Cop shot dog, owner blamed police

[Msmith]

There are wrong in so many levels in this story.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by wutamess

That's a dumb way to look at it... if the officer wanted to kill the dog why not do it instead of firing a warning shot. Stop trying to add fuel to the fire and twist shit around.

Warning shot my ass, the officer just missed.

Even when we're on the same side, you're still FOS.

[seclark]

Originally Posted by KcChiefsKing

Is everybody missing this?


So he was warned...and he still shot the dog the 2nd time?

piss on that...i went to work on a job at a house one time. dog slobbering and barking outside the truck. i wouldn't get out of the truck. the owner came out and said "it's ok...he won't bite." the dog followed him back to the house. i got out and went up to the protector to start working. f@cking mutt came around the other side of the house and bit me on the back of the leg.
sec

[wutamess]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Warning shot my ass, the officer just missed.

Even when we're on the same side, you're still FOS.

No sir... Now I think you're a little anal just to be spiteful.
Why only stop at one if he just "missed"? Assuming it'd take another 3-4 secs to get to the backyard from inside the house why would the officer be at a stare down with the dog instead of just continuously firing until he HIT this target if his intent was to kill the dog?

The 1st shot was a warning... Not an attempt to hit the dog.

Please tell me your reasoning skills aren't that off.

[wutamess]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

it's with the conduct that created the problem where there wasn't one initially.

We finally agree on something... The owner won't be shooting anymore p-guns in the backyard any times soon.

[Stevie.Wonder]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

It's why this needs to be reviewed on a strictly factual basis..

Simply impossible. Even the actual eye-witnesses couldn't come up with a reasonable transcriptiom to save their ass.

Give it the smell test. A couple of good 'ol boys made a potato cannon, with a pit bull in tow. The majority think they're dangerous yahoos. They could easily be Ivy League engineering students. I've known folks doing the same activity fulfilling both situs.

[Stevie.Wonder]

Originally Posted by seclark

piss on that...i went to work on a job at a house one time. dog slobbering and barking outside the truck. i wouldn't get out of the truck. the owner came out and said "it's ok...he won't bite." the dog followed him back to the house. i got out and went up to the protector to start working. f@cking mutt came around the other side of the house and bit me on the back of the leg.
sec

Big difference between being neglectful in the opportunity to segregrate a dog from a possible victim and the dog getting shot for simply being where it is (by all aspects) legally a-ok.

[seclark]

Originally Posted by Stevie.Wonder

Big difference between being neglectful in the opportunity to segregrate a dog from a possible victim and the dog getting shot for simply being where it is (by all aspects) legally a-ok.

whatever the difference, just because someone says a dog is safe, doesn't mean it is.
sec

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by wutamess

No sir... Now I think you're a little anal just to be spiteful.
Why only stop at one if he just "missed"? Assuming it'd take another 3-4 secs to get to the backyard from inside the house why would the officer be at a stare down with the dog instead of just continuously firing until he HIT this target if his intent was to kill the dog?

The 1st shot was a warning... Not an attempt to hit the dog.

Please tell me your reasoning skills aren't that off.

"The officer pulled his pistol and fired, missing the dog as it lunged"...

And to think, you're the one that's questioned my reading comprehension...

Find me an officer that says they've ever been trained to fire a warning shot.

Every single cop in the world will tell you that, if they fire their pistol, it's with bad intentions.

Otherwise you've just put a bullet in the air in a residential neighborhood in order to scare an animal with the reasoning skills of an infant child. Hell, even if I give him credit for a warning shot, that's even dumber than shooting at the dog would've been. At least at that point discharging a firearm in a neighborhood was done in self-defense.

So the report on the story, the training of the officers involved, and simple common sense suggests that this was not a warning shot.

Please tell me you're not that hell-bent on defending this moron.

