Dog get's shot by police *WARNING* may upset alot of viewers.

[2012 Wont Happen]

You doubt it, you don't know it.

A 6 minute (silent) clip posted by a user in support of people who fight animal cruelty (a noble cause admittedly), with no context given, in the middle of a street in broad daylight - with several officers around.

It's not exactly convincing me yet. Don't get me wrong, I don't want the animal shot and I'd much rather it hadn't been, but forgive me for not simply assuming that a group of police officers are so vindictive as to kill a harmless animal.

Exactly.

Assumptions based on internet comments? No thank you.

It's like you're assuming that just because he's a serial rapist automatically makes it ok to murder him...

Rapists deserve to be murdered. They forfeit their right to life.

And with that said, I'm glad you do not nor shall ever have any sort of authority or commanding power.

No law can be arbitrary, no sentence should be greater than the crime committed, no one man should dictate when and how another man's life comes to an end. Clamor for the willful and unnecessary death of a man and you're no better than the criminal.

Almost every sentence is greater than the crime committed. If we're going to argue it from a certain angle, you could say that even a years jail time is "greater" than the crime of rape, because in that time a person may be raped in prison, and will have lost much more of their life than the victim of the rape lost.

However, sentences are greater than the crimes. There's a reason for that. If you don't have a much stricter sentence than the crime committed, then there is no incentive to not commit the crime. If I know that if I steal $10,000, I will only be fined $10,000, I will most likely steal the money. I have nothing to lose from it, if I'm caught I'm back to where I started, and I have $10,000 to gain from it if I'm not caught. A sentence that is equal to or lighter than a crime is useless.

Of, and it is not unnecessary to kill a rapist. In many cases, it can be unnecessary to kill a murderer- if it was a crime of passion or a crime committed for a specific reason, then perhaps imprisonment and counseling could fix the murderer. No such actions can fix a rapist. They are broken beyond repair. They are a danger. They are not human. They deserve to die.

So when it comes down to it, you'll pull the trigger? You'll look that "human animal" in the eye and take his life in cold blood?

Yes. Then I'll have a cup of hot chocolate and sleep like a baby.

What's stopping you from doing it now, then?

I don't understand why you even feel the need to ask this question. The police are stopping me. Jail time is stopping me. The rules of society are stopping me.

If you have the legal authority to allow me to commit murder without repercussions, I'd gladly start executing rapists today, but I very much doubt you have such authority. As it is, it would be throwing away my life to end theirs.

 

[Tdc2182]

I apologise for any offense I may have caused, I have just seen enough to have generated a stereotype of American law enforcement.

Its because all you will ever see about police officers is negativity. It doesn't matter when they do things right, nobody notices that, kinda because it is their job to be doing things right.

They are held to a higher standard than average society because they have power. And when they abuse that power, they will get brought down hard.

He's right, though. All pigs are worthless and corrupt, and need to be removed, American or not.

You clearly don't know anything about Police officers then. My father was a police officer (more or less), plus I have multiple friends who are police officers.

Making general assumptions about an entire group of people is proof enough that you are an idiot, especially seeing how most, if not all, your backwards logic was probably gained from internet videos.

The fact is, the reason and dedication it takes to become a police officer simply disproves the amount of bribing it would take to corrupt someone like that.

This is real life bud. Sure, you are going to find the occasional idiot in the police force that went into it because he had a rough time at school, but the majority of them go in because the simply respect the law.

You take away the police, there is no stopping the filth and decay of society from taking over. Than of course the Army goes into power, and it immediately becomes a totalitarian state.

So no thanks, I'll keep my officers of the law. Go to Somalia if you don't like police. I'm sure you'll have one hell of a time.

 

[dashiz94]

Really? Seven pages over a dog? Boohoo, a single animal has died, I must mourn its loss. You know, there are actual humans getting killed every day. Surely there are better things to focus all this attention on.

It's more the focus on police brutality than the actual dog dying, you damn buzz kill.

In that case I hear there was quite a bit of that during the recent student protests in the UK. You know, human students.

Police brutality on a dog. Jesus Christ, has the phrase lost so much meaning?

Except that happened in the UK, this happened in the U.S. Therefore all the users on this site that are from the U.S. (which is a lot) will comment on this. The point is, people were having a discussion, there's no point in you telling them it's a dumb discussion.

