Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Burglars are generally not armed. If they were armed it would be easier for them just to go a rob a store.
Please stop confusing violent crime with property crime. The police need to use the appropriate level of force for each situation.
Your anti-cop agenda is not making you think clearly. A burglar is not to be taken lightly. The appropriate force for some scumbag who has to steal something that isn't his is a shot to the temple. Anybody breaking into a house to steal something should think twice about being so brazen.
I still have the page open with the video and rewatched it. It was more than a second. I do think he may have started to take the gun out before the dog appeared, and if so, lie #2.
I'll read the report. I know you're not lying about what's in there, but maybe if I read the whole thing I'll better understand where you're coming from.
But, I do think we may differ in opinion because I think he needed to take some action against the dog. I just don't think he took the right action.
What are your thoughts on that point?
00:45 dog barks
00:48 dog apears
00:49 cop aims gun and shoots.
The dog was shot within four seconds after it first barked. The dog heard somebody in it's yard, barked and ran to see who it was. Saw the cop, and one second later it was dyeing.
Cop heard the dog. Cop saw the dog. Cop killed the dog. He could have just as easily killed the homeowner.
This is what I will never understand. A pet is not a family member. You did not give birth to that four legged creature that licks his own butt. You did not put him through grades 1-12 and possibly college. You did not walk it down the aisle to be married. Stop confusing a pet with a member of the family.
All of this could've been prevented simply by the homeowner, knowing the police were on their way, putting the dog away.
This is the thing--even if the police officer had used other methods, I think many dog advocates would STILL be crying foul. It seems that nothing satisfies them except this ridiculous notion that a cop is just supposed to let some nasty dog slobber all over them or get all under their feet as a trip hazard while they're trying to do their ACTUAL JOB. Even if a dog isn't being danger, it being a pest is reason enough that the homeowner, knowing the police are coming, puts their dog out of the way.
No excuses. Period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Town FFX
We can see who has never had a pet.
Not the case with me. I have 2 dogs and 4 cats, and I enjoy them and appreciate the comfort they bring, but I haven't for a moment confused them with my CHILDREN. I wouldn't want a police officer shooting any of them unnecessarily, but I certainly wouldn't be even 1 trillionth as mad or traumatized over that vs them shooting my CHILDREN. I have brains and logical thinking that way.
Not the case with me. I have 2 dogs and 4 cats, and I enjoy them and appreciate the comfort they bring, but I haven't for a moment confused them with my CHILDREN. I wouldn't want a police officer shooting any of them unnecessarily, but I certainly wouldn't be even 1 trillionth as mad or traumatized over that vs them shooting my CHILDREN. I have brains and logical thinking that way.
Ask your family, ask your kids if they consider the pets to be part of the family and how they would react. Something tells me they wouldn't be so dismissive, brains and logic aside.
I doubt it was personal cowardice. The police must train thier officers to respond that way, "neutralize the imminent threat" and all that. Apparently they don't realize that, short of shooting somebody's child, shooting thier pet is about the worst thing they can do. Word needs to go out to the people in charge of police departments that they must train their officers to handle dogs without killing them.
Then the police are being trained to be cowards. They need to be trained that they are there to serve and protect, not to look out for their own personal safety. To do that they need to be 100% sure before they shoot something or someone, that it something or someone that they should be shooting. If they are not willing to do that, then they are not providing any useful service to society, and they should not be paid for it.
OK, so there are people--certainly not anyone I'm friends with--who consider their pets "part of the family."
OK then. There's this thing called BEHAVING. You think my children would get away with acting rude to guests at our home? It may be our home, but if guests come here, my children are taught to BEHAVE and not do bratty things towards our house guests. If they can't, they're reprimanded, perhaps sent to their room and told to stay there. They're not permitted to be bratty and misbehave around house guests. Nobody may feel inclined to reprimand them, but then I'm doing that vs not doing that.
The plumber was here, they were just being sweet kids checking out what he was doing, but they were still "underfoot," not in a mean way, but still "underfoot" and interfering with his work. They were told, nicely, to confine themselves to their rooms so he could do his job without interference, because it's not his job to deal with my children, it's MINE, and yes this may be our home, but he was ASKED HERE to do a job (a job for our benefit) and it's only courteous to give him the environment necessary to perform it vs expecting him to tolerate nuisance behavior that interferes with this.
This is what we expect our CHILDREN to do, and they're family members. So--if dogs are family members, then I say the same goes for them. They need to know how to behave, and not interfere with what a police officer is doing, or they need to be confined so they can't, OR the homeowner needs to handle the job at hand their own selves rather than involving someone else who doesn't want to be pestered by their dog, however well meaning the dog may be.
This is what I will never understand. A pet is not a family member. You did not give birth to that four legged creature that licks his own butt. You did not put him through grades 1-12 and possibly college. You did not walk it down the aisle to be married. Stop confusing a pet with a member of the family.
I don't personally disagree that a pet is not a family member, but I'm not a pet owner. Many pet owners would disagree.
It doesn't matter though, because this trigger happy cop could just as easily have killed the homeowner as her dog. What if the woman's grandchild had been in the yard with the dog, and had came running behind the dog, and took the bullet? Think about it.
If your pet is loose and you don't have control of it his death is on you not the police. If you know a policeman is going to be coming to your house remove your pet from the policeman's path.
Your anti-cop agenda is not making you think clearly. A burglar is not to be taken lightly. The appropriate force for some scumbag who has to steal something that isn't his is a shot to the temple. Anybody breaking into a house to steal something should think twice about being so brazen.
Thats not what the US Constitution says.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
