Thoughts on Hawthorne, Ca Police Kill Dog

[Negatempest]

So the response of some of these people is, the police don't know how to handle the dog? Are you kidding me? Did anyone actually pay attention to that size of the beast? A dog that big can easily take down a single individual no problem. And I SAW the whole video. The police officers literally waited the last second to shoot the dog. The dog was getting closer and closer and more aggressive. The moment the dog even looked like it was going to lounge, the police shot it. Police Officers are not equipped to handle animals, period. That is what the dog/animal police are for, they carry the nets and stuff.

What I'm getting from these "pro-dog" complaints is that they do not know how to handle an aggressive dog either. Cops don't carry nooses in their cars. And tasering or pepper spraying a dog would be stupid and reckless.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Do tell, what do you propose should be used to control crime without police?

OT: yoloswag shitstain gets his dog shot by doing everything in his power to provoke the cops, but it still must be the cop's fault because, as we all know they are state sponsored murder robots.

Well given that the main indicator of crime in any given country is the wealth gap and social inequality, I would start by addressing that disparity. But why confront the cause when you can just keep policing the symptoms.

Anyway, if a police officer can't react with greater maturity, professionalism and self control than any other fuckwit with a gun, I don't see what makes them deserving of the title of protector.

 

[Something Amyss]

Fine. I don?t like it when the MAJORITY of police get insulted, is that better?

Not particularly, but it's a step in the right direction, I guess.

The police in this country have a terrible track record. If you want to pretend otherwise, fine. The Police themselves have bred everything from distrust to hate and enforced that barrier.

 

[The Inquisitive Mug]

I hate seeing people in this thread refer to the dog as a weapon. Dogs are not weapons. You can't shoot a weapon to death. And last I checked, tasers work just fine on canines if you're really that concerned for your safety. Of course, as has been stated, shooting the dog was not necessarily an act of malice. It could have been a snap judgement call. Unfortunately, it was the wrong call, and I would have hoped that people that we have given authority and guns to would have been able to make a better one. As a result, a dog is dead.

EDIT: In regards to the link posted by NiPah (http://www.abc4.com/content/news/state/story/tasing-dog-shooting-dog-dozer/SO0rZUC9Ek6dlXuzvZCVGw.cspx)): This is not real evidence to me that tasing a dog is ineffective. The only opponent in this article to using a taser to subdue a dog is a single police lieutenant from the same police department that shot the dog to death. There are no studies or statistics cited. We have only his word, and it's in his best interests to side with his department.

 

[NiPah]

Dogs are weapons, the fact that it dies when shot does not effect that label. As for finding first hand accounts from police officers "not real evidence", I'm sorry to tell you there aren't many studies that taser dogs to see how effective it is in stopping them.
Color me surprised if there is an actual study which tasers dogs, I would find it quite inhuman and ludicrous (or maybe a meta study which takes in multiple accounts from officers and civilians on tasing dogs, but you wouldn't believe it because they are mean to dogs).

 

[bigman88]

I have long renounced my f da popo sentiment; i'll opt to fight my own battle upon a break in or on the street, but if i catch a bullet(they fly around often in my neighborhood as of lately), 911 it is. I've been arrested once for a frustratingly retarded infraction (walking between train cars through the door) but the cops that dragged me farther from my destination towards that pissy, dirty cell were fine. The lady cop was nice enough to buy me skittles and soda when we got to bookings. Still hated them for conducting a secret sting operation by following me through the door into the other train car then standing around pretending their not going to arrest me.

That being said, police are not your friends, period. Some are cool peeps within themselves, but their primary objective as officers is to uphold the laws imposed by the state/Government; 95% of which go against the common citizen's financial and individual interests/ freedoms, and they'll uphold whatever for that paycheck. Others don't give a damn about upholding anything or jelping people and are glad to legally whoop ass, shoot guns at live targets, and hold federally sanctioned authority over others for the base thrill of it. Coupled with the fact that a growing number of police in the last few years are generally more inclined towards beating and shooting people/dogs with little to no requirement or provocation, then the officer and the brass taking all necessary steps to lie, cover-up and justify said violent acts further shows us that the cops are not here to help us.

The man here was recording the scene, which is not illegal. That doesn't stop police from becoming angry and arresting the person recording anyway. Granted, this man was a bit obnoxious, and should have recorded at a safer distance, far from the cops, but observing how both cops forcefully and unnecessarily grabbed and contorted the man's arms despite his compliance, and the countless cases of cops angrily pursuing anyone recording them doing something they shouldn't be doing (beating, shooting dudes for little to no reason), then it's safe to assume these cops were not interested in securing the scene and keeping everyone safe. Also remember that they LIE, and sometimes switches it up upon the surfacing of damning video evidence. So the reason of them trying to keep a crime scene secure, keep people safe and turn down his music is according to the police.

