California officer shoots dog

[jammies]

He didn't secure the dog properly, it attacked the police officer and got shot. I fail to see where it's the cops' fault that he is an idiot. His own negligence was the primary cause of the incident, he could have secured his dog in his car by rolling up the windows, but he was too focused on his imaginary right to loop Usher and not focused enough on not being a d-bag.

[Northendzone]

at first i was thinking that perhaps 5-0 took down Nate or Snoop Dogg......

Nice to see that this guy was all about checking into his fellow citizens civil rights, especially after the po-po broke into his house for no particular reason.........

[Canuck-Hater]

Originally Posted by jammies

He didn't secure the dog properly, it attacked the police officer and got shot. I fail to see where it's the cops' fault that he is an idiot. His own negligence was the primary cause of the incident, he could have secured his dog in his car by rolling up the windows, but he was too focused on his imaginary right to loop Usher and not focused enough on not being a d-bag.

Or at least used non-lethal force. The man was clearly not resisting and was cooperating.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

So an agiated dog, showing signs of attacking the officers arresting his owner is not ok to shoot?

Would it be ok for the officer to shoot a person coming at them with a knife? That is what I compare the dog to, and I think the officer was justified in their action.

Sucks for the dog, but this situation could have been pretty bad if action wasn't taken.

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

You have the worst arguments ever - try and defuse a situation with a dog that is attacking you? How do you propose that he does that - talking quietly to the dog, stroking his back and giving him a milk bone, it isn't a person that can be reasoned with. It is a dog. It sucks that the dog was shot, but an aggressive dog that is attacking a police officer, particularly a big dog that can cause major injury with it's teeth, is going to get shot. The police officer was left with no other option without putting his health and safety in jeopardy - and from the video it actually looked like he tried to calm the dog first as well as use a Taser on the dog.

As for a legitimate arrest - you don't know the specifics based on a three minute youtube clip, but based upon the history the guy was going into a potentially violent situation (look at the police with the weapons that were present and drawn), had very loud music playing, and frankly looked like he was getting in the way. The police didn't manhandle him, they arrested him, likely for disrupting the peace or something along those lines, something that they have every right to do as police officers.

Mace? Tazer? I have to think if this happened in Canada or Great Britain (cops don't even carry guns) ths could've been resolved in a non-fatal manner. No question the owner is a giant D-bag but the Rottweiler looked no more aggressive than police dogs that are sicked on criminals. Not to mention there were 3 police officers and the guy already had cuffs on. Total use of excessive force.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MisterJoji

Mace? Tazer? I have to think if this happened in Canada or Great Britain (cops don't even carry guns) ths could've been resolved in a non-fatal manner. No question the owner is a giant D-bag but the Rottweiler looked no more aggressive than police dogs that are sicked on criminals. Not to mention there were 3 police officers and the guy already had cuffs on. Total use of excessive force.

Must be nice to be a monday morning quarterback. There's no guarantee that Mace or a tazer is going to subdue a charging agitated dog in an area with not only cops, civilians and a handcuffed person, and as much as I love dogs, public safety and officer safety has to come first.

The cops acted rightfully. To me the owner was trying to pick a fight with the cops probably to file another lawsuit that will likely happen anyways.

Not to sound cold hearted, but the bottom line is, he didn't properly contain his already agitated pet, he knew that the dog was probably going to go even nuttier.

There was no excessive force here, the owners at fault, hopefully a judge see's it that way.

[Hockeyguy15]

I think the heat is clouding the judgement of some of these people claiming the police were using excessive force to arrest this dummy.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

I would compare it to something different.. more along the lines of someone jumping in to defend someone who is being attacked by a gang. In fact, the only justifiable action I see is the dog attacking the police officers in defense of his owner.

Police detain someone for no legitimate reason, creating the dangerous situation.

Be it because he had loud music playing or because he was recording the police, they had no right to detain or arrest him.

The guy doesn't resist, but they still decide to manhandle him.

Dog jumps out of the car to defend his owner from being attacked.

Had it been a legitimate arrest (perhaps if he had been doing something against the law), then I could see the shooting of the dog being in a grey area, but given that there was no reason (as near as I can tell) for them to arrest him, then I'll continue to put the blame for the situation on the police officer.

Not to be a complete dick here, but in the middle of a armed robbery situation where the cops need to be able to communicate, but hear what's happening and some dickbag rolls up and pumps up his music. They ask him to turn it down and get a f%%k off instead?

At this point it has nothing whatsovever to do with this idiot recording things on video and everything to do with the possibility that this idiot was possibly endangering lives on two fronts. First with the music and then with his dog.

to me the guy should get 30 days in the clink.

