Animal Cruetly By Police

page: 6
43
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


According to statistics there are three dogs in the top that attack individuals:


According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.
Source

Do you seem to mention the Rottweiler or the Presa Canarios? No you just label the Pitbull being the problem.

Include the facts that you state not just what you want to be fact.


[edit on 19-6-2010 by theability]




posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by pteridine
 


Do you seem to mention the Rottweiler or the Presa Canarios? No you just label the Pitbull being the problem.

Include the facts that you state not just what you want to be fact.

Check my post. I did mention the 'other breeds' as needing to be controlled, but the pit bull is the topic here. Pit bulls are a problem as are Rottweilers and Presas.
All should be controlled and owners should be criminally responsible for the actions of their dogs. If you read you will discover many attacks on family members and neighbors. Children take the brunt of it.
Your previous post asked about Shepherds. Shepherds are used by police because they are big enough to intimidate, intelligent, predictable, and can follow instructions. Pits are generally not trustworthy, not intelligent, and aren't real good at following commands. Calling a Pit off an attack is difficult, to say the least. This makes them entirely unsuited for such work.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 



All should be controlled and owners should be criminally responsible for the actions of their dogs.


Man the dog got loose, how does that get filed in criminally? What did the dog do? Prove the dog attacked someone!

Fact is the dog didn't do anything.

Your thinking isn't rational. That isn't a crime nor should they be treated as criminals. They dog posed no threat it was laying down.

People like you supporting violence for any purpose you see fit is sickness run amok.

Enough said to you and your rant why dogs should be treated this way.

Good day.


[edit on 19-6-2010 by theability]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by theability
 


Perhaps your emotions cloud your thinking. You did not respond other than with another emotional outburst. There is a difference between the neighbors' mutt crapping in someone else's yard and a loose dog tearing up the neighborhood children. Possibly, you don't discriminate between these events because both are readily solved wth a shovel.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I don't want to get too far off topic here but I worked with a vet at one time and by far the nastiest dogs I consistantly came in contact with were Cocker Spaniels.

OMG These little floppy earred animals were MEAN and they were major biters.

The sweetest and most well behaved seemed to be the Dobermans



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 



You did not respond other than with another emotional outburst.


You responded with why killing is justified for no reason.

Pick a side.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Truly sick people out there and they deserve some punishment.

I still plan on going through with my LEO training here soon and continue to proudly gear up for it, and I thank ATS for brining some things to my attention, namely stuff like this. It's been one of my ambitions in life to protect and serve and I fully intend on doing that.

I have nothing but love and empathy for animals (and people too) so this really sickens me. Whatever department I go into, I worry about that I'll witness. I've met good cops and assholes, and if I saw this happening I wouldn't stand for it.

So if you ever stop hearing from me late down the road, it could be because I tried to blow the whistle on the ass backwards criminals they let patrol the streets anymore.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by slugger9787
I have shot numerous dogs that were either running loose in town knocking over trash cans, or in the country chasing livestock.


My neighbor came out to water his sunflower plants about 10 minutes ago. He knocked over my freakin garbage can. Do not worry though. You reminded me what a serious problem something like that is and I took care of it promptly. I am hoping maybe you can call his wife and new baby to explain why knocking over garbage cans is such a horrible thing.

edit to add: Now the new baby is running loose outside. That is it, where did I put my gun.

[edit on 19-6-2010 by K J Gunderson]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
My question is this:

Out of all the people posting and reading this thread, how many people will actually send a letter admonishing this barbaric behavior and demand the 'officers' responsible to be removed from their jobs?

Silence is acceptance. If you see something illegal or unethical happen and choose to remain silent, it is the same as giving permission and being an accessory to the crime.

"All that is needed for evil to succeed, is that decent Human Beings do nothing." - Edmund Burke

Posting outrage on here is one thing, but sending physical letters to the ASPCA, PETA, news outlets and the City Hall in mass numbers will have a much stronger affect. When there is a public outcry (cruelty to animals, humans, planet or bad politics), those in power usually respond to the squeakiest wheels.

SPEAK UP! Let your voices be heard loud & proud. Send that letter!
(mine is in the mail today)



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by theability
 


You do not know the circumstances and cannot say if it was for "no reason." If the animal attacked people off its property and the owner was too irresponsible to control it, that is reason enough. Good-bye Fido. No big loss.



