Recent Police shooting of family dog, Police CAM video...*WARNING* CONTAINS GRAPHIC MATERIAL*

I posted on this the other day because there seems to be an uptick to this sort of police behavior.The Police department has since released the video footage today that shows the perspective from another police officer on the scene.

*WARNING*

I do warn you it is graphic in the sense it will make you angry and it is intense at the end. If you are a dog lover I suggest you skip it. It is not bloody graphic however nor do you actually see the shooting.

You are warned!

If you do not wish to see it at all I provided a detail (as I saw it) from the video.

Police shooting of family dog in self defence

Synapsis:

Two police officers are walking up to the house, as one goes up to the back side door (Not the Front Door). The door is slightly open and the cop being filmed knocks on the door (dog barking is heard) and asks if Anyone is home.

The other filming officer walks back to the side of the driveway and reports in. (Dog(s) barking louder at this point. The filming officer turns to see his partner backing up with two dogs coming at him barking. Barking is behind the filming officer as is his partners yelling.

Both officers have guns drawn and it is unlear who fires or how many shots are fired. As the filming officer runs over to his partner you see a white dog go down (not graphic) and the other dog run off. A young man is seen screaming at the police “You just shot my dog!” the police tell him to calm down to which he says “NO YOU SHOT MY DOG!” The video ends.

What are you thoughts after seeing the video (if you watched it) was it justified?

Why do cops have guns at all? Guns can KILL PEOPLE. They should all only have tazers.

reply to post by CALGARIAN


Tazers kill people too.

They should only have marshmallows. Fresh ones, not stale and hard.


reply to post by abeverage

After seeing the video, it is more of a gray area. The police were definitely in danger from the dogs. The shooter is lucky he didn't shoot his partner.

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
Why do cops have guns at all? Guns can KILL PEOPLE. They should all only have tazers.

Ok, I actually disagree if there is an armed suspect they should be armed as well. That said they could have tazed this dog too!

But guns at a residential home...ESPECIALLY ON A WELFARE CHECK UP (not yelling at you)! They could have accidently shot one of the kids!

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
Why do cops have guns at all? Guns can KILL PEOPLE. They should all only have tazers.

Why should cops have guns? For the same reason that citizens should have guns - CRIMINALS have guns.

If you read through my posts you'll see I'm no police apologist. In this case I think the officer was justified in shooting. Maybe those dogs weren't going to bite, maybe they were. In any case EVERY person has a right to defend themselves when they legitimately think they have reason to fear for their or their family's safety.

To the OP, the officer that was being charged is the ONLY one who fired. The officer with the camera COULDN'T shoot without risking the safety of his partner.

I love dogs, and MOST dog shootings make me really angry at police, but in this case I believe the responsibility falls on the dog owner for allowing his dogs to run outside and attack an officer. Imagine if that were a girl scout trying to sell cookies... The officer even announced it was the police department. The idiot behind teh door should have put his dogs away before opening the door.

The moral of the story is this; If you cannot control your dogs, you shouldn't have dogs. Sad that this dog had to pay the price for his owner's irresponsible ways.

Originally posted by AnonymousCitizen
reply to post by CALGARIAN

 

Tazers kill people too.

They should only have marshmallows. Fresh ones, not stale and hard.

Usually, I am a great white snark, completely snarky about most of what is posted here, but in this case that is pretty ridiculous…marshmallows…(pretty sure I have had better comments thrown out of other threads, but I will let it ride)
On a house call for the welfare of children do you think they need guns? They are supposedly "PEACE" officers.

Dont get a pitbull.

If you want to be tough guy,,,,buy a lion

Originally posted by superluminal11
Dont get a pitbull.

If you want to be tough guy,,,,buy a lion

Nothing wrong with pitbulls. When I was about 5 I used to ride the back of a huge pitt named Otto. He wouldn't have hurt a fly and wouldn't have charged people knocking on the door either. It's not the dog, it's the dog owner. Just like it's not the gun, it's the gun OWNER.

a pitpull lunges at you like it did him, and you'd shoot too.

pitpulls have the ability to kill a person.

That cop had every right to shoot that dog , both pits were lunging at the officer, I know what pits can do, and they can be very dangerous, if not raised right.

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by CALGARIAN

 

On a house call for the welfare of children do you think they need guns? They are supposedly "PEACE" officers.

It would be absolutely foolish for a law enforcement officer to go anywhere on official business unarmed. I also believe in the law-abiding citizen's right to be armed at any time, any place.

But, that's just my opinion. (And the second amendment.)

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Why should cops have guns? For the same reason that citizens should have guns - CRIMINALS have guns.