 

[Aidinthel]

Really? Seven pages over a dog? Boohoo, a single animal has died, I must mourn its loss. You know, there are actual humans getting killed every day. Surely there are better things to focus all this attention on.

It's more the focus on police brutality than the actual dog dying, you damn buzz kill.

In that case I hear there was quite a bit of that during the recent student protests in the UK. You know, human students.

Police brutality on a dog. Jesus Christ, has the phrase lost so much meaning?

Except that happened in the UK, this happened in the U.S. Therefore all the users on this site that are from the U.S. (which is a lot) will comment on this. The point is, people were having a discussion, there's no point in you telling them it's a dumb discussion.

It isn't necessarily a dumb discussion. In and of itself it's actually pretty decent. I just find it upsetting that so many people are more interested in the fate of a single animal than in more important problems affecting actual people. It's possible I could have expressed my dismay more diplomatically, but I really was upset at the time and wanted everyone to know it. I suppose the point was some vague hope that I'd encourage someone to put a little bit of the time that they would have spent on this dog and put it to better use. Like FreeRice for example.

 

[PhiMed]

Fortunately we are both in agreement that the officer shouldn't have been dealing with the situation, instead they should have been keeping the dog there and waiting for a professional. Was he under-equipped? Well looking at the video the dog, even when it had a gun to it, didn't have the energy to escape the pole used to restrain it. So he had the equipment necessary, he was just incompetent when it came to the situation.

We're only partially in agreement there. This doesn't appear to be a thriving metropolis. There might not be any "professionals" to call. If there is an animal control unit in this municipality, then there may be a very good reason they weren't called. Perhaps the owner of the dog made an armed response necessary?

As I've already said on this anyway, you can't justify shooting the dog because, it would go to the pound anyway. If you check the article, the owner clearly cares about the dog, " Even if his campaign to change the law in unsuccessful, Mays said the fight will be worth it.
?I don?t feel (Cammie) was vicious,? he said. ?I feel I stood up for her.?" so if it went to the pound it may have been saved before it was disposed of.They're there to take the dog from the owner because of registration violations and aggressive behavior in the animal. Why in the world would they release the animal to the person they just took her from? Also, I didn't read anything in the article that indicated that the owner "truly cared for the dog". At least two judges appear to think he is a somewhat lacking owner, as well.

"(to anyone who's been around dogs a lot)" I've been brought up around dogs since I was born, so 19 years of personal experience. I've been to dog shows, I've talked with professional trainers, and my family (both mother and father) have worked in the veterinary industry, selling pharmaceuticals, dog food, running stands.
I'm not an expert by any means, but don't think I've only seen a picture of the damn things.
P.S Yes the "to anyone who's been around dogs a lot" comment is extremely patronising, don't think just making random assumptions about my background with dogs is going to aid your argument. This is one of the most patronising comments I've encountered on this forum.

I don't mean to patronize, but telling me you've hung around show dogs your entire life doesn't really give me the feeling that you know how to deal with animals with behavioral problems. Additionally, the breed of your dog, springer spaniel, doesn't exactly tell me you're accustomed to dealing with dogs who are capable of, as my dad used to say, "winning an argument".

I'm talking about dogs that work. I'm referring to dogs that hunt, retrieve, and track. Aggression towards humans has to be recognized early and definitively in animals like this, because A) you're training them to channel that aggression to other endeavors and B) they are much more powerful than your springer spaniel and a slip up in behavior will result in much more damage to your person.

So, based on what I was actually talking about: No, I don't think you've been around dogs a lot. That doesn't make you a bad person. It doesn't make you a stupid person, a morally lacking person, or a person in possession of any other negative characteristic. It just means that you're probably not the most qualified person in the world to comment on a grainy video with a fixed perspective with no sound of a dog behaving badly.

I'm not saying I'm the most qualified person in the world, but I've spent enormous amounts of time training dogs that have a lot more in common with the dog in that video than your spaniel or some show dog. That's not condescension. That's fact.

 

[PhiMed]

I'm assuming by "pigs" you mean Police officers?

Yes. I guess it's more of an American term.

