It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wisconsin police deploy armored vehicle over dog poop dispute, SWAT team executes dog

page: 4
74
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: anton74

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: anton74

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: anton74
Really you want to say the pup was let lose to attack the cops?!
please tell me I missed the sarcasm in your post


The man told the cops he was going to send it out to attack them and from the reports here in WI, they recorded him when he said it. Apparently this guy has a long history with police and the incident started before the dog took a poop on the lawn.


I think that is all irrelevant since the dog WAS RUNNING THE OTHER WAY.


So its o.k. to send you dog out to the cops after you tell them you going to have it attack them. Maybe we should put some blame on the guy who let it out.


If you threaten to sick that dog on me I am going to laugh. And I would not have a gun or be in full riot gear.

I do blame the idiot for being an idiot, but he is not the one who shot and killed something that was no threat to anyone .

I would think when in a neighborhood cops would show the utmost restraint before firing their weapon.




posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: anton74

Ya i saw it in op, my fault for not reading all of it.
Reeks of cya tho and once the dog turned back around I don't see how it could be a threat anymore.
also what the hell is a dog gonna do vs body armor and riot shields.
This man was obviously not mentally stable so shots fired was bound to happen as that seems to the the only way our police force knows how to handle the mentally unstable



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64
They would have had to kill me too if they shot my dog like that.

Getting tired of waiting for the reset/collapse to happen. Its the only thing that is going to change all this B.S.

I could see an event like this triggering something major. They will pick the wrong neighborhood one of these days.

OMG This PISSED ME OFF. ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


I would also have died to fight for my dog.
Many people consider their dogs to be part of their family.
Someone in the USA who tells the cops how to behave knows this,and is using it against the people.

I think the reset/collapse has started and is happening right before our eyes-this dog killing by cops is but a tiny part of the operation.

As I have said before,I read a lot(maybe too much)of history books and the way your cops/feds/intel machines are behaving recently looks like something from any number of crazy regimes from the past-basically all those regimes we the allies have stood against in years gone by.
Those regimes our forefathers gave their lives for,and promised us would never rise again.

It freaking beggars belief the way the world is panning out-hence my belief we have fallen into a parallel universe.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: SubTruth

I was commenting on the news being controlled,which you also commented on






Fair enough writing is much harder to understand what is really being said......Sorry for taking you out of context.
edit on 3-11-2014 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: SubTruth

Study my post history and see if Im a troll,arent I allowed to observe that the posse commitus threads are becoming increasingly ridiculous and ominous at the same time
edit on 3-11-2014 by khnum because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: anton74

This man was obviously not mentally stable


Maybe he shouldn't have had dog then.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: khnum

I edited my previous posts to reflect my misunderstanding over context.......My bad.
edit on 3-11-2014 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:57 PM
link   
WTF is wrong with these people.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
a reply to: jimmyx

No they sent them because of the man involved.


Despite the circumstances I still think a SWAT team was a little over the top. The guy was supposedly a problem for a while. Just shows the police need to be more responsible as do the citizens. Sometimes people are dangerous but that little dog could've been put into a crate or even put into a car for a few minutes until they figure out where to put it (and not put it down).


and yet the title of this thread seems to indicate that the swat team was sent for a "dispute over dog poop" and that the dog was "executed" for it.....look, the police went way, way, over board on this, and It seems that there should be different guidelines drawn up and followed for similar confrontations in the future....why? a lot of people are going to hole up in their houses when they feel threatened, and you shouldn't always deploy a militarized, assault-weapon-carrying, tactical team, for every one of these situations...poor leadership and training results in this type of action.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: anton74

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: anton74

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: anton74
Really you want to say the pup was let lose to attack the cops?!
please tell me I missed the sarcasm in your post


The man told the cops he was going to send it out to attack them and from the reports here in WI, they recorded him when he said it. Apparently this guy has a long history with police and the incident started before the dog took a poop on the lawn.


I think that is all irrelevant since the dog WAS RUNNING THE OTHER WAY.


So its o.k. to send you dog out to the cops after you tell them you going to have it attack them. Maybe we should put some blame on the guy who let it out.


If you threaten to sick that dog on me I am going to laugh. And I would not have a gun or be in full riot gear.

I do blame the idiot for being an idiot, but he is not the one who shot and killed something that was no threat to anyone .

I would think when in a neighborhood cops would show the utmost restraint before firing their weapon.


Well if everyone could be like that then we will have made a GIANT step forward.

Sorry, had to do it.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: tavi45
a reply to: Skada

Why? Because they are sending messages to the public that they will kill over dog poop or a home garden or even no reason at all. Imagine what they'll do if you rebel. Fascism is here to stay most likely. We missed the window of opportunity.