[edit on 6/19/2010 by pteridine]



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Nivcharah
 


How many people will wait until they understand the circumstances and will send the owner of the dog a letter admonishing him if the dog attacked people when loose.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


That is not enough reason. You need to understand the laws and reasons an officer would use lethal force.

This dog was not a threat since they were able to leash it without any injury to self. If the dog had attacked while attempting to leash it, THEN they may have had just cause to use lethal force.

To excuse what they did because they were "instructed to do so" is a crap excuse. We don't know what these cops were saying to their commander, nor do we know what the commander was telling them. It was easy to observe this dog was not a threat and was submissive at the time of being executed by a firing squad. Which is essentially what these asshats are!

If you live in Missouri, I suggest getting a firearm and practicing a LOT with moving targets. That seems to be what these cops were using this dog for. This was just as bad as people who tie up a bear or big cat in the woods and then 50 ft away and shoot it so they can say the hunted it out in the wild! It's the exact same thing!



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Nivcharah
 

Since the exact circumstances are not yet known, who can judge the officers involved? What if the dog had a history of breaking loose and attacking people not on its property? What would you recommend?



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


The dog was not a threat at the time of 'arrest'.

But let's run with your theory, shall we?

A man has a history of wreaking havoc in a neighborhood. He beats and rapes women, sodomizes children, vandalizes the property of others and has been known to brandish a firearm sporadically.

When the police finally catch up with him, the raises his arms above his head and says "I give up."

The officers shoot him. He's injured but still breathing. They shoot him again. Now he's dead.

How would THAT play out in the courts? Is it justice? Was he a danger to himself or the public at that point? No. He was submissive and no weapons were drawn on the officers.

This is exactly what they did to the dog. The purpose of Law Enforcement is exactly that, to enforce the laws by arresting and handing out citations. They are NOT Judge, Jury or the legislative party. But hey! The next time you get pulled over or the cops stop by your home, hopefully you get treated the way this dog was, since it appears to be the law you believe in.

Where I come from, the police can give the owner citations and take the dog in. However, a dog is not shot dead unless it is an immediate danger to society and no other means can control or subdue the animal. Period.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nivcharah
Where I come from, the police can give the owner citations and take the dog in. However, a dog is not shot dead unless it is an immediate danger to society and no other means can control or subdue the animal. Period.


I am not really sure what the laws are here but I know my father lost his dog when I was young. It had bitten several people by getting loose. The cops came and TOOK the dog and a judge then decided what to do with it. He was allowed to live but was taken from my father for good. I kind of thought that was how it worked, just in case they shoot your dog while it is laying in driveway but looks a lot like some dog that did something to someone else.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Unless there is an animal that is "clearly" going to put a person's life at risk then there should be no reason for an officer to do harm to the animal. If I were to see blatant animal cruelty by a police officer, I would attack him and most likely do my best to subdue him with whatever means necessary. Officers don't get a free ride for cruelty and the people should stand up and show them what happens when they act with excessive force that isn't justifiable. Just make sure to stop officers that are undeniably in the wrong.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Nivcharah
 


This was not a person, it was a dog. While some souls think their dogs are people, that is not the case.
Wait until you have more information before you judge the officers.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
It just goes to show that even when THEY record their own crimes, nothing is done.

I really do so hope these slimbags get cancer. I hate to say it... but Im sick of it. I hope they witness their own death, slowly.




posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam

There were reports of the dog attacking a couple of people previously. I don't know if they're true or not.



I know of two pigs in the area that are known to shoot restrained animals. And that is true.

Someone should hunt them down and euthanise the savage rabid creatures.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by super genius
i love the outrage when something liek this makes a blip ont he radar, then no mroe than 1 hour later the peopel that get so furious over a shooting of a dog, sit down at the table for thier dinner or beef, chicken, or seafood.
every time you eat meat, your essentially doing the exact same thing. dont try and rationalize this away, unless you know of a way to seperate the meat form a cow/chicken/fish and its still alive, i dont want to hear it.


Here we go, the nutcases have arrived...

yes... because when the police show up and shoot your cows, it's all good.

good job, now begone!






new topics
top topics
 
43
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join