[Chiefnj2]

"This case presents an issue of first impression to this Circuit concerning whether law enforcement officials may conduct a warrantless search of a private residence in response to an emergency situation reported by an anonymous 911 caller. We conclude that when exigent circumstances demand an immediate response, particularly where there is danger to human life, protection of the public becomes paramount and can justify a limited, warrantless intrusion into the home. Once in the home, officers may seize any evidence found within plain view"

US v. Holloway.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

"This case presents an issue of first impression to this Circuit concerning whether law enforcement officials may conduct a warrantless search of a private residence in response to an emergency situation reported by an anonymous 911 caller. We conclude that when exigent circumstances demand an immediate response, particularly where there is danger to human life, protection of the public becomes paramount and can justify a limited, warrantless intrusion into the home. Once in the home, officers may seize any evidence found within plain view"

US v. Holloway.

"the deputy arrived and noticed a plastic "cannon-type device" in the yard through the wooden fence, the report said."

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

"This case presents an issue of first impression to this Circuit concerning whether law enforcement officials may conduct a warrantless search of a private residence in response to an emergency situation reported by an anonymous 911 caller. We conclude that when exigent circumstances demand an immediate response, particularly where there is danger to human life, protection of the public becomes paramount and can justify a limited, warrantless intrusion into the home. Once in the home, officers may seize any evidence found within plain view"

US v. Holloway.

Congratulations, you just told me exactly what I already knew and have tried to drive into your skulls about a dozen times, often using the exact same terminology.

As I have said as nauseum - this does not constitute an emergency situation. That holding is well known to anyone that has studied this and it most certainly does not say that an anonymous caller that reports an emergency situation creates a situation that is per se exigent.

No, it says that if tere appears to be a danger to human life upon the arrival on the scene, then it is justified.

Again and again and again I have said that the facts of this case certainly suggest that nobody involved thought this was a true emergency.

It's why I continue to ask you if you're being intentionally obtuse. I cannot imagine you truly believe you've just presetned me with some sort of 'gotchya' moment here.

[Chiefnj2]

I can't believe that people believe the homeowners story. He was in his house, hears a gunshot, immediately runs outside to tell the police my dog is nice don't shoot it? If that dog was lunging at the officer the cop would have shot it quickly. I seriously doubt there was enough time between shots for the guy to run out of the house, process the situation, beg for the dogs life and make eye contact with the officer before the 2nd shot.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

"the deputy arrived and noticed a plastic "cannon-type device" in the yard through the wooden fence, the report said."

In. The. Yard.

With nobody around it.

A situation the officer found so dangerous that he walked into an area secluded from public view, in a not-too friendly part of the country, with no backup, and no viable means of escape.

As I have said - if this is how he handles instances where he senses a legitimate and immediate threat to himself or the public, then he is not long for this earth.

The truth is that he didn't. I have no idea how you can look at his conduct combined with the history of law enforcement in this area and the character of the jurisdiction he works in without coming to this conclusion.

There are so few facts that fall on your side of the argument that I can only assume you are being completely closed-minded to the possibility.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

"the deputy arrived and noticed a plastic "cannon-type device" in the yard through the wooden fence, the report said."

He's still responding to a call of gun shots in a residential neighborhood. That is an emergency situation. The cop saw some type of firearm and he investigated further.

[Stevie.Wonder]

Originally Posted by seclark

whatever the difference, just because someone says a dog is safe, doesn't mean it is.
sec

Of course not. I'd bet that 50% of dogs owned by crazy old ladies who have created an evironment (i.e.: babied, spoiled) for their shitty little lap dogs result in more bites, per capita, than Rottweilers. Little old ladies, small dogs, etc. He wouldn't hurt a fly. Bullshit: they're snappy as hell and the old bat is delusional, forgiving their transgressions.

Similarly, to a lesser extent, are the 'regular' folks who think their Dalmation/Lab-mix/Husky/etc. isn't a man-eater, even if it nipped the neighbor kid.

I've owned Rottweilers, French Mastiffs, and black labs. I can see the first two being intimidating, but when overly protective moms at the lake freak out when my 110# black lab is wagging his tail and licking their kids face? It's a F***ING BLACK LAB!!! If you don't want the arguably BEST breed to touch your kid, stay the fuck away from it, mom.

Obvious example where a black lab is ridiculous (imo) to be a threat on it's own property, but dude's dog was on his own property. IMO, the dog was shot simply to reduce threat/aggravation on the cop's part based on breed. Turrible. And likely expensive, eventually, for him personally and the department.