Why so many poorly trained police officers when dealing with dogs?

[ExMem-LarjaThwei]

Imagine how vegans must feel.

That's only half in jest, but seriously, it was a tragic accident and that's really all there is to be said about it. The owner will move on with his life and no doubt get another dog he loves just as much as this one. To compare a dog to a son or daughter... they're not equivalent.

But comparing a dog to livestock is accurate. Okay...

I don't see how this was simply an "accident". The police officer knowingly tresspassed on this person's property without bothering to see if there was a dog in the backyard, and instead of walking away, tasing or using pepper spray on the dog (which still would have been going too far seeing as how he had no right to be there in the first place), he decides to go straight for his gun and shoot the dog in the head. That's not an accident. The police officer didn't accidentally shoot the man's dog. He knew what he was doing, and he was absolutely in the wrong.

Not to mention, the dog's body wasn't anywhere near the gate leading me to believe the dog only barked at the officer from a distance.

I cannot believe you guys are OK with this and just writing it off as "**** happens".

 

[pixletwin]

Pets are not livestock. Nor are they equal to ones own children. It's almost as if you have the inability to see life for all the shades of grey it possesses.

 

[Blackthornone]

Pets are not livestock. Nor are they equal to ones own children. It's almost as if you have the inability to see life for all the shades of grey it possesses.

Some pets aren't equal to some people. Some pets are BETTER than some people, like the dog who was better than the cop who shot him in the head. The dog was a better dog than the cop was a cop.

That's shades of grey...

 

[The Ween]

Did they seriously offer him a replacement dog? I would be pissed as **** if they did that.

Proof that the poor dog was not viewed as a living, caring, emotional being and just a piece of property.

According to the law, it's just that, property. That's why animal abuse is slap on the wrist and why puppy mills, etc. are allowed to exist.

 

[Invictus Sol]

i disagree.
i dare you to say that to marcus lutrell. a dog he name after his fallen comrades got murdered. the low lifes that killed his dog got convicted for murder.
some couples cant bear a child and settles for family pets instead. dogs are treated as a member of the family...

OK, fosing, the interaction that one can have with even the most loyal dog is not the same as with a child, and that's coming from someone w/no children and a lifetime of pets. I get pets can fill a gap and be a figurative member of the family; I mean, I love my cat, but to put her life the same as say a stranger's child I never met? No, cat loses, sorry.

But comparing a dog to livestock is accurate. Okay...

So because you label a cow, or a pig, lamb, whatever, "livestock" (though the latter two are kept as pets by many), they don't have emotional lives? As someone that regularly eats meat, I'd have to disagree with that. I'm sure pretty much all animals have complex emotional lives, but that doesn't stop us from mechanizing their lives and deaths. The dog, overall, had a good life, and then was a victim of circumstance one day, same as if I walked across the street and got hit by a car or got hit by a stray bullet. It's bad luck, but life is random. I accepted long ago that bad things happen to good people (or dogs) and it's not necessarily anyone's 'fault'.

 

[ExMem-LarjaThwei]

i disagree.
i dare you to say that to marcus lutrell. a dog he name after his fallen comrades got murdered. the low lifes that killed his dog got convicted for murder.
some couples cant bear a child and settles for family pets instead. dogs are treated as a member of the family.

lousy judgement call by the officer. negligence is not an accident.

I personally care for my dog more than some family members. I love him to death. But even putting that aside, the officer still had no right to do what he did.

Pets are not livestock. Nor are they equal to ones own children. It's almost as if you have the inability to see life for all the shades of grey it possesses.

Care to elaborate?

At the end of the day it doesn't matter if it was a living being or an inanimate object. Legally, the officer is still at fault.

 

[pixletwin]

I guess "legally" we shall see (if his case makes it to the court room).

 

[ExMem-LarjaThwei]

So because you label a cow, or a pig, lamb, whatever, "livestock" (though the latter two are kept as pets by many), they don't have emotional lives? As someone that regularly eats meat, I'd have to disagree with that. I'm sure pretty much all animals have complex emotional lives, but that doesn't stop us from mechanizing their lives and deaths. The dog, overall, had a good life, and then was a victim of circumstance one day, same as if I walked across the street and got hit by a car or got hit by a stray bullet. It's bad luck, but life is random. I accepted long ago that bad things happen to good people or dogs and it's not necessarily anyone's 'fault'.

I'm not trying to say livestock aren't living beings that feel pain, but they're bred specifically to be eaten. A lot of people rely on them for food to survive.

Dogs were bred to be loyal, caring companions. It's not the same thing at all.

And it is the police officer's fault. If he had performed his duties correctly the dog wouldn't have a bullet in it's head.

 

[fosing]

OK, fosing, the interaction that one can have with even the most loyal dog is not the same as with a child, and that's coming from someone w/no children and a lifetime of pets. I get pets can fill a gap and be a figurative member of the family; I mean, I love my cat, but to put her life the same as say a stranger's child I never met? No, cat loses, sorry.

to some people its enough, even more.