This is exactly the reason why all this is happening. They want you to know they are all powerful and can kill you at their leisure without reason. Total control.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Regardless of the mans threats against the SWAT team, the message is CLEAR for civillians. LEO's will shoot pets regardless of threat level. We have reached a point where they are no longer acting in the interests of the public, only themselves. So what can we do, when even City Councils cannot disband rogue police forces by rule-of-law?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Only MONEY, namely insurance coverage, can solve this problem.

American Buffalo, Cows and Crocodiles kill more people per year, than domestic dogs, when tracked as individual species; 4 times as many when combined.

BUT...a loose horse running down 11th Avenue, in Manhattan, is not dangerous enough to warrant it being shot?

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Would the SWAT team noted in this article have shot a horse under same circumstances?

Does anyone know what the difference is between a pet dog and a carriage horse?

The carriage horse is an "insured asset" and the police WILL have to pay the owner of a shot horse, due to something called "subrogation".

In contrast to dogs, you don't see many horses, cows, hogs or other livestock getting shot very often by law enforcement. I think the main reason why, is because they are an established commodity, with an insured value. If that same kind of insuring practice was done on dogs in largerer numbers, I believe the "accidental shooting of pet dogs" by law enforcement will also decline.

To summarize my point, it will only take a few victim "insured dog" owners, whom were carrying "Animal Mortality" insurance specifically, with multiple claims of wrongful death, to get a broad policy change in place.

How many "insured dogs" shot by police, per year, do you think the insurance companies would tolerate, before they begin to put the screws into the legislators and LEO's?

If a dog has a set insured value, of say $10,000, and is then shot by police on private property, the owner would then file a claim against their "Animal Mortality Insurance" policy, which they had previously taken out on the animal. So, as with all insurance companies, the victims insurance will then subrogate the damages from the responsible party.

Subrogation WILL CERTAINLY HAPPEN, you can count on it, even against an LEO or their department. No insurance company is going to eat the $10,000 and not follow through on subrogation, simply because its an LEO. They are certainly going to attempt to subrogate the damages from another insurance company. The only questionable part is, if it will be the departments insurance or the individual cops policy (home owners etc) that will pay.

Note, NO INSURANCE COMPANY ON EARTH is going to eat the cost of payout, while forgoing the subrogation process.

AGAIN, THE EXACT SAME SCENARIO WOULD APPLY TO A HUMAN, whom was covered by a "Key Person" Insurance Policy, wrongfully shot by police, without a liable third-party present.

In the subrogation process, the individual cops insurance will be contacted by the "Animal Mortality" insurance company and the departments insurance will also be contacted by the "Animal Mortality" insurance company. After that process, the individual cop and/or the police organization itself would likely have their insurance premiums increased. Its highly doubtful many officers imagine such a scenario, when shooting someone or damaging property, because most "people" and/or "things" are not insured individually in that manner (typically just home, renters or car insurance). For example, a wrongful death of a rich CEO carrying an "Executive Life Insurance Policy" would likely bankrupt an LEO department or local jurisdiction. Encountering an "insured dog" would likely take many departments by surprise, post shooting, when the insurance claim comes in.

LEO's and their departments will ABSOLUTELY not be expecting it.

Also, since LEO's can be held personally accountable for a Title 1983 Civil Rights lawsuit, a dog getting shot by an LEO can be deemed an "unreasonable seizure". So, when a dog "insured for a named dollar value" is shot, it can trigger an insurance claim to be made against the individual officers personal insurance policies (not always the department). Being personally liable, in an instance like this, could conceivably render the shooting officer uninsurable, OR at minimum, result with an increased personal insurance premium, due to claims being filed by any side.

Now to clarify further, the purpose in taking out an "Animal & Livestock Mortality" policy on a dog, is not to get a large payout from the insurance company after the dogs death, by cop/LEO. The purpose is to make the insurance company's get involved on the legal side, once an "insured dog" is killed in a negligent manner by an LEO. The legal effect against Law Enforcement would be even greater, if an increasing number dogs, across the country, shot by police, also happened to be covered by "Animal & Livestock Mortality" Policies. The insurance companies would likely begin to draw up real data, about police shooting dogs, to strengthen their cases.

To my knowledge, there have been no dogs shot that were carrying Animal & Livestock Mortality Insurance. However, there have been more than a few breeding show dogs shot by law enforcement and in those cases the Police departments settled for much more then the typical $300, plus immediate medical expenses. Imagine, for a moment, if those dogs had been insured individually, as well, with a specific dollar value and pay out schedule on the policy. The damages found in court would likely have been much higher at the end of the day. Also remember, the insurance covering the individual officer and the departments insurers will also be involved in the legal discussion about payout. Three insurance companies talking about a claim, involving a negligent cop whom shot an "insured dog", due to irrational fear, can't be good for continued institutional public policies that encourage officers to shoot civilian owned dogs on a whim. Imagine a scenario where a cop whom shoots dogs negligently becomes both uninsured individually and uninsurable departmentally.