If you read through my posts you'll see I'm no police apologist. In this case I think the officer was justified in shooting. Maybe those dogs weren't going to bite, maybe they were. In any case EVERY person has a right to defend themselves when they legitimately think they have reason to fear for their or their family's safety.

To the OP, the officer that was being charged is the ONLY one who fired. The officer with the camera COULDN'T shoot without risking the safety of his partner.

I love dogs, and MOST dog shootings make me really angry at police, but in this case I believe the responsibility falls on the dog owner for allowing his dogs to run outside and attack an officer. Imagine if that were a girl scout trying to sell cookies...

The moral of the story is this; If you cannot control your dogs, you shouldn't have dogs. Sad that this dog had to pay the price for his owner's irresponsible ways.

Thank you for your response.
I agree that cops should have guns. But this was a routine call for the welfare of children. Do they need guns? Couldn't have tazers been another option? Children could have actually been the victims here as well!

And if you watch the video the Officer opens the door, and soon after the cop is attacked. Not sure about you but my pet is not on a leash inside my house! Which makes your argument flawed.

A girl scout would never (nor should) open a door......it is why many people get pets who bark as a deterrent to a break in! The dog barked a lot before it came after the officer if you saw the video.
I would like your reply to a pet inside a house being controlled.

Originally posted by bdb818888
That cop had every right to shoot that dog , both pits were lunging at the officer, I know what pits can do, and they can be very dangerous, if not raised right.

I am curious what if that was a thief breaking into the house? They dogs were not in yard and he was warned several times with the barking...

Originally posted by abeverage

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Why should cops have guns? For the same reason that citizens should have guns - CRIMINALS have guns.

If you read through my posts you'll see I'm no police apologist. In this case I think the officer was justified in shooting. Maybe those dogs weren't going to bite, maybe they were. In any case EVERY person has a right to defend themselves when they legitimately think they have reason to fear for their or their family's safety.

To the OP, the officer that was being charged is the ONLY one who fired. The officer with the camera COULDN'T shoot without risking the safety of his partner.

I love dogs, and MOST dog shootings make me really angry at police, but in this case I believe the responsibility falls on the dog owner for allowing his dogs to run outside and attack an officer. Imagine if that were a girl scout trying to sell cookies...

The moral of the story is this; If you cannot control your dogs, you shouldn't have dogs. Sad that this dog had to pay the price for his owner's irresponsible ways.

Thank you for your response.
I agree that cops should have guns. But this was a routine call for the welfare of children. Do they need guns? Couldn't have tazers been another option? Children could have actually been the victims here as well!

And if you watch the video the Officer opens the door, and soon after the cop is attacked. Not sure about you but my pet is not on a leash inside my house! Which makes your argument flawed.

A girl scout would never (nor should) open a door......it is why many people get pets who bark as a deterrent to a break in! The dog barked a lot before it came after the officer if you saw the video.
I would like your reply to a pet inside a house being controlled.

My argument is NOT flawed. Do you think this is the FIRST TIME those dogs have run out the door at a visitor? I highly doubt it.

So, knowing that this behavior is most definitely not new or surprising to the dog owner, do you still believe he should just let them go running out the door any time they have a visitor? Those dogs seemed aggressive, that dog owner is not a good dog owner.

My dogs aren't on a leash inside either, nor are the on a leash outside and part of my yard is unfenced. Why aren't my dogs on a leash?? Well, they don't go chasing after people barking viciously and they come when I call them.. I hope you can see the difference.

The cop didn't open the door, the homeowner did, and he let his dogs run out. I think you need to watch your own video a few more times...

I used to work as a pizza delivery person, and obviously knocked on a lot of doors. Even people with overly friendly dogs that jump on you to lick and love you will keep their dogs away from the door when I knocked.. This dog owner just let his run out and attack..

I understand that this is a sad story, and shocking, but we can't let our predetermined notions of police and dog shootings cloud any single incident. And depending on the nature of the call, it's very appropriate that the officers come with weapons. Those weapons are only out until the officer can determine whether or not there is a reason to use them, it's better to show up prepared and put it away than it is to show up unprepared and not have the ability to defend yourself in a hostile situation. This video is a shining example of that very justified philosophy.

As I said, if you read my previous posts you'll see I'm the first person to call a cop out when he doesn't something wrong... This is not one of those situations.

Originally posted by TinkerHaus

Originally posted by abeverage

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
Why should cops have guns? For the same reason that citizens should have guns - CRIMINALS have guns.

If you read through my posts you'll see I'm no police apologist. In this case I think the officer was justified in shooting. Maybe those dogs weren't going to bite, maybe they were. In any case EVERY person has a right to defend themselves when they legitimately think they have reason to fear for their or their family's safety.

To the OP, the officer that was being charged is the ONLY one who fired. The officer with the camera COULDN'T shoot without risking the safety of his partner.

