Dumb-Ass Trigger Happy Cop Has Instant Karma Moment

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: mOjOm

Not chasing a dangerous felon and only serving papers one wonders why did he not call animal control and just wait a bit. As the Gump saying goes "stupid is as stupid does"

This is what happens when you have an IQ limit for employment usually around 105.

People with 125 have notably been allowed to be excluded from employment.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

but what about the nursing home patient awhile back, killed in a confrontation for having a knife?

Hey Wrabbit,

I don't know if this is what you're talking about:

Nursing home Patient Dead After Confrontation With Police

But if it is, NO ONE who can't disarm a 95 year old man without shooting him, either with bean bags, bullets, or a taser has any business walking the streets with a badge and a gun. They just don't have what it takes and they just make things more dangerous.

What has happened to us as a country, what has happened to us as men?

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: samkent

For what it's worth, perhaps the law and court's understanding of the 4th amendment is different in California than it is in Missouri. However, in Missouri, a Deputy Sheriff doesn't have the right to open closed and latched gates, to enter private back yards....to simply serve papers. This is listed as an eviction notice service, not a physical eviction process.

So.... If they want to 'go that extra effort' and violate the law in the process? Getting attacked by a dog is the price of that bad judgement. I'd feel no more or less for a meter reader or a nosy relative for that matter. People latch gates for reasons....and warrants generally come before opening them, in my experience.

Back home, a deputy has what they call 'open field access', in that they can let themselves onto your property without a warrant, with the exception of your 'curtilage', your home, yard and immediate outbuildings, and specifically, the fenced area around your home.

Lacking some exigence, a warrant, a fleeing suspect or some articulable reason that someone's life is in immediate danger or evidence is about to be destroyed, if one lets himself into a fenced area it's called constructive trespass. Which would be chargeable but in practical terms no prosecutor would be bothered, and if they barged into your yard and shot your dog you'd be short a dog.

a reply to: imwilliam

That wasn't the one but it's a good example. It seems to me that the net shown in that video would be more than enough to entangle someone like that man and end the problem. Heck, let them fight it to exhaustion if it floats their boat.

The urgency that leads to hard action is another thing I don't get. Police have the ultimate solutions...they can afford to be generous with time when possible. Very often, it's like they get bonus points for time to clear the call.

originally posted by: Tenacious8
If police officers seriously believe that they have to use their firearms to defend themselves against dogs, then they don't deserve to be in uniform.

This whole story reminds me of a quote from the animated TV show Archer, which I can't repeat here. Suffice to say that any grown man who feels like he needs a gun to defend against a single dog is a coward. Multiple dogs? Maybe. But a single dog? Come on man.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000

The urgency that leads to hard action is another thing I don't get. Police have the ultimate solutions...they can afford to be generous with time when possible. Very often, it's like they get bonus points for time to clear the call.

Oh, THAT. It's easy. You're looking at a combination of training, narcissistic personality disorder, short attention spans and poor emotional control, plus often a sort of pack mentality. So they arrive convinced their whims are law, and that anything short of abject obedience is a direct personal insult which requires immediate reprisal 'to get control of the situation', 'establish authority', and 'go home at the end of the shift'. Even when the situation doesn't require any of that.

So when that doesn't happen right off, you get a sort of seething anger and resentment that they toss back and forth between each other until it turns into rage at being defied, and then they go overboard and beat someone to death or whatnot, then lie each other up with "he was coming right for me" and "I thought he had a weapon" or "I was just responding to his rage" and they investigate themselves, find no wrongdoing, bribe/threaten the prosecutor and pat themselves on the back as they go down the road to the next heroic action.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: mOjOm
...while the officer decided to walk uninvited into someone's private property through the closed gate and fenced yard...

You need to keep in mind that that "private property" was no longer assigned rights to the person occupying it, and the eviction notice was created by the property owner.

In the real world, if someone continues to occupy property for which they have been ordered to leave, a dangerous dog is a potential danger to everyone, not just a Cop doing his job.

Additionally, I removed the derogatory vulgar acronym from your opening post. Perhaps in the future, you might want to apply a bit of common-sense filtering between brain and keyboard and compose a more compelling opening post. The story deserves it, but you went in the wrong direction.

Someone may have already mentioned this, but I haven't read the entire thread yet. An eviction notice is a notice to vacate. Nearly every state allows 30 days after receiving an eviction notice for the tenant to vacate. During that time the tenant is still habitating the residence and is therefor entitled to all rights and protections granted while still legal occupying their residence. It turns out that in California the tenant has three days to remedy the situation.

The tenant was not occupying property from which they had been ordered to leave. They were occupying property for which they were about to receive a notice to leave.

That all being said, this is poetic justice. Having worked as a cable/phone/internet guy, I can tell you that the FIRST thing you do before entering a fenced yard is check for dogs. You can should, whistle, yell, bang on the fence, etc... If cable guys know this why don't cops...? Or was this cop just itching to shoot something?

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Someone may have already mentioned this, but I haven't read the entire thread yet. An eviction notice is a notice to vacate. Nearly every state allows 30 days after receiving an eviction notice for the tenant to vacate. During that time the tenant is still habitating the residence and is therefor entitled to all rights and protections granted while still legal occupying their residence.

It varies from municipality to municipality, but nearly all the time, at the point the eviction notice is delivered, the lessee looses as lease rights as they are no longer legally a tenant. The "grace period" to vacate is a legal limbo defined by local laws/proceedures.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Someone may have already mentioned this, but I haven't read the entire thread yet. An eviction notice is a notice to vacate. Nearly every state allows 30 days after receiving an eviction notice for the tenant to vacate. During that time the tenant is still habitating the residence and is therefor entitled to all rights and protections granted while still legal occupying their residence.

