It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Police officer shot dead after pointing stun gun at man's dogs as he attended domestic dispute

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 11:34 PM

Originally posted by deadeyedick
Im not buying the warrant for traffic warnings confrontational one on one showdowns.
It sounds too personal.
Just catch him speeding and write him a ticket.

I've had that very thing happen to me (and I have been called to that very situation). As a teenager I was speeding down the street to my house, neighbor called the police, and before they showed up he was at my door ringing my doorbell and chewing my ass for speeding. My cousin and I were riding in my cousin's car 6 or 7 years ago, he accelerated too quickly for some guy's liking, guy chased us to my cousin's driveway and chewed our ass while waiting for the sheriff he called to show up. I personally have been called to situations where somebody was angry with somebody driving erratically. It's not all that uncommon. Regardless of if a warrant was issued or not, if the officer was responding to a call, no warrant was needed. If they had the chance to quickly have a warrant issued, then outstanding work done by them.

posted on Aug, 15 2011 @ 11:38 PM

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by boncho

So do tell, how is firing a warning shot operating a firearm safely?

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

It's not aimed at someone's face.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:01 AM
reply to post by boncho

So firing a gun in the air is safe, because it is not pointed at someone's face.

I am sure everyone would be happy with that . . . except for the person down the street who gets a random round falling through the sky into their cranium.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:04 AM
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II that dog had it coming though it mauled a lady and evidently it did die but they dont list offical cause of death dog from the freeway also died from tazer tazed and peper sprayed and dog died uk dog again died after getting tazed and attackign some one that one didnt die as far as i saw but i turned it off early cuz the sounds were angering my dog there is a few but after these i got alot of thinks back to this thread

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:07 AM
reply to post by mademyself1984

Regardless of if a warrant was issued or not, if the officer was responding to a call, no warrant was needed.

The disturbance took place on the roadway, from what info we have. The officer has no right to go onto a persons property without their permission, unless:

*there is an emergency (i.e. crime in progress)

*life or property are in imminent danger

Granted, the officer can go up and try and question someone, but as soon as that someone says to get off their property, the officer must comply.

In your story, you could have easily gone inside, and told the sheriff to get a warrant, if he wanted to investigate further.

It baffles me how so many people wish to piss on the 4th Amendment.
edit on 8/16/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/16/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh i hope its not to off topic but this man used a fully auttomatic weapon to defend his gun shop fired full autto warning shots and they released him and his guns but its a good read

"Harry Beckwith fired two magazines of 15 rounds each from the Colt .223 rifle, and two full mags and part of a third from the S & W submachine gun. Only one bullet caused death.

The great majority of his gunfire fell into the "warning shot" category - suppressive fire if you will. We can argue at length about the concept of the warning shot, but the fact remains that in this case, it fulfilled its intended purpose.

It was not lost on the grand jury that exculpated Harry Beckwith that he could have killed all seven perpetrators, and chose not to. It was likewise to his benefit that twice before in his life, he had shown mercy and not killed men he'd shot when they gave up the fight after he wounded them."
so in answer to your question yes warning shots are advised some times

its good were digging up more info on this and trying to get a better picture hopefully we continue to get more insight into what exactly happined and what mistakes can be learned from and avoided next time

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:12 AM
Officer Barney Fife shot in the line of duty today ~ LMAO.

score one for the home owners, not wanting to live in a police state.

If i understand this story correctly, an officer shows up to the house. The home owner comes outside and orders the officer to leave if he does not have a warrant and does not wish to talk to him (his legal right to do this). At which point the officer had nothing else within his jurisdiction to enforce upon this home owner. he should have left, IMMEDIATELY to the sidewalk or end of the home owners property. Instead he (im assuming at this point) tried to bark out orders of compliance to the home owner who then let his dogs out of the house. the dogs are barking at the officer, he calls for back up. The chief! lol shows up and tells his officer to shoot the dogs?!

are you kidding me?? the dog had been barking at him for what atleast 2-3 minutes...while back up arrived. did it hurt his ears so badly that they had to shoot the dog with a stun gun?

and dont give me the ohhh it was only a stun gun sob story.... a stun gun can and will stop a persons heart, what makes you think a dog is any more resistant to this? i would think it would mess a dog up worse than a person...

some people consider their family pets family members...i for one certainly value my animals...