This has nothing to do with recording, in this situation the cops couldn't care a less.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by MisterJoji

Mace? Tazer? I have to think if this happened in Canada or Great Britain (cops don't even carry guns) ths could've been resolved in a non-fatal manner. No question the owner is a giant D-bag but the Rottweiler looked no more aggressive than police dogs that are sicked on criminals. Not to mention there were 3 police officers and the guy already had cuffs on. Total use of excessive force.

I bet if you took a survey of cops in Canada almost all of them would have shot the dog as well. Let's not make this into a 'Merica and their love of guns debate.

[Stay Golden]

The owner was acting like a clown and his pet dog paid the price trying to protect him.
I don't agree with the owner being cuffed that was BS. If that was our police force they would not cuff you for taping them. They would have asked to see your ID etc and had you delete the tape if need be.
I don't see anywhere in this footage where the black dude is posing a threat to the officers and he complied right away when they approached him and fully cooperated yet they still chose to cuff him and started jerking him around.
The other thing that burns me about this is that guy even put his dog in the car so when the police did approach him the dog wouldn't attack.
I regret watching this and seeing that dog get shot 3 times by the cop point blank.

[Travis Munroe]

Really disturbing watching the dog squirm in pain when it simply wanted to protect its idiotic owner. The cops were left with very little decision which is unfortunate. Call me crazy but I am surprised they were able to hold off as long as they did. I expected the shots to come when the dog first charged.
Still tough to watch the helpless dog suffer while the clown looking for attention is simply detained.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

The owner was acting like a clown and his pet dog paid the price trying to protect him.
I don't agree with the owner being cuffed that was BS. If that was our police force they would not cuff you for taping them. They would have asked to see your ID etc and had you delete the tape if need be.
I don't see anywhere in this footage where the black dude is posing a threat to the officers and he complied right away when they approached him and fully cooperated yet they still chose to cuff him and started jerking him around.
The other thing that burns me about this is that guy even put his dog in the car so when the police did approach him the dog wouldn't attack.
I regret watching this and seeing that dog get shot 3 times by the cop point blank.

I would say his walk towards the cops when they were walking towards him wasnt completely complying. I also believe there is a reason every other video taper is at the same distance back yet this guy is getting right in there.
Others also mentioned he was asked to turn his music down as it was interfering with the reason they were there to which he did not comply with.

[Leondros]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

The owner was acting like a clown and his pet dog paid the price trying to protect him.
I don't agree with the owner being cuffed that was BS. If that was our police force they would not cuff you for taping them. They would have asked to see your ID etc and had you delete the tape if need be.
I don't see anywhere in this footage where the black dude is posing a threat to the officers and he complied right away when they approached him and fully cooperated yet they still chose to cuff him and started jerking him around.
The other thing that burns me about this is that guy even put his dog in the car so when the police did approach him the dog wouldn't attack.
I regret watching this and seeing that dog get shot 3 times by the cop point blank.

This was not about the recording. You are legally allowed to record public acts such as this one. This was about the gentleman adding to an already tense situation. He was endangering the lives of the two people taken as hostages and for this reason it is the officer's prerogative to detain the individual in the interest of public safety. The police acted completely professional and acted how anyone would have given the circumstances. If you have a 90 lb rotty coming at you with a bite strength of 328 pounds you would put it down as well. The nature of both American and Canadian law puts man ahead of animal and it is within your rights to protect fellow man with whatever force necessary.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Must be nice to be a monday morning quarterback. There's no guarantee that Mace or a tazer is going to subdue a charging agitated dog in an area with not only cops, civilians and a handcuffed person, and as much as I love dogs, public safety and officer safety has to come first.

The cops acted rightfully. To me the owner was trying to pick a fight with the cops probably to file another lawsuit that will likely happen anyways.

Not to sound cold hearted, but the bottom line is, he didn't properly contain his already agitated pet, he knew that the dog was probably going to go even nuttier.

There was no excessive force here, the owners at fault, hopefully a judge see's it that way.

Well since it looks like the cop hit the dog on the 1st shot, it is very likely he would have hit it with the Taser as well. Maybe I should clarify that I don't think the cop should be reprimanded for what he did, it was a difficult scenario and the dog owner is 99% responsible for the whole situation. But I think in Canada or Europe this dog does not get shot, it gets a non-lethal form of subduing. The dog was barking like crazy from a car that had its window open, and the suspect had already been handcuffed, I think it's reasonable for the cop to try and subdue the dog without lethal force. Do Animal Services in any city carry guns?

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I bet if you took a survey of cops in Canada almost all of them would have shot the dog as well. Let's not make this into a 'Merica and their love of guns debate.