I mean, I love my cat, but to put her life the same as say a stranger's child I never met? No, cat loses, sorry

put in context. women and children first....pets....crazy uncle.....bag of chips. but that is not the case here.
the officer did not have to choose a person's life for a dog. he had OPTIONS. and he chose to put a bullet in the dogs head. that's why i called it a lousy judgement call. negligence. and he should answer to that.

 

[Taibhse]

But comparing a dog to livestock is accurate. Okay...

I don't see how this was simply an "accident". The police officer knowingly tresspassed on this person's property without bothering to see if there was a dog in the backyard, and instead of walking away, tasing or using pepper spray on the dog (which still would have been going too far seeing as how he had no right to be there in the first place), he decides to go straight for his gun and shoot the dog in the head. That's not an accident. The police officer didn't accidentally shoot the man's dog. He knew what he was doing, and he was absolutely in the wrong.

Not to mention, the dog's body wasn't anywhere near the gate leading me to believe the dog only barked at the officer from a distance.

I cannot believe you guys are OK with this and just writing it off as "**** happens".

They are writing it off because it wasn't their property and it wasn't their dog..

When poop hits their fan and the QQ starts.. be like ..meh.. really?.. it was an accident, no?.. overreacting much?.. s*** happens, so what?

.. then stand back and wait for the explosion!

 

[Invictus Sol]

...he had OPTIONS. and he chose to put a bullet in the dogs head. that's why i called it a lousy judgement call. negligence. and he should answer to that.

Certainly he should have to account for his judgement call. Unlike you guys, though, I'm not going to pre-judge it. Presumably if he was egregiously negligent, he'll answer for it.

They are writing it off because it wasn't their property and it wasn't their dog..

When poop hits their fan and the QQ starts.. be like ..meh.. really?.. it was an accident, no?.. overreacting much?.. s*** happens, so what?

.. then stand back and wait for the explosion!

That's a nice little fantasy scenario you've created, Taibhse. I've already been though enough that I know I wouldn't contradict anything I've said here in that scenario, though, so have fun waiting.

 

[crows]

he'll answer for it.

you are joking right ?

 

[Taibhse]

...That's a nice little fantasy scenario you've created, Taibhse. I've already been though enough that I know I wouldn't contradict anything I've said here in that scenario, though, so have fun waiting.

You have made it quite clear in every post you don't care.. starting with -

...Guy seems a bit unstable, IMO.

A Police officer trespassing on private property, after the Police department failed to thoroughly search the toddlers house, shot his dog in the face.. perhaps the dog owner should have taken the 'heroic' officer down the pub for a beer and a game of pool, to compliment him on his marksmanship and compare favorite hand guns? ..all good manly stuff.. no sense in getting overly attached to animals, when apparently people are cooking babies elsewhere in the USA.

.. so, no fantasy.. just considerable genuflecting to authority status by some.. despite the hypocrisy that those same police officers can prosecute you for killing a police officer, if one of their dogs happens to attack you or a member of your family in an 'accident' and you defend yourself in a manner where the police dog dies.. even though it's 'just an animal'.

One look at the facial expressions and body language of the three police officers who remained on site, in that video, gave a very clear indication of what had happened during that incident, ie. a monumental FUBAR.. not to mention the fact the 'heroic' shooter fled the scene.. and strangely the remaining officers could only remember his surname, not his Christian name or his Police number.. despite him being a colleague and them having notes on everything else concerning the incident.. amazing how training tends to fluctuate in its application, during a scenario like that.

What you have 'been through' was life experience, everyone has them.. empathy, not so much.

 

[WellCQCaboutthat]

to serve (violently) and protect (eachother)..............................police know that no matter what is said theyll always have eachothers back. one hand washes the other. theyre not even scared of anything anymore, just alter the report here, here, aaaaaaannnnnnnnnndddddd here. nothing more accurate than the almighty report, it always tells EXACTLY what happened. remember, lying is part of an officers job. theyve been trained for it.

 

[Taibhse]

Hmmm.. tbh, plenty of Perps make stuff up too, particularly about the Police, often in an attempt to establish 'mitigating' circumstances for their transgressions.


I don't have a particular beef with Law Enforcement Agencies per se, I just have a healthy skepticism of all authority figures and organisations.. I expect them to be be governed by and observe the Law, just like the rest of us.. ie. strapping on a badge and a gun, is not a 'Do what the ***k you like and get out of jail free' card.

 

[Adoptedscot]

I thought this thread had calmed down and it was okay (ish) considering it's content, but I guess I was wrong.

I don't think tarnishing an entire police force because of one officer's actions, nor making blanket hateful statements about them is warranted (pardon the pun ).

What happened in my opinion was wrong and should not have happened but posting about all police in such a spiteful manner is just nasty.

So, before this goes further and gets even more heated, again...thread closed.
x