angle doesn't acknowledge is the owner being an idiot. He DROVE over to the scene of police activity and kept distracting the police (you can hear him saying stuff and videotaping with his phone).

Videotaping with a phone isn't illegal, and there's no reason for it to be considered distracting to the police unless the guy is actively disrupting what they're doing (which he wasn't).

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9772 posts, RR: 27
Reply 27, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2294 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting HorizonGirl (Reply 18):
I love dogs, I think this was a horrible, awful incident, and it should not have happened. However, I believe in this circumstance, the officer had no choice but to shoot the dog.

As much as it pains me to say it, I agree. There might have been ways to avoid this, prior to what we see in the video, but based solely on the video, I can't fault the officer.

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 14):
If the dog next door doesn't stop barking real soon, he may be tasting one of my bullets. It's so wrong that people let their dogs bark and bark and bark with disregard of those around them.

Damn. Would you kill a baby who won't stop screaming, too?



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7803 posts, RR: 52
Reply 28, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2289 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 26):
Videotaping with a phone isn't illegal, and there's no reason for it to be considered distracting to the police unless the guy is actively disrupting what they're doing (which he wasn't).

While I agree and would fight any attempt to disallow filming, it does often annoy me when people film and then nitpick everything the cop does. Most the time, the filmers are completely ignorant of the law or police SOP and judge the cops like they have months to plan out every meticulous detail, not just mere split seconds. On top of it, the people they show it to are also usually just as ignorant so all this anger and hatred flies around that is undue and unneeded. Also, when sleezy lawyers enter the picture, the cops' already hard jobs get harder

I of course am not talking about legit cases of police misconduct which does happen quite a lot. I'm talking about situations like this--and don't get me wrong, I can argue a few points on how the cop wasn't right, but a lot of the arguments I've seen so far aren't really valid and lack a understanding of policing. I can't really blame people sometimes, the mercy kill shot, for example, seems like a legitimate action, but the policeman may very well be not allowed to do it, and for good reason (I don't know this department's SOP, but shooting a gun near a bunch of people when an officer's life is NOT in danger probably is not allowed, as sad as it is to see the dog suffer)



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineidealstandard From France, joined Apr 2009, 407 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2273 times:

I think the Police Officer needs as few distractions as possible whilst dealing with an arrest situation, as such if a dog (which can be vicious and dangerous) is approaching the officer he needs to take any measures necessary to prevent the situation unfurling.

User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5344 posts, RR: 14
Reply 30, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2247 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 27):
Damn. Would you kill a baby who won't stop screaming, too?

I wish people would stop drawing a moral equivalency between a human being and an animal.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 31, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2240 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 23):
Have you ever tangled with a large dog? Really tangled with an angered dog defending its own? I've seen the results of what happens when you do that.

Indeed. A couple of months ago, I saved my neighbor's dog from another neighbor's dog. The attacking dog had the victim dog by the throat, and I had to use a broom handle to pry its jaws open. It's not uncommon for certain breeds to latch on and never let go.

As horrible as the dog shooting was, the officer was absolutely justified in stopping the threat like he did.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
This was a disgusting incident. There was no need to shoot the dog.

What would you have done? And what training have you had that better qualifies you to make such a decision in this situation? Please enlighten us.



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9772 posts, RR: 27
Reply 32, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2218 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 30):
I wish people would stop drawing a moral equivalency between a human being and an animal.

For many people, dogs are part of their family. Wish all you want, but people don't have to share your view. Just like how some people would do absolutely anything for their friends, and others wouldn't.

With that out of the way, my response was half-sarcastic. I don't actually expect that DFWHeavy would shoot a baby that wouldn't shut up. But the utter callousness of his post (from my point of view) shocked me.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineDFWHeavy From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 560 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2206 times:

Absolutely not Vikkivyk. People and animals are two different things. I'm rational.. I can separate between humans and animals and understand they have a place below us. I definitely do not condone animal abuse or the like, but I'm not going to allow an animal to interfere with my privacy or me being able to work. Far too many people have lost sight of this and elevate animals to the same level as humans and treat them as such...which is sad. I like pets/animals, but the minute I can't control it or it bothers others around me, it will no longer be in my household. The courtesy to humans around me is paramount to any animal.


