Jump to content

PD Shoots Dog, Ignores Seizure Victim


Chief1C

Recommended Posts

Watching that video again, the cops look pretty young. This was probably the first time either one of them have fired a weapon in a non-training situation. They both probably soiled their hanes (especially the one that was close to the line of fire) and were a little shell shocked afterwards.

The shooter is mighty jacked up and keeps hopping around for a while before additional officers arrive and he settles down.

His partner has a " Dude, you just shot in my direction and I am lucky you only hit the dog" look on his face.

I think they did pretty well for city folks. Some people that grow up in the country (many country people do not participate in hunting) shoot live things quite frequently and would possibly be more accustomed to actually seeing their bullets impact living flesh. The amount of information being processed could easily cause psych and neuro overload.

Firing a weapon on a crowded street has to have a psychosomatic effect that is potentiated by shooting into living flesh, seeing the dog squeal as blood spatters on the pavement, hearing people screaming at you, the relief of saving your partner, wondering if you did the right thing, imagining the butt chewing and sea of paperwork if it turns into a PR nightmare all the while knowing that your actions have been taped and will face the scrutiny of thousands is a lot to process in less than a few seconds.

Heck yea he was a little freaked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see.. Getting charged by a random dog that has obviously been aggressive towards other people or take out the threat.. I would have done the exact same thing. There is no way I would let myself or partner get injured by a dog. This officer took the necessary actions to neutralize the threat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I can't access the video for some reason, so I can only speak about some of the points brought up here and in the article.

The officer's job is to address the threat, which was first the dog, and then later, the angry crowd. Unless he can ensure some amount of scene safety, the medics won't be able to help the patient at all. The police may attempt to render aid, but to do so at the neglect of their police duties in creating a safe scene would be very poor use of resources.

Regarding the shot in a crowded area, there is nothing that is truly cut and dry here. There is the very real and present threat of the dog that has already lunged at people, and there is the theoretical danger of a shot ricochet or fragment harming a bystander. It's a lose-lose situation all the way around; if the dog lunges again and hurts a bystander, the police will be criticized for not shooting him sooner. If a bullet fragment strikes a bystander, they will be criticized for shooting in that crowded environment. I tend to favor addressing the threat that you KNOW is there, rather than a "what if".

I love dogs. I just put my dog down this week, so I really feel for this dog and the owner. But a dog who lunged at police and a bystander is an immediate danger to everyone there, and the right thing to do was to shoot it. That is the fastest way to eliminate the threat.

'zilla

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid meter maids.... why don't they stick to writing speeding tickets thats all they're good at anyway.

I'm just saying... its called sedation. They make guns that shoot sedating darts.. Why don't they carry those for situations like this?

I had friend in Montana whose dog was shot by the police because a concerned neighbor called in and complained that the dog was barking at people who were walking by and she thought it was a threat. Cops showed up and shot the dog with a shotgun.

WTF

Edited by KSL2786
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meter maids? Wow, I was almost ready to label you a misguided soul with potential, but now I'm thinking troll.

Agreed. Why would the average partol officer carry a veterinary sedation dart? Talk about low yield, especially in a place like NYC. The dog charged at a bystander and a police officer. This was not simply a case of trigger happy cops from Asscrack, Montana going a little overboard. The dog was an immediate threat that needed to be dealt with. Even if they kept a dart gun in the car, there was no way to use it in this situation. This whole thing went down in about 3 seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way to use it in this situation? They had enough time to pull the trigger on a real gun, why wouldn't they have been able to pull the trigger on a tranq gun?? I just don't think that a dog that MIGHT weigh 100lbs max is enough of a threat that it needs to be shot and killed. Thats pretty weak and not respectable at all as far as I'm concerned.

Sorry for my meter-maids comment but thats how I feel. Where I live I've not seen cops be very capable of stopping crime, catching criminals, or anything of importance other than stopping speeders, writing parking tickets, etc.

We had a car stolen out of our driveway a few years back. There was video footage of known criminals passing through a gas station a couple blocks away from my house around 3am, on bikes. Our car was gone, there were 3 bikes left in the yard. They knew who these guys were and knew the area they were from..they were known criminals. Cops wouldn't touch em.. didn't to squat.

Sorry but I just dont have much respect for law enforcement officers and not much will change my opinion until I start to see positive results in my community. We've got people dropping dead every day from heroin overdoses yet no one is being convicted of sales. Too busy running radar and eatin donuts to do real work I guess.

Edited by KSL2786
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way to use it in this situation? They had enough time to pull the trigger on a real gun, why wouldn't they have been able to pull the trigger on a tranq gun??...

Because you get maximum effect from a bullet nearly instantly, from a tranq, not so much. You might shoot him with a dart now, but he's not tipping over any time soon...Sorry Brother, you've seen to many TV shows..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear ya. I guess I just don't see even the most vicious of dogs as enough of a threat to where lethal force is necessary. There are other ways of restraining them, even if that just means manning up and tackling the dog yourself.

I'll admit my opinion is biased, I'm a dog lover. I've never met a dog vicious enough that I couldn't have taken it down with my own two hands.

The actions taken here were overkill if you ask me. I think the officer was just trigger happy and wanted to use his gun.

Edited by KSL2786
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love dogs. I just put my dog down this week, so I really feel for this dog and the owner. But a dog who lunged at police and a bystander is an immediate danger to everyone there, and the right thing to do was to shoot it. That is the fastest way to eliminate the threat.

'zilla

Sorry to hear about your dog Doc. I have always hated having to put one of my dogs to sleep. I am not an anthropomorphic kind of guy but it is weird how much they are missed.

Stupid meter maids.... why don't they stick to writing speeding tickets thats all they're good at anyway.

I'm just saying... its called sedation. They make guns that shoot sedating darts.. Why don't they carry those for situations like this?

WTF

The police in my opinion did what they had to do even though the action decision was one that would potentially bring them a lot of post incident grief.

I can't speak to what some policeman in Montana did but the guys in the video acted appropriately, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...