I would say that although the rot did look like he was jumping at the cop, i think i single bullet or a tazer would have been sufficient enough, then quickly back away and let the owner calm Mr. Rot down. Instead we have 4 bullets, and the cop still in his combat stance pointing his glock at a dog that is OBVIOUSLY no longer a danger to anyone(his body is too busy spazzing on it's side from being shot 4 times). I'm gonna say cops fault here; i'll recognize and admit if it isn't.

I think the government purposefully have police departments fill their ranks with people lacking a moral compass; those who are willing to commit violence when not needed or enforce insane laws, and those who care not what goes on as long as they get paid. Cops are not your friend people.

 

[The Inquisitive Mug]

And where did I say that cops are "mean to dogs?" I actually said the opposite. You're grouping my post with the rest of the threads dissent, and I'd prefer if you didn't make assumptions. I don't distrust the lieutenant because I think he's some dog-hating scum, or because he's a cop. I just don't believe that a policeman that belongs to the department that shot the dog in question is unbiased when asked about the incident. He has a vested interest in not speaking against the actions of his department, especially on the news. And regardless of what I believe, your link fails to prove that using tasers on dogs lead to "higher chance of injury to officers/civilians." The fact that there are, as you admit, no studies that show the effectiveness of tasers on dogs hurts your point, not mine (as you are the one espousing that tasers are ineffective).

 

[Comic Sans]

People wondering why this guy was arrested need to pay more attention to the video. As others have said, he was blaring loud music at a tense situation and didn't comply when told to turn it down. In addition, he was yelling at the outside officers, more specifically calling them racist for being all white. He intentionally antagonized them. He was asking for trouble, and the police were well within their rights to detain him. He then didn't properly secure his dog, leading to a large, potentially violent dog rushing towards police to defend it's master. Think of it from the perspective of the police. They see a large dog running towards them, and jumping at them. They had only a few seconds to react. One of the officers tried to calmly restrain the dog, and when it jumped he reacted. Yes, they could have used pepper spray or something. It's no guarantee to stop an angry dog, and again, for them in happened really fast. I'd rather have a dead dog than an officer mauled because of an idiotic owner. It's sad that the dog died, but it's the owners fault for obstructing justice, being a jackass to the cops, and putting his dog in the situation.

 

[latenightapplepie]

Better one dog killed in self-defence than millions of dead cows, pigs and chickens every year just so we have something nice to eat.

Oh wait.

 

[Daveman]

I do think the dog may have been about to attack, but the police knew he had a dog, he was fine with being arrested, just tell him to secure his dog before you cuff him. They could have let him go and calm the dog too. It's sad that people think that just because it's a big dog it's okay to shoot it. Does that mean it's okay to shoot a guy acting aggressive if he's over like 6'5"?

 

[Strazdas]

this is kind of conflicting and not at the same time.
on one hand
they could just asked the guy to go away, to secure his dog before handcuffing and evne once the dog was out they could have allwoed him to handle it, even without hands hep robably could have commanded the dog to be nice had they let him (that is not act like they threaten him to which the dog reacts badly). its not like he was going to cause imemdiate damage to the police.
add to that, from the video it is clear that the dog did not attack but rather tried to befriend the cop.
on the other hand
you got a guy obstructing a hostage situation. that is a complete noone and you shoudl get rid of him as fast as possible. that said guy is being cocky about it acting like hes in the right. then you got a huge killing machine (this breed of dogs should not even be allowed to be used as pets. they are inherently stupid and aggressive) who has more muscle power than a human lunching at you, jumping on you. a police officer simply defended and in this situation when a dog runs and jumps on you you do not really think "is it befriending or biting me", you avoid. so the officer defended as per regulation and neutralized the threat. it is sad that an animal had to die because of it, but it is not officers fault here.

IF it was me, i would have shot too. i do hope the guy fails at court for its damage claim.

Now some people offered to use baton (seriuosly?) pepper spray and tazer. now lets imagine the cop carried all 3 to begin with, and lets face it not all officers do.
you agitate and hurt the dog. its first reaction is to maul you. when a human gets tazed he realizes not to attack. when a dog gets tazed you wont be fast enough to reload your batteries before hes at your throat. especially this agressive breed.