Christopher W Slovacek
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5344 posts, RR: 14
Reply 34, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2202 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 32):
For many people, dogs are part of their family.

As I've stated earlier, I've had dogs for over 20 years. They have been members of my family. I cried (along with my family) each time one had to be put down.

I treat my dogs better than I treat some people I know...what does that make me?

I don't compare animals to humans.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9772 posts, RR: 27
Reply 35, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2189 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 34):
As I've stated earlier, I've had dogs for over 20 years. They have been members of my family. I cried (along with my family) each time one had to be put down.

I treat my dogs better than I treat some people I know...what does that make me?

I don't compare animals to humans.

OK. I didn't actually say anything about you at all - I don't know you, and don't know your relationships with people or pets.

I don't typically compare animals to humans either, but I don't look down on those that do. People have different priorities in life, and I don't have an issue with that, as long as they're not harming anyone.

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 33):
Absolutely not Vikkivyk.

I know. As I said, it was half-sarcastic, and didn't actually expect you to do that.

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 33):
I definitely do not condone animal abuse or the like, but I'm not going to allow an animal to interfere with my privacy or me being able to work.

Fine. But shooting it certainly isn't a good answer.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 36, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2179 times:

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 33):
I'm not going to allow an animal to interfere with my privacy

Interefere with your privacy? Is it staring at you through the window or something?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 37, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2171 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 26):
Videotaping with a phone isn't illegal, and there's no reason for it to be considered distracting to the police unless the guy is actively disrupting what they're doing (which he wasn't).

Did you not hear the blaring music in the video?

Quoting DFWHeavy (Reply 33):
I definitely do not condone animal abuse or the like, but I'm not going to allow an animal to interfere with my privacy or me being able to work.

So the proper thing to do is to... shoot it?



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 38, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2156 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 26):
Videotaping with a phone isn't illegal, and there's no reason for it to be considered distracting to the police unless the guy is actively disrupting what they're doing (which he wasn't).

Pestering them over and over with idiotic 'complaints' after being asked several times to stop it and move away, while playing stupidly loud music is not disruptive at a time when the Police clearly need to focus on the siege? Yeah, ok.   



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 39, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2136 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 37):
Did you not hear the blaring music in the video?

Did they ever ask him to turn it down?

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 38):
Pestering them over and over with idiotic 'complaints' after being asked several times to stop it and move away, while playing stupidly loud music is not disruptive at a time when the Police clearly need to focus on the siege? Yeah, ok.

When did he pester them with idiotic complaints? He was walking around near his car and filming from there, the police were half a block away.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinestratosphere From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1651 posts, RR: 4
Reply 40, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2131 times:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 31):
As horrible as the dog shooting was, the officer was absolutely justified in stopping the threat like he did.


He may have been in this case but there is certainly evidence of cops being overzealous and killing dogs and people too. Anyone remember a case in Eastern Tennessee man gassing up his vehicle forgets his wallet on the roof of car and drives off and his money is scattered all over. So someone calls cops and they pull the family over thinking they are drug dealers they pull the family out of the car and leave all the doors open the family dog jumps out with tail wagging this was not a pit bull just a plain old mutt, cop takes his shotgun and blows the dogs head off. This cop later got death threats. Cop was a scumbag and there are a lot like him on police forces around the country.



NWA THE TRUE EVIL EMPIRE
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 41, posted (1 year 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2117 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 39):
Did they ever ask him to turn it down?