I love dogs, and MOST dog shootings make me really angry at police, but in this case I believe the responsibility falls on the dog owner for allowing his dogs to run outside and attack an officer. Imagine if that were a girl scout trying to sell cookies...

The moral of the story is this; If you cannot control your dogs, you shouldn't have dogs. Sad that this dog had to pay the price for his owner's irresponsible ways.

Thank you for your response.
I agree that cops should have guns. But this was a routine call for the welfare of children. Do they need guns? Couldn't have tazers been another option? Children could have actually been the victims here as well!

And if you watch the video the Officer opens the door, and soon after the cop is attacked. Not sure about you but my pet is not on a leash inside my house! Which makes your argument flawed.

A girl scout would never (nor should) open a door......it is why many people get pets who bark as a deterrent to a break in! The dog barked a lot before it came after the officer if you saw the video.
I would like your reply to a pet inside a house being controlled.

My argument is NOT flawed. Do you think this is the FIRST TIME those dogs have run out the door at a visitor? I highly doubt it.

So, knowing that this behavior is most definitely not new or surprising to the dog owner, do you still believe he should just let them go running out the door any time they have a visitor? Those dogs seemed aggressive, that dog owner is not a good dog owner.

My dogs aren't on a leash inside either, nor are the on a leash outside and part of my yard is unfenced. Why aren't my dogs on a leash?? Well, they don't go chasing after people barking viciously and they come when I call them.. I hope you can see the difference.

The cop didn't open the door, the homeowner did, and he let his dogs run out. I think you need to watch your own video a few more times...

Watch the video...the door was actually already opened, the dogs do not come running out either. They bark a lot then come out. For all we know the owner was not home, or indisposed.

My dog barks at people when they come to the door. Depending on if I am expecting company or not or if I am on the toilet I will sometimes let him bark...

reply to post by abeverage


You're right, the door WAS already open. That makes the home owner even MORE irresponsible.

The police have a right to knock on your door - and they have a right to defend themselves when they are attacked. What do you think the officer should have done instead? Taken it like a man?

Please tell.

I love dogs, and MOST dog shootings make me really angry at police, but in this case I believe the responsibility falls on the dog owner for allowing his dogs to run outside and attack an officer. Imagine if that were a girl scout trying to sell cookies... The officer even announced it was the police department. The idiot behind teh door should have put his dogs away before opening the door. The moral of the story is this; If you cannot control your dogs, you shouldn't have dogs. Sad that this dog had to pay the price for his owner's irresponsible ways.

reply to post by TinkerHaus


I was thinking the exact same thing. I'm a dog lover too. I've had a dog around me since I was just child. This owner was irresponsible for letting his dog run out of the house. Whether he was a police officer, a stranger or a child, the owner has the responsibility to keep their dog from intimidating or possibly harming another person. It's the reason why we have leash laws.

Strangers don't know if your dog will bite, so why would you put a police officer or a stranger in that defensive, and frightening position? Why would you take the chance of being liable if your dog would bite or attack someone? I feel bad for the dog, but if the owner had any common sense, he would have made sure his dogs were put somewhere in the house to keep them from getting loose and intimidating the officer.

Seems justified. After all, both of the dogs were all over the cop.
Worst case scenario the cops are jumped on by the dogs and the homeowner comes out with a gun...
It's not like they can just push the dogs off until the owner politely gets them under control.

Originally posted by TinkerHaus
reply to post by abeverage

 

You're right, the door WAS already open. That makes the home owner even MORE irresponsible.

The police have a right to knock on your door - and they have a right to defend themselves when they are attacked. What do you think the officer should have done instead? Taken it like a man?

Please tell.

How does an open door make the owner irresponsible? The dogs were not running free they were in the home, until no doubt the officer stepped in.


...First they should have gone to the FRONT DOOR!

Second, is lethal force necessary? They clearly heard dogs barking. They could of had a taser ready? If there was an attack they would not have to Kill the pet and put children or neighbors in dangers being accidently shot!

Look I believe the officer should defend himself. But what about private property?

I'm not going to watch the video because it will put me in a depressed mood for the rest of the day, however I did read your description and so I am going off of that alone.

You state the dogs were barking and coming towards the officers. If the dogs didn't actually lunge at them, than I do not think they should have shot. If the dogs had made to pounce then I could justify (in my mind) that they did what they had to do. To me, I feel they should have waited until an attack was imminent. (Again, I did not watch the video)

I've been very vocal about my distrust of police officers as a whole - still I believe they should have guns, as criminals have guns as well. I just feel that they should be more selective in choosing to use their guns and that when a police officer does use their gun, the policies need to change on reviewing the incidents and on appropriate consequences.