 

[shootthebandit]

There are too many assumptions being made about this topic. We are assuming the dog walkers intention and how long hes been there (and if hes been told to leave a few times), we are also assuming what the policeman may or may not be carrying and the extent of his training as far as dogs are concerned. We also assume that because the dog is a rottweiler that it is instantly agressive, most dogs of this breed are actually very dosile and sluggish despite the fact they have a large physical presence which is intimidating

I cant clearly make a call on whether it was ok to shoot and im not trying to put the police down but scenarios like this make you worried about how trigger happy the police can be. Not so much here in the UK as they dont have guns but it still makes you think about how quick they are to use a violent approach

 

[bigman88]

There are too many assumptions being made about this topic. We are assuming the dog walkers intention and how long hes been there (and if hes been told to leave a few times), we are also assuming what the policeman may or may not be carrying and the extent of his training as far as dogs are concerned. We also assume that because the dog is a rottweiler that it is instantly agressive, most dogs of this breed are actually very dosile and sluggish despite the fact they have a large physical presence which is intimidating

I cant clearly make a call on whether it was ok to shoot and im not trying to put the police down but scenarios like this make you worried about how trigger happy the police can be. Not so much here in the UK as they dont have guns but it still makes you think about how quick they are to use a violent approach

With hundreds of thousands of police brutality instances resulting in stolen property, injury, ordeath, and the police department insistence on lying about it, covering it up and backing up the officers violent actions, then yeah, you got your answers right there.

Also the many cases of police hunting down people film them then arresting them. Filming the cops is not illegal,. They don't want you recording them at all, and they have a reason for it. Then the two cops come and wrench a mans arms behind his back despite him complying. Then the dog, which admittedly did look like it was making a lunge at the cop, shot the poor guy 4 times. Not once, which would have been good enough, then have the owner assume control of the dog, but 4 times. Then he remains in combat stance pointing his gun at the dog that was writhing in pain and of no danger to anyone anymore. Anybody who doesn't see this probably wouldn't realize a police officer is not on this would not realize a cop is not on their side if said cop shoots him in the foot.

The man recording was being very annoying though.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

I take a very anthropic view on cops. As a position of automatic authority with a relatively low bar of entry, I think it attracts a very specific kind of asshole: someone with enough ego to believe he/she has the right to control the people in his environment, only he/she doesn't possess the requisite intelligence/rationality/charisma to naturally accomplish this feat. Rather than internalize this failure and attempt to rectify any character flaws responsible, he/she sets out to obtain a little badge granting him/her unquestioned authority in the vast majority of circumstances.

My personal experiences with police officers have reinforced this theory to a staggering degree. The days of doffing your hat to the friendly neighborhood policeman are over. Almost all of them seem to be gigantic pricks because gigantic pricks are the ones attracted to the job.

Edit: also, the definition of a police officer has slowly changed over the years. They used to be our protectors, people who put themselves in danger to keep the rest of us safe. That's still true, to an extent, but they're far more liable to implement preemptive force these days. People trudge out the thousand and one things that could go wrong any time a cop shoots the crap out of someone or some animal. I'd argue that a cop's job is to risk some of those things happening in order to defuse the situation peacefully - not to blow away any potential threat on the grounds of "it was him or *potentially* me".

 

[Zeriah]

Disgusting display here. As a dog owner seeing that was horrible and heartbreaking, what a terrible choice that Police officer made. There were so many other options that could have been taken, the dog wasn't even being overy aggressive it just jumped up on him for half a second after his owner was being physically detained. They didn't allow the owner a chance to command his dog, they didn't non lethally restrain the dog. They just shot it dead for barking and jumping (no biting whatsoever). This person clearly has no business being a policeman, he has to go and never be let near a gun ever again.

 

[Shock and Awe]

Alright, first off I think that the guy shouldn't have been walking around inside a cordoned off area just so he could get a video of police standing around bitching about the weather, he definitely shouldn't have been doing with a big ass dog when he had a car right there. He should have secured the dog before he even put himself in that situation. The officer's should have also thought about securing the dog as well when they put the owner in cuffs, that was a mess up on their part. In the end though, the dog was acting aggressively and almost bit an officer. The shooting was justified. If I ever had a strange large dog barking and snapping at me, I'd probably would have shot it before the officer made the decision. Its an animal and my safety and that of my comrades comes far before it's welfare.

 

[cpukill]

Here's an even better video: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/08/second-video-dog-shooting_n_3536658.html

Guy drives up, acts like jackass with music blaring and large dog on leash. Cops arrest for interference.

Dog gets pissy because daddy is in cuffs. Officer makes several attempts to grab leash, finally shoots dog when it lunges for him. Puts multiple shots into dog, because that's how public safety officers are taught. Dead dog, jackass owner arrested.

End of line.