I wasn't aware it was a legal (or even moral) requirement for police to "ask" someone to stop breaking the law before they arrest someone for breaking the law.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 42, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2095 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting stratosphere (Reply 40):
He may have been in this case but there is certainly evidence of cops being overzealous and killing dogs and people too. Anyone remember a case in Eastern Tennessee man gassing up his vehicle forgets his wallet on the roof of car and drives off and his money is scattered all over. So someone calls cops and they pull the family over thinking they are drug dealers they pull the family out of the car and leave all the doors open the family dog jumps out with tail wagging this was not a pit bull just a plain old mutt, cop takes his shotgun and blows the dogs head off. This cop later got death threats. Cop was a scumbag and there are a lot like him on police forces around the country.

What I have a problem with is the uneducated second-guessing and armchair quarterbacking that goes on toward law enforcement. Why is it that whenever there's an aviation accident, many/most A.net users respect the fact that:

A) They weren't there
B) They weren't facing the same stress and external factors as the people involved
C) They don't possess the same experience and training as the people involved, and thus,
D) It is wholly inappropriate to criticize that person's actions without having all the facts

Is it good to question authority? Should law enforcement ultimately answer to the people? Absolutely. But it would be nice if people provided even a shred of the respect they provide to flight crews toward the people that work in law enforcement. We don't vilify the entire pilot community by constantly comparing them to a small handful of bad apples in their industry. Why is it ok to direct so much animosity toward the entire law enforcement community because a very small percentage of cops do their job poorly?

I think it all boils down to somehow being considered fashionable or "cool" to be disgusted with the law enforcement community as a whole. I just don't get it.



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 43, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2070 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 41):
I wasn't aware it was a legal (or even moral) requirement for police to "ask" someone to stop breaking the law before they arrest someone for breaking the law.

Playing music is illegal now?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5344 posts, RR: 14
Reply 44, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2060 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 43):
Playing music is illegal now?

Interfering with police .

[Edited 2013-07-12 04:26:07]


When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 45, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2025 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 44):
Interfering with police .

And until the police tell you you're interfering, how do you really know you're interfering?

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 46, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2021 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 39):
When did he pester them with idiotic complaints? He was walking around near his car and filming from there, the police were half a block away.

He was reported to be repeatedly hassling them about why there were 'no black cops' there. He was told to go away - perfectly fair in the circumstances - he didn't go away. You talk as though the cops just hassled him for no reason while walking down the street - they were engaged in an armed stand off. You do NOT start hassling the cops when they're involved in stuff like that. If you do, despite being warned not to, expect to get nicked.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 47, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2015 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 46):
He was reported to be repeatedly hassling them about why there were 'no black cops' there. He was told to go away - perfectly fair in the circumstances - he didn't go away.


Reported by who? I never say them tell him to go away. The first time I saw them approach him was to arrest him. If they had told him to go away or to turn the music down and he didn't do it, then I'd be a whole lot more sympathetic to them. But they escalated the situation needlessly, and an innocent animal lost its life because of it. That's on them, not on the dog owner.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 48, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2014 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Mir (Reply 47):
I never say them tell him to go away. The first time I saw them approach him was to arrest him.


Wait, so you're saying that because you personally didn't happen to see (or hear) them tell him to go away on this particular video clip, it definitely never happened? Is that accurate?

Quoting Mir (Reply 47):
But they escalated the situation needlessly

You're just as wrong as wrong can be. The dog's owner placed everyone into a bad situation by not securing his violent dog. The police were forced to stop the threat.



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 49, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2014 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 47):
Reported by who?

By the commentators discussing the original video for one, specifically stating that he kept badgering them about why there were no black cops, and backed up by the fact that I honestly don't believe that in the middle of an armed siege the police are just going to harass him for no reason if he's not getting in the way somehow.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 50, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2006 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 43):
Playing music is illegal now?

Indeed, playing music at that kind of volume is a civil infraction in almost every municipality in the US... although not something you'd get arrested for unless you refuse to turn it down.

Quoting Mir (Reply 45):
And until the police tell you you're interfering, how do you really know you're interfering?