Dog owners, at this point, should be teaching each other HOW to cause police departments additional logistical and paperwork headaches. I think the issue at this point, is NOT "awareness", people know this kind of unlawful shooting of pets is going on. "Activists groups" need to REFOCUS and target potential loopholes in police policy, then HIGHLIGHT them for the public to us AND abuse.

Here is story about dog shooting by LEO's being deemed
“unreasonable seizure” by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California:

>>> The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, for
example, ruled in favor of the Hells Angels in a case where police officers shot two dogs during a raid. Calling the shootings “unreasonable seizure”, the court chastised the police for failing “to develop a realistic plan for incapacitating the dogs other than shooting them.” The Hells Angels eventually received a total of nearly $1.8 million in a settlement



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: anton74
Um no dogs are great for people with mental instabilities.
yes he was at fault for using and letting the dog out but the police didn't assess the threat by any means and just took it out.
8 guys in armor with shields vs 1 dog that couldn't of been over 60 pounds that was retreating.
Ya shooting it was most definitely saved a life or two.....



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
by the way, what ever happened to those guns that shoot out a large net?....these would have seemed ideal for this type of confrontation...nobody gets hurt, just all tangled up in the net.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
There's just no excuse for this.
Nor for the SWAT team to even be there.
Why can't neighbors handle their own # in the first place?
Cops can't do anything when someone threatens you if it's your word against theirs anyway.
People need to think things through a little before calling in Shooting Whatever Available Target
edit on 3-11-2014 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: alienjuggalo

originally posted by: Char-Lee
a reply to: alienjuggalo

All those big strong armored men all scared of that little baby puppy! I can't find words!


It makes me think they would have shot a kid if he ran out right there.

The FBI shot Randy Weaver's son in the back as he ran away. Then they shot his wife through the neck with a rifle while she held her baby in her arms. Ruby Ridge

Yeah.... they would shoot a child.... running away from them.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
WTF is wrong with these people.






That is the million dollar question why are the police so aggressive today? This is what I have come to believe......Back in the day it was about protecting and serving police forces around the county used tax money as the principle income source. This changed sometime in the 1980s and police forces realized they could gain large amounts of funding by seizure and tickets. This mixed with the new war on drugs the rise of the organized inner city gangs lead us all here.



Police forces have to have the revenue tickets bring.........This has to change and they also all need to wear cameras 24/7/365. This is the only way to stop the rising police state.
edit on 3-11-2014 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Silcone Synapse

originally posted by: stosh64
They would have had to kill me too if they shot my dog like that.

Getting tired of waiting for the reset/collapse to happen. Its the only thing that is going to change all this B.S.

I could see an event like this triggering something major. They will pick the wrong neighborhood one of these days.

OMG This PISSED ME OFF. ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


I would also have died to fight for my dog.
Many people consider their dogs to be part of their family.
Someone in the USA who tells the cops how to behave knows this,and is using it against the people.

I think the reset/collapse has started and is happening right before our eyes-this dog killing by cops is but a tiny part of the operation.

As I have said before,I read a lot(maybe too much)of history books and the way your cops/feds/intel machines are behaving recently looks like something from any number of crazy regimes from the past-basically all those regimes we the allies have stood against in years gone by.
Those regimes our forefathers gave their lives for,and promised us would never rise again.

It freaking beggars belief the way the world is panning out-hence my belief we have fallen into a parallel universe.


I couldn't agree more. I also read a lot of history. My grandfather was in the 101st during ww2. He wouldn't recognize this country. He might think the Germans won..... Oh wait.....we brought all the valuable Nazis over here, they did win.



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
this display of over reaction is to instill fear and panic in the populayion whenevet the police are deployed. it is the militarization of the police.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a ats thread discussion reasons why the militarization of the police.

the regular army cant be used within the boarders sothe govt madrthier own army...and this army has shown over and over and over that it is more than willing to use force against peacefull protests, in situations were deadly force is not needed, to over react not for yout saftey but for thier safety. this army is called your local police dept..



posted on Nov, 3 2014 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: anton74
Um no dogs are great for people with mental instabilities.
yes he was at fault for using and letting the dog out but the police didn't assess the threat by any means and just took it out.
8 guys in armor with shields vs 1 dog that couldn't of been over 60 pounds that was retreating.
Ya shooting it was most definitely saved a life or two.....


You're not going to sell me on dogs being great for someone the appears to have a history of violence and a drinking problem.



new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join