People should not live in fear of their police officers ~ Police officers should live in fear of their people.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:16 AM
reply to post by KilrathiLG

Good info there.

I was always taught that the firearm is either holstered or on target. Too many what-ifs with the alternative.

I guess it all comes down to the jury. It can be argued that you showed mercy, and it can be argued that if you had time for a warning shot, the danger to life or property was not imminent.

Star for you
Like anything in life, their is always more than one side to anything.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:23 AM
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh

yeah ill be the first to admit his case is extreme to the max and i dobut any of us would ever be able to not go to jail after such a thing in this climate( i belive it was 76 when the incident happend)

more directly on topic too bad the guy didnt have out side security cameras or some witness with camera footage i bet that neighbor is feeling pretty crappy right about now especialy if he called for a less then serious reason,and the fact that i bet he in his mind is convinced the guy was going to kill him(especially after causally shooting a cop in the face) so either way i bet he isnt sleeping tonight

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:23 AM
reply to post by HenryTwoTimes

As people have mentioned pets become a part of the family sometimes more beloved than a mans wife or a woman's husband.

Police officers should never be ordered to shoot a mans pets.
If they are for some insane reason I do not think the police officer should pay with his life either although this is one order he should have refused to carry out.

I know that shooting the Police officer was wrong but if I were armed and a Police Officer was going to shoot my dogs I think in a moment of insanity I might do the same thing. You might not be thinking straight.
I might be able to stop the cop by injuring him or shooting the gun out of his hands but I don't think any of that would have time to cross my mind.

I am sure and I know it as sure as I am sitting here the man if he loved his animals was seized by a moment of temporary insanity as it is insane to murder a Police Officer over your dogs but when you are emotionally and mentally tied up in your aggressive threat to their live is translated as something almost worse than a threat to your own. It is the same protective mechanism that kicks in when you fear for your children. You will do what you have to to protect them.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:29 AM
I'm not going to defend the police in totality here, but literally blowing a man's head apart because he pointed ANYTHING at your dog(s) is not a respectable or noble action. I love my dogs, they are part of my family, I will not however kill a man for pointing a tazer at them.
edit on 16-8-2011 by ateuprto because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:38 AM
I haven't read one post on this thread except for the OP.

NO WAY a police's officer's life is worth less than a darn dog....

Are you kidding me?

Dogs are dogs people.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:49 AM
Everybody is quick to defend the cop, but let's not forget there are two sides to every story.

In police custody, the alleged gunman, 46-year-old George Hitcho Jr, said he had told Mr Lasso to get off his property and [color=limegreen]not come on unless he had a warrant, authorities said.
So far we have a cop on a guys property without a warrant. Let's read on:

'[color=limegreen]He tried to kill my dogs and [color=limegreen]pointed a gun in my face,' Hitcho said, according to the documents. 'I do not care if you a cop or not ...Unbelievable.'
OK, so far we have a police officer on a mans property without a warrant, and then he points a tazer at the dogs and points either a gun or a tazer in the mans face. It gets worse:

[color=limegreen]Police Chief George Bruneio, who arrived after Mr Lasso requested assistance, [color=limegreen]instructed him to 'shoot the dogs' and that's when the homeowner pulled out a shotgun and fired, authorities said.
So let's review. We have a cop on a mans private property without a warrant who points a weapon (either a gun or tazer, weapon isn't identified by the guy) at the mans face, and then points a tazer at the mans dog with the intentions to shoot his dogs by request of the police chief.

The thread title is misleading, it should say "police officer shot dead after attempting to shoot mans dogs with stun gun", not "pointing stun gun at mans dogs", because he had the direct consent of the chief of police to taze his dogs. Pointing doesn't mean he was going to shoot them for sure, it could be seen as a precautionary measure in case the dogs charge him, but he had the tazer pointed and he was going to shoot the dogs.