Yeah, in the 60's and early 70's. Kind of obsolete now, don't you think?

 

[thingymuwatsit]

SNIP

I was not generalizing law enforcement in general, but that of which I have observed making grievous mistakes such as this (who in most cases are American I do, in fact, respect law enforcement when it is handled responsibly.
I also reported the other poster because I found his post poorly handled and offensive towards the target community.

 

[Dwarfman]

I would prefer audio along with the visual evidence and maybe an article before making a constructive opinion. Till then my opinion is biased due to my phobia - and general hatred - of dogs.

Edit - I only just noticed the article at the bottom of the posting sorry 'bout that!

hmmm still it's all a little to vague. The article does say that it was agressive to neighbours but the whole thing is quite vague. The other You Tube posting didn't help all that much although it does spout the question at what point did the dog become so aggresive excessive force was required and I think afew people mentioned this but why weren't the animal protection mob or dog pound or whoever not called?

Ah well.. we can only hope the court of appeal can solve this puzzle.

 

[bad rider]

Fortunately we are both in agreement that the officer shouldn't have been dealing with the situation, instead they should have been keeping the dog there and waiting for a professional. Was he under-equipped? Well looking at the video the dog, even when it had a gun to it, didn't have the energy to escape the pole used to restrain it. So he had the equipment necessary, he was just incompetent when it came to the situation.

We're only partially in agreement there. This doesn't appear to be a thriving metropolis. There might not be any "professionals" to call. If there is an animal control unit in this municipality, then there may be a very good reason they weren't called. Perhaps the owner of the dog made an armed response necessary?

Your argument is that there were no animal professionals to call in a city. Right, well that seems to me to be clutching at straws, but heck I can't be sure so, fair game. As for the owner making it necessary, you'd have to elaborate what you mean by that.

As I've already said on this anyway, you can't justify shooting the dog because, it would go to the pound anyway. If you check the article, the owner clearly cares about the dog, " Even if his campaign to change the law in unsuccessful, Mays said the fight will be worth it.
?I don?t feel (Cammie) was vicious,? he said. ?I feel I stood up for her.?" so if it went to the pound it may have been saved before it was disposed of.They're there to take the dog from the owner because of registration violations and aggressive behavior in the animal. Why in the world would they release the animal to the person they just took her from? Also, I didn't read anything in the article that indicated that the owner "truly cared for the dog". At least two judges appear to think he is a somewhat lacking owner, as well.

Okay, that's walking around my point, you can't shoot a dog just because it would go to a pound otherwise. I can't shoot a criminal just because he'll spend the rest of his life on jail or face an execution.

"(to anyone who's been around dogs a lot)" I've been brought up around dogs since I was born, so 19 years of personal experience. I've been to dog shows, I've talked with professional trainers, and my family (both mother and father) have worked in the veterinary industry, selling pharmaceuticals, dog food, running stands.
I'm not an expert by any means, but don't think I've only seen a picture of the damn things.
P.S Yes the "to anyone who's been around dogs a lot" comment is extremely patronising, don't think just making random assumptions about my background with dogs is going to aid your argument. This is one of the most patronising comments I've encountered on this forum.

I don't mean to patronize, but telling me you've hung around show dogs your entire life doesn't really give me the feeling that you know how to deal with animals with behavioral problems. Additionally, the breed of your dog, springer spaniel, doesn't exactly tell me you're accustomed to dealing with dogs who are capable of, as my dad used to say, "winning an argument".

I'm talking about dogs that work. I'm referring to dogs that hunt, retrieve, and track. Aggression towards humans has to be recognized early and definitively in animals like this, because A) you're training them to channel that aggression to other endeavors and B) they are much more powerful than your springer spaniel and a slip up in behavior will result in much more damage to your person.

So, based on what I was actually talking about: No, I don't think you've been around dogs a lot. That doesn't make you a bad person. It doesn't make you a stupid person, a morally lacking person, or a person in possession of any other negative characteristic. It just means that you're probably not the most qualified person in the world to comment on a grainy video with a fixed perspective with no sound of a dog behaving badly.

I'm not saying I'm the most qualified person in the world, but I've spent enormous amounts of time training dogs that have a lot more in common with the dog in that video than your spaniel or some show dog. That's not condescension. That's fact.