When there have been on average 300-400 police shootings per year in America vs. 250 police shootings in Canada in the last 35 YEARS, the statistics speak for themselves. Taking population into account that's roughy 1/770,000 people shot in the USA vs. 1/4.1 million in Canada per year. That's more 5 times more people shot by police in America vs. Canada. Sorry but American police reach for their guns way more than anywhere else in the world and I truly believe that this happens here at home or in Europe the dog is not dead.

[Hockeyguy15]

This thread isn't going to end well.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MisterJoji

Well since it looks like the cop hit the dog on the 1st shot, it is very likely he would have hit it with the Taser as well. Maybe I should clarify that I don't think the cop should be reprimanded for what he did, it was a difficult scenario and the dog owner is 99% responsible for the whole situation. But I think in Canada or Europe this dog does not get shot, it gets a non-lethal form of subduing. The dog was barking like crazy from a car that had its window open, and the suspect had already been handcuffed, I think it's reasonable for the cop to try and subdue the dog without lethal force. Do Animal Services in any city carry guns?

Bunk, we've had dog shootings by police in Calgary as late as last year when and going off of memory a pit bull charged a cop after rampaging through a neighbourhood.

Mace doesn't subdue a dog btw, it pretty much makes them lash out angrily, and there's no guarantee that a taser is going to drop the dog. The cops first responsibility is to public safety and then personal safety. The dog was considered a threat to both if you listen to the explanation.

Originally Posted by MisterJoji

When there have been on average 300-400 police shootings per year in America vs. 250 police shootings in Canada in the last 35 YEARS, the statistics speak for themselves. Taking population into account that's roughy 1/770,000 people shot in the USA vs. 1/4.1 million in Canada per year. That's more 5 times more people shot by police in America vs. Canada. Sorry but American police reach for their guns way more than anywhere else in the world and I truly believe that this happens here at home or in Europe the dog is not dead.

I truly believe that you are over simplifying things to make your argument. Europeans don't have anywhere near the level of gang violence, illegal handguns and other factors that the U.S. has, and good for them, they've done a lot of things right in terms of limiting access to weapons.

The American police tend to be dealing with far more volatile and tough to control situations then the American's do.

The animal might not be dead in Europe, I can't argue that. But it probably would have been shot up here and certainly in the States.

And animal control officers in the States carry rifles. But the Police were dealing with a armed robbery situation and a jacka$$ disrupting their ability to communicate, they're not going to take time to call animal control and worry about the dog when they have bigger problems.

Personally, I think that the owner should be charged with two counts of reckless endangerment.

One for playing his radio at top volume and disrupting the polices ability to communicate and maintain situational awareness during a felony. And the second for not properly securing hi agitated dog.

The cops acted properly, to me. But because this moron has a history of it, there will be a lawsuit.

[Acey]

If I'm being held hostage in a house, I wouldn't want some idiot rolling up blaring music and distracting the police. Too bad they had to shoot the dog and not the owner.

[Stay Golden]

it's just too bad that the dogs owner paraded around like a fool and eventually got cuffed. It is pretty clear that dog loved his owner and its most sad the dog lost their life protecting him. If given a 4 min rewind on life and knowing what happened to his dog this owner would have not bothered with this situation.

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by Acey

If I'm being held hostage in a house, I wouldn't want some idiot rolling up blaring music and distracting the police. Too bad they had to shoot the dog and not the owner.

That is not even rational at all. What would your reason be that the dog owner should be shot????

[Acey]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

That is not even rational at all. What would your reason be that the dog owner should be shot????

The dog is completely innocent, and the owner being an idiot got his dog killed. It never works out that the guilty party pays the price, does it.

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

If that was our police force they would not cuff you for taping them.

You're right, but that's irrelevant, since that's not why he was cuffed.

What I don't understand is the outrage at the police for shooting the dog. It blows my mind that people are surprised and outraged when a dog who could potentially inflict lethal injuries is shot after charging at a cop. Let's hope none of these cops face any kind of supplementary discipline.

Look how that clown is holding is phone, it was going to be a crappy vertical video anyway. All for nothing.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

it's just too bad that the dogs owner paraded around like a fool and eventually got cuffed. It is pretty clear that dog loved his owner and its most sad the dog lost their life protecting him. If given a 4 min rewind on life and knowing what happened to his dog this owner would have not bothered with this situation.

I doubt that.

This dog owner is a moron and is just happy to have a reason to sue the cops. He doesn't sound like an upstanding member of society from the information we have been given.

Yes it is sad the dog was killed, but honestly the dog is probably better off not having to deal with this clown for the rest of his life.