If he hadn't shot the cop, but instead the cop tazed the dog(s) and killed them, people (me being one of them) would be in here attacking the cop and police officers for always doing things like that, killing dogs, abusing power, and so on.

I side with the guy that shot the cop 100%, quene the "tell that to his family" posts.
edit on 16-8-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:54 AM
reply to post by smokeythabear

Just as unnecessary as the death of Oscar Grant. Cuffed unarmed yet still shot in the head with a gun.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:55 AM
reply to post by GMan420

if you cant allow law enforcement on your property without being able to controll your pack... then you deserve to have them taken away.

There are alot of people that shouldnt be allowed to have pets. This guys was not only a nutjob loser.. but also a bad pack leader.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 12:59 AM

Originally posted by Signals
NO WAY a police's officer's life is worth less than a darn dog....

Lets see you say that when an officer cuffs your child and executes him/her with a bullet in the back of the head. Then gets away with just a slap in the wrist.

Or when 6 officers give your child a gang beat down and continues even when your child is unconscious they continue to until he/she is dead.

High five police officers!

Police ARE dogs.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 01:00 AM

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by GMan420

if you cant allow law enforcement on your property . . .

He specifically DID NOT allow law enforcement on his property . . .

So how does that tie in with your analogy?

edit on 8/16/2011 by Lemon.Fresh because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 01:05 AM

Originally posted by balon0
reply to post by smokeythabear

Just as unnecessary as the death of Oscar Grant. Cuffed unarmed yet still shot in the head with a gun.

On November 5, 2010 Mehserle was sentenced to two years, minus time served. He served his time in the Los Angeles County Jail, occupying a private cell away from other prisoners. He was released on June 13, 2011 and is now on parole.


While not entirely accurate you're correct the cop in question is a murderer. I think this guy should get two years also. The cases are remarkably similar. Does anyone think he'll get anything less than the gas chamber?

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 01:17 AM

Originally posted by mademyself1984

You realize that none of what you just said is true right? In this century cops are above the law? Funny...I'm a cop, I have lots of friends that are cops,
edit on 8/15/2011 by mademyself1984 because: (no reason given)

What did I say that wasn't true? The FACT that some police officers routinely break the law and are given a pass? Please give me examples of Police Officers being prosecuted like citizens when they commit crimes on or off the job.

But I guess you have hearing plug's in when swat cops yell "were is the money!" during raids. Or the fact that without civil asset seizure's(something that is probably unconstitutional as well) over 40% of police departments wouldn't be able to function. Also I am guessing you think police brutality isn't a problem in America either.And then you go into "I am blah blah blah" as a deflection and other patriotic nonsense.

The words you have written carry no weight and float away like a feather off of a cliff at the slightest inspection.


I respect the experiences of soldiers, what they are made to do. Any fool can die, but it is often a hard thing to take another's life(for any sane person atleast). Your treading on that patience and the patience many in this country have shown when you try to use your service as a position of higher moral authority. If anything it highlights the fact that you might need social assistance(assistance from society) for the rest of your life(which as citizens we accept that responsibility, hence greater public outrage over soldiers pay compared to SS payouts during the budget debate in Congress).

You have gone through pain and hardship and many will bite their tongue so as not to add to that. Do not take silence as an act of support of what your saying, take it as an act of emotional support for your own person. Because the fact's of the Iraq war do not support your bravado.

edit on 16-8-2011 by korathin because: * added word "some" in the second sentence as not all police officers are bad apples but that is a much longer debate..

edit on 16-8-2011 by korathin because: spelling correction:"add", last paragraph first sentence.

posted on Aug, 16 2011 @ 01:36 AM
reply to post by HenryTwoTimes

Like so many of these tragic incidents involving the police, not enough information at present to make an honest appraisal of the case... I'm sure it'll all come out in good time.

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in