Ignorantia juris non excusat

Also, witnesses have stated that the guy was bothering the cops, and hence interfering.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7803 posts, RR: 52
Reply 51, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1976 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 43):
Quoting Mir (Reply 45):
Quoting Mir (Reply 47):

Are you intimately familiar with this case or are you just "going by the video?" You know better than that Mir! I'm not absolving the cops of guilt, but at the same time, I don't think we've seen/heard enough to say that the dog's owner is innocent either. We need to be careful that we don't shoot at the hip and say a party is either guilty or innocent without knowing all the facts



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8843 posts, RR: 10
Reply 52, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1974 times:

http://news.providencejournal.com/br...-news/2013/07/dog-attackready.html

This an example of a dangerous dog who was shot and deserved to be shot. One dog had 5 people terrorized and bitten. Anytime a dog is this dangerous, and there are many of them it seems. They should be shot. I agree the dog in this thread also deserved to be shot.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 53, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1949 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 51):
Are you intimately familiar with this case or are you just "going by the video?" You know better than that Mir! I'm not absolving the cops of guilt, but at the same time, I don't think we've seen/heard enough to say that the dog's owner is innocent either. We need to be careful that we don't shoot at the hip and say a party is either guilty or innocent without knowing all the facts

It's kind of a given that we don't know literally ALL of the facts. Clearly there wouldn't be much of a discussion without a healthy dose of assumption no matter what side of the argument you favour. What we do know is that the dog went for the copper. We also know there was an armed siege. We also know that the guy got himself arrested. We also know cops are not infallible, but then on the balance of probabilities I'm inclined to think that during an armed stand-off they're not likely to occupy themselves with arresting bystanders for no reason, particularly given the reports of this individual pestering them. But whatever, it's a bit daft to suggest that we shouldn't engage in any speculation. If that were the case, we'd have a thread with about three replies all of which said nothing but "oh, how interesting" or "poor dog". Wouldn't really make for an interesting time now, would it?



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2707 posts, RR: 8
Reply 54, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1929 times:

Funny that there is quite a few people on this thread that have no problem aborting a 20 week old child in the womb but get all upset when a cop put's down an aggressive dog  


OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7803 posts, RR: 52
Reply 55, posted (1 year 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1900 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 53):
But whatever, it's a bit daft to suggest that we shouldn't engage in any speculation. If that were the case, we'd have a thread with about three replies all of which said nothing but "oh, how interesting" or "poor dog". Wouldn't really make for an interesting time now, would it?

There is a difference between speculation and passing things off as facts. Look at the posts in question, a lot of it is not speculation, he was saying this and that DID happen. Maybe he did not mean it like that, but it would make things a lot clearer if he either provided a source or added "it appears that _____" or "if _____ happened then _____."

Mir is a smart guy, so I'm thinking it's just a communication issue or he is seeing something we do not

Trust me, I'm all for speculation, there is just a wrong way of going about it that confuses people



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 56, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1860 times:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 48):
Wait, so you're saying that because you personally didn't happen to see (or hear) them tell him to go away on this particular video clip, it definitely never happened? Is that accurate?

There are other videos out there that show the whole thing - the one in the OP is ridiculously short, and how one could draw anything from it I have no idea.

Try this one instead - shows the whole thing from the time the guy arrived, with no editorializing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJZb2sB2Xjc

At no time do the police approach him or say anything to him until they come to arrest him. Yes, he's videotaping from the corner (and at one point moves out into the street, but still doesn't approach the police), and yes he's saying things to the police, but neither of those things are illegal.

I can understand why the police shot the dog, but it's their fault for letting things get to that point in the first place.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 49):
By the commentators discussing the original video for one, specifically stating that he kept badgering them about why there were no black cops

And if I were the police, I'd say "what an idiot" and ignore him. Or, I'd tell him he's interfering with what they're doing and ask him to stop.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 50):
Indeed, playing music at that kind of volume is a civil infraction in almost every municipality in the US... although not something you'd get arrested for unless you refuse to turn it down.

