Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 6/23/2002 6:38:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/23/2002 6:40:31 PM EDT by punkatomic]
AMERICA'S MOST WANTED (AMW) Did anyone see this? A police dog was sent after a deranged man who was walking down the road with a shotgun and talking and behaving in a strange and threatening manner. The decision was made to have the dog bite or distract the man so authorities could safely arrest the man. As soon as the dog approached, the man leveled the shotgun and fired at almost contact range killing the dog. The suspect was then shot a couple times by police and survived his wounds. This was heartbreaking to watch. Why couldn't the police have aimed weapons at this guy from cover of their vehicle and ordered him to drop the SG or be shot, and then shoot him if he didn't comply. At least, if the dog was to be used, why didn't they have a rifle aimed at suspect to shoot him as soon as it appeared the dude was going to shoot the police dog. What a waste. The dog didn't need to be sacrificed when the suspect was obviously a lethal threat to the public by being armed and ignoring police commands.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 6:42:00 PM EDT
So? SO? I don't like K-9s. Their lives are worth more than ours. This guy is going to find out he's in deep shit for killing an "officer". All Animals Are Equal. SOME Are More Equal Than Others.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 6:45:14 PM EDT
Yeah, I saw it. What a waste. Just what did they expect the whacko with the shotgun to do? Did they really think he was just gonna' let that dog chew him up? Yeah, he was a nut or altered in some way and needed to be stopped. It almost seemed like they were just looking for an excuse to shoot the dumbf**k.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 6:47:50 PM EDT
As much as I love to cop bash, I do belive that they should be able to have some more liberty as to when they can shoot. Ok if your some asshole that goes walking around in public with a shotgun and are obviously not intending on depleting the local bird population, the police should be able to say "Drop the weapon or be shot" "5, 4, 3, 2, 1, BANG!" Story over asshole dead no more threat to public, No more strain on the health system, No more strain on the court system. Just one dead badguy on his way to the morgue.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 6:51:30 PM EDT
I love dogs. More than most people. But if there is a deranged man and you make a snap judgment that a dog may be able to disarm him, the life of a dog is worth less than that of a human, especially one short a few marbles upstairs. A dog is, at the end of the day, a dog. If the death of a dog upsets you so much, maybe you should think about cosmetics and drug testing on puppies. Or monkeys. Again, I love dogs, but a person is a person.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 6:56:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Phil_A_Steen: I love dogs. More than most people. But if there is a deranged man and you make a snap judgment that a dog may be able to disarm him, the life of a dog is worth less than that of a human, especially one short a few marbles upstairs. A dog is, at the end of the day, a dog. If the death of a dog upsets you so much, maybe you should think about cosmetics and drug testing on puppies. Or monkeys. Again, I love dogs, but a person is a person.
View Quote
Not to the POLICE! This guy will be charged with death of an officer......
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 6:56:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TheFNG: Ok if your some asshole that goes walking around in public with a shotgun and are obviously not intending on depleting the local bird population, the police should be able to say "Drop the weapon or be shot" "5, 4, 3, 2, 1, BANG!"
View Quote
What do you have against open carry of a longarm? "The right of the people to keep and BEAR arms" has nothing at all to do with "depleting to local bird population." There is, of course, a difference between carrying in a peaceful manner, and carrying unsafely or with malicious intent, and someone who is TRULY a threat to public safety should indeed be treated as the criminal they are. If that was what you were getting at in your post, I appologize for responding in error--but it sure didn't sound like it.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 6:57:24 PM EDT
Sorry Phil.... I have shot my fair share of feral dogs in my area so I am by no means a dog lover. That said..... This sucks..... No nutcase with a shotgun is worth the life of a trained Police dog....my aunts schnauzer??? Sure go ahead..but it is not much of a dog to begin with.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 7:06:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/23/2002 7:10:02 PM EDT by punkatomic]
Originally Posted By Phil_A_Steen: I love dogs. More than most people. But if there is a deranged man and you make a snap judgment that a dog may be able to disarm him, the life of a dog is worth less than that of a human, especially one short a few marbles upstairs. A dog is, at the end of the day, a dog. If the death of a dog upsets you so much, maybe you should think about cosmetics and drug testing on puppies. Or monkeys. Again, I love dogs, but a person is a person.