Well you pass one patronising comment for another, thank you. Dogs I have had the pleasure of dealing with, 3x Labradors, 1 Dachshund, 1x king Charles cavalier spaniel, 2x pointers, 2x Alsations (One an ex guide dog thrown out for attacking Labradors. The other an actual guard dog nicknamed skeletor, because he was a guard dog who you had to be very dominant around. we were keeping him for several months and at one point he did actually take a chunk of leg out of my mother) 3x terriers one a rescue dog that had severe issues and would bite and growl at you. Also two greyhounds. Possibly others I'm forgetting, but those are the ones that come to mind, each had their own personalitys, I've put a few in but it would take a while to go through. I don't really want to post every relevant bit of knowledge on dogs I process because it would be tedious and pointless because hey, I could write that I'm an astronaut in my spare time. Do any of those count as "dogs who are capable of, as my dad used to say, "winning an argument"."?????

" It just means that you're probably not the most qualified person in the world to comment on a grainy video with a fixed perspective with no sound of a dog behaving badly." Well by that logic, neither of us should be sharing our opinion on this.

Oh also "I'm referring to dogs that hunt, retrieve, and track." springer spaniels are a breed of dog that is used in hunting, because their noses make them excellent trackers, they are used more often than not in hunting to flush birds and retrieve the ones you shoot. So what's your point?

 

[mrcheatbuddy]

I HATE ANIMAL CRUILTY but the video was half coverd and had no sound we dont know what could of been going on

 

[EllEzDee]

Once again, why are Americans allowed to carry guns?

 

[Spy_Guy]

Rapists deserve to be murdered. They forfeit their right to life.

Perhaps I'm just a vindictive individual, but I see nothing wrong with this statement.
After all, kill one, nothing of value is lost.

In regards to the dog, I don't feel it's such a big deal. Especially considering the lack of information in the video, plus the fact that the person who recorded and uploaded it to YT clearly has a motive behind it.

That being said, hindsight is 20-20 and I'm not sure I'd be entirely comfortable around a dog that size. However, it does seem just a tad unnecessary to shoot it, considering the leash and all...

Though, I wonder one thing, if someone a bit more knowledgeable about dogs could tell me... why is it wagging its tail after being shot the first time? I mean, dogs do that when happy, I'm told.

 

[CaptainKoala]

I could post a video of a serial rapist getting shot by police and leave the comment: 'homeless man offends cop - is shot dead' and, considering how quick everyone here is to blindly follow in suit, you'd believe it.

Silly.

To make that situation parallel to this one, the rapist would have to be handcuffed to a pole, then executed by the police officer. I don't think that video would go over well at all.

What? If someone raped my daughter I'd probably cuff him to a poll and shoot him. And I wouldn't feel bad for it either.

Just hope you realize you and the officer would be convicted for murder if either of you did that.

I wouldn't do it if I were a cop, that would give every other cop a bad name that they didn't earn. If I weren't a cop, and it was my daughter, you bet I would hunt down her rapist. And I would accept the murder charge without thinking twice. Because I did what I needed to do.

 

[CaptainKoala]

Once again, why are Americans allowed to carry guns?

1. That was a cop. Not a citizen.
2. Even if it were a citizen we have the 2nd amendment.
Cops sorta need guns to protect themselves and others against extremely violent criminals and other trivial things like that.

 

[Mcface]

To be fair shooting the stray is probably doing it a favor. Life of a stray dog is miserable, and chances are it would just be gassed anyway.

 

[Comrade_Beric]

To the people who say we should get more information from the police before "jumping to conclusions":

That's right. Because with enough context, maybe they can rationalize shooting a relatively calm and subdued dog in the head. "Maybe she killed somebody"? Well then maybe she should have been euthanized at an animal control center instead of executed in someone's driveway.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

Regardless of whether the dog was rabid or not, it is not a police officers' job to shoot it. It should be taken to a pound first, then a vets and if it's beyond help then it should be put down painlessly.

And people wonder why I give to animal charities but not childrens or research.

EDIT

It doesn't matter about the context, whether the dog had killed or injured someone or not. It was leashed and there was no way it was getting to either of those police officers (if it had, it would have been the police officer's fault for not handling the device correctly).