Exactly. They should have asked him to turn it down first, and if he refused then I'd have no problem with them arresting him.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 50):
Ignorantia juris non excusat

Except that there's no clear definition of what "interfering with police" is, it's really up to the discretion of the officer in question - that can vary, and thus it's morally incumbent on the officer to tell the person that they're interfering and to stop (unless it's blatant, such as the guy trying to get close-up video and getting in the way, which he wasn't doing). By your logic, an officer could choose to arrest someone on the spot for videotaping them on grounds that they're "interfering", despite the fact that videotaping is legal and a reasonable person would not think they were breaking the law by doing so. I just can't accept that.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 57, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1837 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 56):
Exactly. They should have asked him to turn it down first
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=256_1373408203

They did tell him to back off, and he mouthed off back to them.

Quoting Mir (Reply 56):
and yes he's saying things to the police, but neither of those things are illegal.
Quoting Mir (Reply 56):
By your logic, an officer could choose to arrest someone on the spot for videotaping them on grounds that they're "interfering", despite the fact that videotaping is legal and a reasonable person would not think they were breaking the law by doing so.

Recording police officers is not against the law.

Badgering cops obviously in a stand-off situation while playing loud music is, especially after they tell you to go away.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 58, posted (1 year 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1815 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 56):
Or, I'd tell him he's interfering with what they're doing and ask him to stop.

So what makes you so sure they didn't?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 57):
They did tell him to back off, and he mouthed off back to them.

There we go.

Quoting Mir (Reply 56):
Except that there's no clear definition of what "interfering with police" is, it's really up to the discretion of the officer in question

Absolutely right. In the middle of an armed stand-off, however, I'd probably set the bar fairly low. There's no place for interfering morons in a situation like that. None at all.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 59, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1765 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 57):
They did tell him to back off, and he mouthed off back to them.

I can't hear exactly what they said in the video, but I will accept that they did say something to him. But it doesn't sound like they told him he could be arrested, which is what they should have done - there's no reason for him to think that he was doing anything illegal.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 60, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1748 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 59):
I can't hear exactly what they said in the video, but I will accept that they did say something to him. But it doesn't sound like they told him he could be arrested, which is what they should have done - there's no reason for him to think that he was doing anything illegal.

If you start beating someone the Police won't come over and suggest you stop because you could end up being arrested. There's an armed siege which was obvious, they very likely told him to go away when he started distracting them, he chose not to. There's no reason for them to spell out that interfering with the Police when they're operationally engaged is going to get you nicked. It should be downright obvious not to do it in the first place.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently onlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21512 posts, RR: 55
Reply 61, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1748 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 60):
If you start beating someone the Police won't come over and suggest you stop because you could end up being arrested.

Because beating someone is clearly a crime. Videotaping is not, nor is talking to the police, nor is playing music. It only becomes a crime if the police decide it is, and at that point it's morally incumbent on them to let the person in question know.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5564 posts, RR: 6
Reply 62, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1743 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
Because beating someone is clearly a crime.

Funny, I don't see the producers or participants of UFC being arrested.

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
Videotaping is not, nor is talking to the police, nor is playing music.

He was not arrested because he was recording the scene, nor was he arrested for simply "playing music". He was arrested because he was playing music at an excessive volume, while badgering the police, and continuing those actions after he was told to go away.

Also, there's the legal concept of "totality of the circumstance". While each action might not be illegal or suspicious by itself, the combination of them most certainly can be.

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
It only becomes a crime if the police decide it is

Um, no. Cops have leeway on the enforcement of laws, but a crime is a fact not subject to the whims of law enforcement.

You also continue to imply that the man was given no warning or direction as to his behavior, when the video I posted clearly shows otherwise.


Again, there is no legal or moral obligation to warn somebody that they are committing a crime, are about to commit a crime, or the repercussions if they do not follow a lawful order (which is a crime). This is a well established legal principle.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5344 posts, RR: 14
Reply 63, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1710 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 59):
I can't hear exactly what they said in the video, but I will accept that they did say something to him. But it doesn't sound like they told him he could be arrested, which is what they should have done - there's no reason for him to think that he was doing anything illegal.