View Quote
Mr Steen, I am quite aware of the relative value we place on human life and that of animals, animals are basically considered property and that's fine with me. Your comments on cosmetic and drug testing are completely out of context here, so the value question I pose to you has more to do with the waste of resources (the K-9) than with the emotional response of seeing a dog that is helpful to man getting killed. And that is sad. I would think that even you would hate to see an animal you were lord over get wasted by a shotgun wielding madman. Save your animal rights wrath for PETA.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 7:18:51 PM EDT
How is a dog considered a police officer? I find that logic very wrong. The guy shot a dog, no more no less. So he is gonna be charged the same as if it was a human? Seems like a rule to bust someone easier or something. OK the dog was trained to aid in the skills of police work and assists in the carrying out of the police duties but seems to me that the punishment for that act shouldn't be equated to the same as shooting a human. Maybe I'm missing something here but since when are animals given same status as humans? It was considered a member of the police force? Well my dog is considered a member of my family but if someone kills it while it is taking a crap in the back yard will they get charged like it was a person? Hell no! I love dogs. I think there is something wrong with anyone who can't find a feeling of happiness and companionship when a dog licks your face but it is still a dog. I don't care if it is property of the police or not, it is a dog. BTW the police must think of the dog as a subordinate and lesser life if they are so willing to send it instead of a person into a potentially lethal situation. Seems under this line of reasoning they should have just used a human to try and distract the guy if they were gonna shoot him anyway if he started with the shotgun. Dangerous when the gov't can raise the rights of animals that it owns equal to the citizens. The dog is a tool at best the guy should be made to pay for the dog, shooting at a dog IMO does not justify the police to try and kill you. What would have been the difference if he broke the officers' baton? I don't know but it is just wacky to give an animal status that is reserved for humans. Flame Away
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 7:20:10 PM EDT
I'll be clearer, I have no issue with animal testing, nor am I advocating it be stopped. I'd probably be skinned alive at a PETA meeting (pausing to bite into another juicy rib). I was only trying to make the point that our societal value is on the life of people ahead of animals, and while the loss of the dog was sad, I won't second judge officers who sacrified the poor K-9 in the hopes of saving this whacko.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 10:05:40 PM EDT
Now I'm wondering who here that has posted actually saw the episode? IMHO, the tactics in this situation sucked, anybody could have guessed that this guy would shoot the dog so it was a sacrifice play. I think the police had reason to take this guy down with lethal force before the shooting of the dog, they did anyway and again a dog's not considered a human life. The K-9 was miles away when first called to respond, so there were some other options open considering this time factor. They could have hit the suspect with a bean bag and as soon as BG leveled shotgun at officers they could've fired on him. If you saw the video you might agree that it was (in hindsight) a senseless sacrifice. Or not! Phil_A_Steen, I understand your position better thanks to your last post.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 10:23:32 PM EDT
Originally Posted By MKSheppard: I don't like K-9s. Their lives are worth more than ours. This guy is going to find out he's in deep shit for killing an "officer". All Animals Are Equal. SOME Are More Equal Than Others.
View Quote
This policy should also extend to the officer's family members.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 10:31:54 PM EDT
My 2 cents! If you have a wacko waving a gun around in public, and has already pointed in the direction of police, they should have NEVER sent in a dog! It should have been dealt with by negotiations and if they failed, deadly force should have been used as a last resort. A police K-9 is a COP. No ands, ifs, or buts about it. A K-9 will take a bullet and protect it's handler at all costs, but to just send it by itself against a gun toting man, is nuts. This should have never happened. Sorry for the rant, but I am pi@#&d at this unnecessary loss of a trained police K-9!
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 10:44:25 PM EDT
What did they expect? If I am armed and attacked by a dog, I will shoot said dog. It's an instinctual thing that anyone would do, crazy or not... hell you'd have to be crazy to [b]not[/b] defend yourself. Criminals will do this just the same as innocent people. The police that sent the dog in had to see the potential for this to happen, but as usual, they're probably scratching their collective head and thinking "why'd he shoot ol' Rex?" Nevermind the fact that 'ol Rex would've gnawed on the guy for at least 30+ seconds till the cops got to and disarmed the guy. Sic'ing a dog on someone would surely be considered cruel and unusual if it were used after a trial as punishment... so why then is it seen as no big deal to put the dogs on people who've yet to be tried? Yah, yah, I know the dogs are a great help in most instances... but they have their limitations and can certainly exacerbate a situation buy placing the criminal/perp/whatever in a catch-22, such as the incident we're discussing.
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 10:47:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/23/2002 10:47:53 PM EDT by Wolfpack]
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 10:59:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Wolfpack:
Originally Posted By Gunbert: What did they expect? If I am armed and attacked by a dog, I will shoot said dog. It's an instinctual thing that anyone would do, crazy or not... hell you'd have to be crazy to [b]not[/b] defend yourself. Criminals will do this just the same as innocent people. The police that sent the dog in had to see the potential for this to happen, but as usual, they're probably scratching their collective head and thinking "why'd he shoot ol' Rex?" Nevermind the fact that 'ol Rex would've gnawed on the guy for at least 30+ seconds till the cops got to and disarmed the guy. Sic'ing a dog on someone would surely be considered cruel and unusual if it were used after a trial as punishment... so why then is it seen as no big deal to put the dogs on people who've yet to be tried? Yah, yah, I know the dogs are a great help in most instances... but they have their limitations and can certainly exacerbate a situation buy placing the criminal/perp/whatever in a catch-22, such as the incident we're discussing.