It varies from municipality to municipality, but nearly all the time, at the point the eviction notice is delivered, the lessee looses as lease rights as they are no longer legally a tenant. The "grace period" to vacate is a legal limbo defined by local laws/proceedures.

In California they are served a notice to vacate and have three days to leave or pay.

If they do not leave within three business days the landlord files a complaint with the courts, who then serve papers on the tenant giving them five days to vacate or be removed.

After that five days, the tenant is NOW illegally occupying the property, and have waived any rights to private property.

The time frames change, but you are not illegally occupying and are therefor entitled to rights as a property owner/inhabitant until you are removed. I don't know if this was the first or second notice to the tenant, but in either case they are still entitled to their rights of privacy/private property.

I live in Utah and just bought my second house. Rather than sell the first we decided to attempt to rent it out as our house payment on that house is ridiculously low, this provides some extra income each month.

Before getting in to this situation I made sure I was at least somewhat informed about the laws regarding the tenant/landlord relationship. The California eviction process is almost identical to the process in Utah.

a reply to: mOjOm

ROTFLMAO .....ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!!

The cops came in my yard past my wall and fence...actually shot my two pits:




I had a field day in court with my local police department and well, uh.....they lost. The cops need to stop breaking into folks property trying to pull stupid crap.

I even had a doorbell located at the gate, all they had to do was ring the buzzer




ETA
Forgot to add, that my dogs are all well and good.

You know some way,some how, the pig is going to get that dog, someone or something of gonna pay for what that moron did to himself

a reply to: SkepticOverlord
The language on vacating is fairly clear in most counties within Southern California. I'm not sure what this guys deal was, however, I thought it a tad bit extreme that the cop decided to "attempt" to shot the dog. He could have just called animal control. Hence, his leg would be fine, the tenant would be removed and the property owner could begin rental procedures.

Everyone would have been satisfied, except for the tenant of course.


You're pretty much correct except, in California where I reside and own rental property, the sheriffs (in L.A. County) serve the tenant a summons to appear in court for non pay, or what ever the reason is for the complaint. Then, the tenant is supposed to appear in court on said date (usually, non paying tenants are no shows). The tenant then has a say in the situation, if they appear in court. The judge then rules one way or the other.

If the tenant is ordered to vacate, a "writ to vacate" is issued/posted by the sheriffs, ordering the tenant to vacate the premises. If the tenant fails to vacate, then the sheriffs arrive with the landlord and oversee the removal of property. The latter of course, is after the three day notice has been issued and the tenant failed to respond to the writ to vacate.

If this guy failed to vacate then he was clearly in the wrong. However, the cop could have just called animal control.

cops during training have to get pepper sprayed and tazered so they know how it feels....

Why can't they get shot while training so they know the pain of a bullet entering their bodies. Maybe then they will stop using guns on innocent animals and humans.

Lol.

If, during training, they were shot in the testicles (can I say testicles?), it would sure save society a lot of trouble in the long run. Bleach, meet gene pool.

Back to the serious issue tho, I've seen postal workers spray an attacking animal with pepper spray and it stopped the 100+ pound dog instantly. Today's police killing animals left and right has the look-n-feel of massive incompetence. Either that or training that is working to remove the hesitation to kill. Does not matter which ..... something is seriously rotten in Denmark.

a reply to: mOjOm

Serves him right.

Cops you need to learn to exercise diplomacy first. The public would have your back more if you stopped viewing every single person that isn't a cop as an enemy.

originally posted by: HomerinNC
You know some way,some how, the pig is going to get that dog, someone or something of gonna pay for what that moron did to himself

I certainly hope you're wrong. I think, maybe this cop just panicked and shot. Although, I think his actions were highly immoral, maybe the jack@ss feared for his life (yeah right). Like I said earlier, all he had to do was call animal control if he could not gain access to the premises.

The cops around here really need to take a chill pill, especially when dealing with civil matters...it's getting kind of ridiculous.

a reply to: mOjOm

I just LOVE IT when stuff like this happens.


love it too thanks for my lol moment

s&f

Take away all the qualities that make for a genuinely good cop—training, courage, honor, selflessness—and what you have left is Jim Carrey with a badge!

In Living Color - Police Academy.

a reply to: mOjOm

LMAOOOO thank you so much for posting this.

I wish there was a video!! While this is indicative of a much larger problem - I have to enjoy the moment....*ahhh*

freakin pssy...

NOW

-Why was a cop serving an eviction notice?
-Why does a cop feel he has the right to shoot a dog anyway (ESPECIALLY at the dogs own house).
-What the hell do you carry a taser for if you're all about bullets??

This cop shoots himself in the leg in a residential area. What would prevent him or another 'law officer' from accidently shooting one of the children playing close by, their excellent marksmanship? The dog did not seem at all viscious but animals are often better judges of character than we are, just in case this peace officer did sense hostility coming from him.

Don't we deserve to have better public servants working in our neighborhoods? I see a problem getting progressively worse and not a more pleasant outcome any time soon. I'm sure the answer to this problem by the authorities is to just step up their assertiveness to an even more unpleasant level. This will not end well and will continue to further divide the populace away from their essential liberties. Americans are already the most incarcerated people on Earth, so where do we go from here? The present tactics do not seem to be working well.

a reply to: unphased

There is a video. Enjoy!