You know, back when I was a fire officer, I had a young man detained by the police because he would not leave the area around a fire hydrant that was actively supplying water to an engine at a fire where I had 3 companies inside with an exposure problem.

The guy just wouldn't leave the hydrant alone. The police walked over...cuffed him and took him away. The officer never said a word. to the guy.

The police do not have an obligation to tell you that you are about to be arrested.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away. Never leave your cave without your club.
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7688 posts, RR: 21
Reply 64, posted (1 year 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1702 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
Videotaping is not, nor is talking to the police, nor is playing music. It only becomes a crime if the police decide it is, and at that point it's morally incumbent on them to let the person in question know.

I would suggest that IF he was indeed repeatedly pestering the Police while they were engaged in that situation, and AFTER being told not to, that too would blatantly obviously be a crime. If an individual doesn't know it's a crime not to keep bothering the Police after a warning not to while they're dealing with a situation then well, there's no accounting for foolishness like that. With other onlookers around it does no good at all to let that sort of behaviour pass - it needs nipping in the bud after a firm warning, lest others are emboldened to start interfering too. Public order offences often seem trivial or too severely enforced, but while many might be the thin end of the wedge they are totally necessary for wider control of dangerous situations. All of that being said, the one caveat I am at pains to point out is that one MUST warn the offender to stop it and go away, but there's not necessarily a need for that warning to take the form of a legal lecture and consequences. The direction simply has to be lawful, and if the ignoring of it with continued interference can be deemed to constitute and offence, in you come.

In a situation like the one the Police are involved in here in the video, the risk of public disorder and personal danger is high. I cannot blame them one bit for coming down hard on interference of any kind.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 65, posted (1 year 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1568 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Mir (Reply 56):
I can understand why the police shot the dog, but it's their fault for letting things get to that point in the first place.

What responsibility does an owner of a potentially violent dog have in terms of securing it? Any?

Quoting Mir (Reply 59):
I can't hear exactly what they said in the video, but I will accept that they did say something to him. But it doesn't sound like they told him he could be arrested, which is what they should have done - there's no reason for him to think that he was doing anything illegal.

So you admit you can't hear exactly what is said in the video, and yet you STILL proclaim to be a better judge than the professionals actually managing the situation? You're being ridiculous. That's like an NTSB investigator faulting a pilot in the absence of any CVR or FDR data.

You must think very highly of yourself to deem yourself a better judge of the police in this situation. Then again, I'm sure the comfort of your armchair provides quite a bit of confidence in that respect.

Quoting Mir (Reply 61):
It only becomes a crime if the police decide it is

100% incorrect. A crime is a crime the moment the elements are met. It only becomes an arrest if the police decide it is.



Intentionally Left Blank
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Cancun During Spring Break: Safe Or Not Safe posted Sun Jan 27 2013 08:57:20 by Elite
Blind Copy (Bcc) Option On E-mail: Ethical Or Not? posted Thu Dec 20 2012 07:02:55 by EDKA
Police Shoot And Kill Wheelchair Bound Amputee posted Sun Sep 23 2012 12:08:43 by KiwiRob
NHL Season Or Not? posted Mon Aug 20 2012 12:20:28 by connies4ever
Slash & Fergie - Good Or Not? posted Fri Nov 12 2010 19:53:24 by YVRLTN
To Buy Or Not To Buy Presenter Dead! (UK TV) posted Mon Mar 1 2010 15:35:16 by LHR380
Danish Police Shoot Intruder At Cartoonist's Home posted Fri Jan 1 2010 20:03:25 by Dreadnought
Surplus PC For 80 Bucks... To Buy Or Not To Buy posted Tue Sep 29 2009 12:52:13 by DesertJets
Cat Person, Dog Person Or....? posted Sat Jun 27 2009 18:15:08 by OzarkD9S
Fair Or Not Fair.... posted Mon Dec 22 2008 05:03:15 by Cgnnrw