View Quote
If you had a canine on Friday night when that guy made the comment about your shirt, would you have sent "Rex" to bite him? [:D]
View Quote
Hell Yeah! [;)]
Link Posted: 6/23/2002 11:19:15 PM EDT
I did see the part of the episode in question, and it was foolish to send the dog in that situation. The dog had too far to run to reach the suspect. The nutjob had plenty of time to lower the boom on the dog. I think a dog is a more capable sprinter than a human, and they assumed that the dog could reach the suspect and disable him quickly. In hindsight, that was not the case. P.S. I am all for open carry by law abiding citizens. But this wacko was apparently threatening people for 45 minutes. I would not want him anywhere near my family, gun or not.
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 12:14:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jake75: My 2 cents! If you have a wacko waving a gun around in public, and has already pointed in the direction of police, they should have NEVER sent in a dog! It should have been dealt with by negotiations and if they failed, deadly force should have been used as a last resort. A police K-9 is a COP. No ands, ifs, or buts about it. A K-9 will take a bullet and protect it's handler at all costs, but to just send it by itself against a gun toting man, is nuts. This should have never happened. Sorry for the rant, but I am pi@#&d at this unnecessary loss of a trained police K-9!
View Quote
Hmm A K-9 Dog is a cop and should be protected at all costs even if it means the taking of a human life, but my German Shepard being beaten by said neighbor with a pipe/hose/bat/chain/ or what not, even if said neighbor is in the wrong. Neighbor gets shot, learns a lesson via hot lead. Now, what court is going to uphold the fact that my dog is as important to me as anyones kid/cop's k-9/first cousin/uncle/aunt/granny/gramps? Playing fair is cool as long as everybody has the same rule book. Cops say that a dog is their partner, well so is mine, and he deserves to be looked upon with the same respect as a cop k-9. No more no less!
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 12:23:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 321Bang: Cops say that a dog is their partner, well so is mine, and he deserves to be looked upon with the same respect as a cop k-9. No more no less!
View Quote
Sorry, but you civilians better get it through your heads that your mutts are only considered property under the law. Police dogs undergo extensive training and certification which makes their lives etremely more valuable than a pathetic newspaper fetching fido.
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 3:04:49 AM EDT
I watched that episode,looked to me like "when the 'deadeye' cops started shooting the dog went down".I smell a cover up.If they didnt have to shoot the guy they never would have hit the dog.[pissed]
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 8:59:02 AM EDT
Hmm? A K-9 is a cop? I think not. I love dogs as much as anyone but this is very disconcerting. It is an animal that is trained and utilized to help police carry out their duties. Define police officer? Never seen the box asking for species on the application for a civil service test or any other application. Is the dog capable of carrying out police duties without a handler, being trained to react by conditionaing and rote or better yet is the dog compensated, able to file reports, use good judgement, help direct traffic, decide when lethal force is nesseccary? See my point? The dog by "taking a bullet" or going in harms way is by no means the same as a human doing the same thing, as much as we would like to believe so. So far as we can see a dog has no sense of mortality or self awarness, as far as we are able to determine. Given that, it is irrational and illogical to conclude that a dog is aware he is a "police officer". Just because the dog is a loved part of the officer's family and a loyal companion does not equate it with the same intrinsic characteristics as a human. It is doing what it is trained to do, no more, no less. Dogs cannot by definition be a police officer. They can be a family pet, a loyal servant, a peice of public or gov't property, a wet sopping mess after a swim but they are not humans and as such designating them with a title that personifies them only sets a standard that allows the gov't more intrusion on our liberties. Think about it. That dog had no idea it would die by going after the guy with a shotgun. That is why it was sent. The dog is a tool. They are tools used for rescue, drug interdiction, rabbit hunting, bird hunting, hauling fishing nets, guides for the blind, even police work but they are not human and designating them as an officer is wrong and sets a dangerous precident.
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 9:27:50 AM EDT
The way I see it is this, the cops should have known full well that the dog was essentially being sent on a suicide mission. As a rational person if I was about to be attacked by an animal that could cause serious harm to myself and I have a firearm in my hands or anything to help defend myself, I am going to do it. Sorry but if it's between an animal and my safety, animal loses every time. Now consider that this wasn't a rational person, it's a person with a dangerous weapon who is very likely to use the firearm against any threat no matter if it's coming from human or animal. To me it seems pretty obvious that in both situations, sending a snarling attack hound after a person armed with a shotgun is likely going to do nothing more than get the dog killed in short order. Atleast the chances are very high unless the person holds the life of animals in higher esteem than that of humans which isn't unheard of. Call me heartless but what do the police expect to happen when they send these dogs off to bring down an armed suspect? To me it is better that this happen to a dog "cop" than a human cop.
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 9:34:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/24/2002 9:37:35 AM EDT by Hawkeye1]
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 10:24:05 AM EDT
I was wondering about the protection level of that bulletproof vest they designed for the dog...
Link Posted: 6/24/2002 3:33:09 PM EDT
Hawkeye1, Exactly!!!
Link Posted: 6/25/2002 4:53:30 AM EDT
Top Top