If you guys were Hiccup in "How To Train Your Dragon", you would've killed the dragon and the film would've been 15 minutes long. You make the baby Jesus cry. :(

Then again, if the baby Jesus had a pitbull charging at him, he'd probably fry the sucker with a lightning bolt. :D

Really, I don't blame the dog. It was just being a dog. Even if the owner isn't a moron who trained it to be vicious, the dog was just defending its territory. The officer isn't to blame, either, for plugging the pooch--I mean, what's the alternative, he let the dog chew on him? But I agree that the fault lies in the officer's actions: what he should've done was shot the kid with the potato gun, and then run out of the yard and let the dog be. The kid with the potato gun deserved the bullet more than the pooch...

This! ROFL

Thread Over!

Sucks for the guy, they better be reimbursing him..

Hypothetical, I am conceal/carry in this area.. Cop dog goes nuts and decides to attack me for no reason.. I had better be able to kill that dog no problems..

They didn't "just say" probable cause. He saw the gun, thus making it probable cause.

There once was a crazy creator
Of cannons that could shoot a tater.
The cop who came on the scene
Performed the standard routine;
Shoot the dog first and ask questions later.

FAX

I'm not done reading every post, but a couple thoughts;
1) The call was for suspected gunfire, yes he saw the potato gun, but that doesn't exclude the possibility of real gunfire happening for which the call was initiated.

2) Pepper spray doesn't always work on dogs, and you can't talk a dog down by threat or pepper spray or a tazer stun.

3) I have no idea how the dog was approaching the officer or how I would have felt, threatened some or very threatened.

conclusions - I don't know that I would have reached for the sidearm first, but I don't necessarily blame the responding officer for doing it. Was he approaching alone is one question, where was backup, how far out, etc are other questions that come to mind that might have influenced his decision. They would certainly influence mine.

I wouldn't have gone to the front door just from seeing a potato gun. I would still keep caution on my side during the investigative approach.

The officer may well of done nothing wrong, deserve no administrative punishment and the city could still pay for the damages. This seems logical enough.

*side note, had the cops called on me and some buddies in college for shooting paintball guns around the house. The call was we were shooting 22s at each other. Cops showed up cautious and figured everything out without shooting anyone, this was in a small town. Similar story with a different result, not ALL cops make questionable decisions.

not 100% on jurisdiction in that area, but a call of gunfire in the backyard could be the probable cause to enter the back yard, potato gun or no potato gun, without verbal permission. A trail of blood to the house would have given same authority to enter the house if no one answered the door.

The owner stating that he talked to the officer prior to the dog being shot strikes me as the only part where the officer acted hastily/poorly/improperly. And that's if there was still time to react differently, thus buying time for the owner to halt the dog's actions. However that's if his side is confirmed by an impartial bystander as true, and still just hindsight (which is always 20/20).

And yet you're still not coming with anything worthwhile.

You need more than mere probable cause to execute a warrantless search. You need an exigency that this guy didn't have. I've said this once already, I don't feel I should have to say it again.

He'll likely argue that he thought it was an emergency situation and a judge will grant deference. But his conduct and the conduct of the dispatcher clearly indicate that they never thought this was an emergency; he wouldn't have gone in alone.

Again, just stop. You don't know what you're talking about.

But remember - there was one officer on the scene. Jefferson Parrish isn't a tiny little area, there's a fair amount of violence and a fair amount of police presence in the area. If anyone involved in this thought it was truly a 'shots fired' scenario, they wouldn't have only sent one cruiser and there's no way that officer would've walked into the yard by himself and with no viable means of escape.

C'mon, look at the actual conduct of all parties here and it's just as clear as day. The facts do not even approach adding up to a shots fired call or an officer that believed he was approaching a dangerous situation. This cop was lazy, strolled into the place without cause, screwed up and now he and his boss are trying to trump it up as 'shots fired' and the discharge of illegal firearms by hulligans in order to cover their asses.

When you consider the fact that Jefferson Parish isn't exactly known for their up-front law enforcement, it's even more obvious.

The cops knew what this was and they screwed the situation up. He carelessly walked into the yard unannounced and then got freaked out by the dog and shot it.

The rest of it is white noise.

If and only if there was a genuine belief that there was an a threat of harm to the officer or the public.

Not a theoretical belief (i.e. there may be hidden ninja assassins in the bushes), but an actual belief by the parties involved.

If there was an actual belief that there was a public threat, there's no way that guy goes in without backup in Jefferson Parrish.

Like I said - he'll lie to the judge (that's how they roll down there) and the judge will grant deference. But c'mon, can anyone with any law enforcement experience honestly look at the facts here - the officer was sent by himself, says he saw the potato gun and then went into the backyard without backup and with no escape route - and tell me that this officer genuinely believed that there was an immediate risk of harm that created an emergency exigency?

Doesn't pass the sniff test.

itd be funny to watch someone try and stop a charging bulldog with pepper spray. Might as well try and spray water in its mouth while your at it. lol.:rolleyes:

agree...mine has scars all over his nose, and he still loves to fight the weedeater.
sec

Singular is the bulldogs disposition. They dont understand or care, they just do what they do.

a lot of speculation right there. First responding unit may start the investigation without others there, I'd prefer to wait, but if my gut said to go, I may go with hope I'd be able to save a life.

How are you privy to information that only one car was dispatched?
How do you know he just walked in haphazardly or that this officer is lazy?
Is a complaint call for shots fired, not cause to investigate that area?
You say the area is known for violent actions, yet this time the officer was supposed to know there was no danger?
So far, you and a select group here say this was a screw up. I don't know that it is or isn't a screw up.


Was there a complaint call for shots fired? Yes - credible? who knows.
The officer has a duty to investigate for more information, that takes him to the back yard. Nothing seems unusual, save the potato gun, mental note, but not conclusive that the call was bogus. He goes into the back yard, not looking for ninjas, but for signs of a struggle, a round casing, blood trail, anything that would give more information, if nothing found, he knocks on the door. I don't see any problems with this. A dog comes into play and officer takes action that you don't agree with. If you were there in that situation, I'm sure you'd karate kick the dog in the nose and the world would be safe again, because you are Chuck Norris.

I have 12 years of law enforcement experience. So yes I can say it, as I did a few posts ago, of how I would probably react, but no one can say unless they are there in that moment.