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.

 

Cop accidentally shoots a 4-year-old girl while attempting to shoot her dog

page: 2
17
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   
Interestingly enough, having demonstrated his incompetence by shooting a kid, the officer suddenly has no further issues with the dog?

I mean, the evil, vicious, crazed Cujo-like animal for which there was no option but to shoot gets out of the house and is loose...the officer shoots, misses, hits the kid...and then walks away in no particular hurry, gets in the squad and drives off?

The red eyed demon dog from the depths of hell just lets the cop walk off, no further need to shoot for his protection?

I'd have expected that any animal you were having to whack on the spot would have been so insanely aggressive that you were sure to have to keep blasting away until it was dispatched, right? How is it that after the kid's down you suddenly don't feel that need anymore? I suppose other things become more important than being the manly Officer Dog Shooter after you screw the pooch (ahem) so thoroughly. Like getting with your union rep and gang-writing that perfect report RFN.
edit on 10-10-2015 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

It just never ends.
They ALL need to be required to, at the very least, take a short time while in the academy to go over animal (dog) behavior. It's extremely easy to tell what most dogs intentions are, and quickly. I'm sure the ASPCA, or another animal group would be more than willing to go in for a half hour one day and go over with each class. I would gladly do it for free myself, if it was an option.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: radarloveguy

Granted, he didn't jump straight up 14 feet, but my point was that a boxer/terrier mix is certainly capable of going for the throat.

Pit Bulls ARE terriers, and the dog in the video appears to be a pit mix. I have a feeling the news is only refraining from saying Pit Bull Terrier because for once the dog isn't the bad guy in the story. There are a TON of dogs that fall into the Terrier category, but the dog in the video certainly wasn't a West Highland Terrier. It definitely had bully breed in it.





A boxer/terrier cross is NOT a pitbull , that is why they
are not deemed 'dangerous' and banned , like they are here .



The American Pit Bull Terrier is one of the so-called bully breeds often labeled a pit bull. In fact, "pit bull" isn't a breed, but a term used to describe the American Pit Bull Terrier, the Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier.



The following dogs (including cross-breeds) are prohibited within the Fraser Coast boundaries:

American pit-bull


Let's agree to disagree on the dogs lineage if that didn't help.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

So the dog trys to defend its territory and possibly its owners and kids, and this somehow gives this overzealous little piggy the notion to shoot the poor beast. But wait, the moronic fool can't even shoot straight enough to preform the heinous action and he accidentally hits the little girl.

You have to wonder, do they even bother to train these so called officer's of the law anymore? Or do they just hang around outside the psycho wards recruiting the next generation of Police scum?

Poor bloodthirsty form of you ask me.

edit on 10-10-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 08:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam




Interestingly enough, having demonstrated his incompetence by shooting a kid, the officer suddenly has no further issues with the dog?


That really does speak volumes.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

Nothing about THIS OFFICER and only this officer, should go undespised.

I didn't watch the vid because seeing kids get hurt, causes me
to have extremely violent reactions followed by a full range of
emotional bunji jumping that always leaves me hanging by my
heels in a very dark place. But if he just left the scene of an
accident car or gun? Isn't that a felony? Or at least a wilful violation
of the penal code among men? All I'm say'n is it might be time to
remind police and sheriffs depts that before you can be a cop.
You first have to be human.



Bad spell

edit on Rpm101015v29201500000031 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: eisegesis

What a joke you write:

"Almost 50% of Americans own a dog and there is no reason for the animal to be isolated indoors. Officers need better training when it comes to handling these types of situations."

Typical dog lover that wants "freedom" for their dog. I'm willing to bet that in that urban city that there is a law against a dog running free. You can't have it both ways, people. You, the owner, are responsible regardless of the circumstances of how and why your dog was shot. Cops have enough to contend with.

I have this viewpoint from having spent several years as a US Postal carrier having had to confront countless numbers of loose dogs. You learn to never turn your back on a dog and to never believe an owner that tries to tell you, "Don't worry, my dog doesn't bite."

edit on 10-10-2015 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun




I have this viewpoint from having spent several years a a US Postal carrier having had to confront countless numbers of loose dogs.


And look, you're still alive, presumably without ever having shot any of the dogs you encountered and subsequently endangering little girls.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Aliensun


Typical dog lover that wants "freedom" for their dog. I'm willing to bet that in that urban city that there is a law against a dog running free.

I have never had a dog and the second part goes without saying. As I pointed out earlier, the dogs were confined to the house and the officer was in the doorway when he discharged his weapon.


You, the owner, are responsible regardless of the circumstances of how and why your dog was shot.

You can have it both ways because there is no reason why a persons dog cannot enjoy the outdoors if properly contained. If my rottweiler is securely tethered to something that doesn't allow him near the edge of my property, but close enough to reach and defend my house, you're going to blame me for sitting inside, unaware of the officer that comes uninvited onto my property?

The point is, there is training already in place and available but they are choosing to freak out and disregard their surroundings. Look what happens. I'm not sure if the death of both the little girl and her dog would be enough to change your mind? Dogs are mainly doing what they are trained to do and we all risk and give up securities for the right to own animals that can do harm to others.

Being prepared is our best option. With the amount of dogs in America, officers have a fifty percent chance of encountering one, but act surprised and end up putting others in harms way. If possible, which in many cases it could have been, attempt all forms of nonlethal force before resorting to murder.

The training is available and even the ones that know it are too lazy and reactive instead or proactive and respectful of other peoples property. Many officers even admit to hating dogs. That kind of aggression can easily manifest itself when involving a suspect. Innocent dogs and innocent people get injured and dies for no reason.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1   >>

log in

join