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

Comic concepts
Advertise with us
Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
pixletwin said:
Yes. That is exactly what I said. Good job on your reading.
Click to expand...
And you honestly don't see a problem with that?

I can't fathom how someone could care so little for a dog to think it's OK for a police officer to randomly pop in your backyard and shoot one just because it might be a problem for them.

Especially when they could just use a taser and/or pepper spray instead of dropping it dead with a bullet to the head.

And especially when they have no right to be there in the first place.
 
pixletwin said:
Yes. That is exactly what I said. Good job on your reading.
Click to expand...

Yes, you said as much. A badge is a license to kill dogs in their own yards without a warrant when conducting a false search. When someone cries wolf, cops can shoot dogs.
 
pixletwin said:
You can't honestly be that.... *sighs* I was being sarcastic.
Click to expand...
I was referring to the post of yours that Blackthrone quoted, which wasn't sarcasm.

I honestly can't be that what? Go ahead and finish your sentence with whatever insult you had in mind so I can report you and get you out of here.
 
Blackthornone said:
Yes, you said as much. A badge is a license to kill dogs in their own yards without a warrant when conducting a false search. When someone cries wolf, cops can shoot dogs.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Can you tell me what you mean by a "false" search? Because I don't recall any allegations by anyone in this thread that the cop was conducting any sort of "false" search. Also who, precisely, cried wolf in this fantasy scenario you are talking about?
 
I can't believe I have been caught up responding to posts by the likes of blackthornone and larwaaaaaah. :lol
 
You must really enjoy it seeing as how you're following me to other sections to insult me now. :huh
 
pixletwin said:
Interesting. Can you tell me what you mean by a "false" search? Because I don't recall any allegations by anyone in this thread that the cop was conducting any sort of "false" search. Also who, precisely, cried wolf in this fantasy scenario you are talking about?
Click to expand...

It was a false search because the boy was in his bed at the time the search was conducted. He wasn't even missing. The point was that anyone could say that someone was missing even if it wasn't true( and it wasn't true in this case) and then go and shoot people's dogs in their backyards looking for someone who isn't even there. The boy was found asleep in his own home 30 minutes later.
That is why it was a false search.

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/na...ng-dead-dog-fenced-backyard-article-1.1844057
 
That is one big dog.

geist26n-3-web.jpg
 
pixletwin said:
That is one big dog.

geist26n-3-web.jpg
Click to expand...

One big nice dog who only wanted to defend his master's property, even from a police officer who trespasses without a real cause. Apparently only the police are allowed to protect property and human lives. Evidently private citizens must wait until those who trespass have robbed and killed the residents and then they can complain and then maybe the police dept can buy them a new dog, or wife and compensate them financially somewhat.
As long as they replace those that they kill with a new one, that makes it ok with the police.
Do the police import mail order brides from Russia or China when they kill people's wives to make it ok or what?
 
pixletwin said:
You're guess would be wrong.

*from someone who works in the legal field*

The department has already offered to replace the dog and give him a bit of compensation. The guy, at this point, is just being an *******.
Click to expand...

i would empathize for him. guy just lost something as close to a family member. murdered, with a bullet to the head. if that was a son/daughter, would they offer a replacement and compensation? hell no. he should face suspension or even jail time. he may be a hero cop, that doesnt absolve him from future slack and lousy judgement call.

*if a family dog/pet dies, you are even entitled for a bereavement leave. over here anyway.
 
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.
 
Blackthornone said:
One big nice dog who only wanted to defend his master's property, even from a police officer who trespasses without a real cause. Apparently only the police are allowed to protect property and human lives. Evidently private citizens must wait until those who trespass have robbed and killed the residents and then they can complain and then maybe the police dept can buy them a new dog, or wife and compensate them financially somewhat.
As long as they replace those that they kill with a new one, that makes it ok with the police.
Do the police import mail order brides from Russia or China when they kill people's wives to make it ok or what?
Click to expand...

Any one familiar with the breed knows its reputation for being docile and a great family dog.
Its not like a Rottweiler, Doberman or a German Shepard was challenging him.
The odds are the officer could've retreated with out further incident, they'll bark but won't physically confront.
The only way the officer could've brought more shame on himself is if he'd shot a Golden Retriever or a daschund.
Pathetic.
 
pixletwin said:
You're guess would be wrong.

*from someone who works in the legal field*

The department has already offered to replace the dog and give him a bit of compensation. The guy, at this point, is just being an *******.
Click to expand...

Lar'ja Thwei said:
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.
Click to expand...

According to pixeltwin they did.
 
Lar'ja Thwei said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Invictus Sol said:
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.
Click to expand...

:lecture

Well said.
 
Invictus Sol said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top