Police kill dog in front of owner for nothing.

a comment from reddit.



Officer from a different state here.
It appears the dog was, in defense of it's owner, attempting to bite the officer who was attempting to restrain the dog. The owner was obviously worried the dog would attempt to attack as he tried to kick the dog to get him to stay back. The dog was posing a potential threat to the officers...therefore justified shooting.
HOWEVER, depending on what they charge the owner with it could be deemed the officers provoked the dog for needlessly arresting the owner. In which case they violated his constitutional rights which is a felony, and the shooting is no longer justified. At least in the state in which I work. From what I can see in the video, and this is just my opinion, it appears there is absolutely ZERO reason to arrest the owner as he was only video taping the raid along with several other individuals, including some just watching and nobody else was arrested. At least not in this video.
SO, assuming there is not another reason for the arrest that we do not see in the video, imo they should not have arrested him. Anyways just thought I would share my thoughts. It will be interesting to see what happens through the investigation.
Edit: posted this in the old thread too.
I too agree with you however, Tazers...while very effective against dogs...like even more so than against people, are incredibly inaccurate.
Also officers train more with their side arms than with their tazers. So the side arm becomes the reflex go to. This is why you see the other officers who are carrying rifles also draw their pistols when the dog initially charges towards them. If they had at least used the rifles the dog would not likely have suffered as much. But the reflex is the pistol. The draw and aim is muscle memory. Unfortunately pistol rounds are not effective killing munitions. They are for those "oh ****" situations when you find yourself in a gun fight you weren't expecting.
But this could also be a difference in training between there and where I am at. We are actually told that, when possible, we should taze a dog...however we are also told that we should not risk injury to ourselves or others in order to do so.
Edit: I also posted this in response to someone who mentioned using a tazer.

some people are also saying that it's technically a crime scene so he can be legally detained for causing a scene.

just trying to put some stuff into perspective.
 
...
I agree with you,

but I'm talking about at the point that the dog jumped at him.

is this a hard concept to grasp?
or are we just trying to avoid the obvious, that the problem was not shooting the dog, but arresting the owner.


Both are/were problems.. The 1st problem was the manner with which they choose to deal with the owner..

As far as the posted video goes, the final problem shown was the shooting of the dog..

As a police officer, if you are able to resolve a situation without using lethal force.. You have an obligation to do so..

Everything about that video demonstrates that those 2 individuals shouldn't be in a position to 'uphold' the law
 
up to that point, NO

at that point, YES

a dog jumped at them, the owner was already in cuffs.

YOU TELL ME WHAT YOU WOULD DO
not aggrevate the dog further by

a. dashing towards it, waving your hand and weapon "trying to calm him down"
laugh.gif

b. letting go of his owner.
thank you, you've made a fool of yourself now

can the original contestant reply
They should have pepper sprayed, tased the dog, or shot it with rubber bullets. At that point there was no reason for the cop to even have his gun out.
 
Last edited:
...
I agree with you,

but I'm talking about at the point that the dog jumped at him.

is this a hard concept to grasp?
or are we just trying to avoid the obvious, that the problem was not shooting the dog, but arresting the owner.

As a police officer, if you are able to resolve a situation without using lethal force.. You have an obligation to do so..

they're there to keep the peace and their authority allows them.

if a dog is going to injure them they have to put it down.

I believe it was the only logical choice at that point in time.

They should have pepper sprayed, tased the dog, or shot it with rubber bullets. At that point there was no reason for the cop to even have his gun out.​

I only agree with rubber bullets, tazer, but I don't know if they had them

pepper spray might have just made the dog angrier, so I wouldn't go that route.
 
Last edited:
Why are people seriously arguing for this :lol:

Dogs are part ofthe ffamily to some people.. Other people they are just pets. That's it. What is there to argue.. Steezy loves his doggy like his brother or sister cause it's family to him.. dude just loves his dog more than you. Who cares.. Some of yall arguing just to argue :smh:

this. some of you guys just love to push your opinions down other peoples throats.
 
interview with the dog owner

http://bcove.me/pmk2691k
Now someone defend this after it comes out that dude came out of nowhere, wasn't anywhere near the TWO (
mean.gif
 why were there two people around a dude already restrained and cuffed and was compliant with the cops this whole time)  so the dog wasn't remotely even threatening him, and he already had his gun drawn, so his only reason for coming over there was to kill the dog.

Some people are just evil. 
mean.gif
 
Last edited:
so what about those that have lost their family and all they have left is their dog, are these people entitled to feel as though that dog is their family, to your standards???....or do these people not exist?...which brings me back to "it all depends..." part of my reply to you.

Sure. They can consider dogs their family and truly mean it.

None of that would change the fact that the loss of a close family member will always have a more dramatic effect on your life than the loss of a beloved pet. Those things just aren't equal.

Pretend you love a human and a pet "equally". If given the choice between saving just one of their lives, which would you pick?
 
Sure. They can consider dogs their family and truly mean it.

None of that would change the fact that the loss of a close family member will always have a more dramatic effect on your life than the loss of a beloved pet. Those things just aren't equal.

Pretend you love a human and a pet "equally". If given the choice between saving just one of their lives, which would you pick?

this is just silly fam....pretend you had a choice between saving mom or saving your daughter....i mean we cant come up with these extremes to try to prove a point, to you, your dog's life doesnt hold as much value as say your cousin, i get it....why is it so hard to understand that in the same way other people value their dog's life more than they probably do some relatives....
 
The police shooter has been identified as Jeffrey Salmon.

Same dude involved in a Police Brutality & Corruption lawsuit in 2006.

Goodrow vs. Hawthorne.
 
so what about those that have lost their family and all they have left is their dog, are these people entitled to feel as though that dog is their family, to your standards???....or do these people not exist?...which brings me back to "it all depends..." part of my reply to you.

Sure. They can consider dogs their family and truly mean it.

None of that would change the fact that the loss of a close family member will always have a more dramatic effect on your life than the loss of a beloved pet. Those things just aren't equal.

Pretend you love a human and a pet "equally". If given the choice between saving just one of their lives, which would you pick?

Sorry, I had to jump in.

But this is the key word. It's subjective, if a person feels that their dog is closer to him/her than human family member. Then that's their emotion, not yours.

You can not speak for them, you can not feel for them, and you surely can not think for them.
 
Sure. They can consider dogs their family and truly mean it.

None of that would change the fact that the loss of a close family member will always have a more dramatic effect on your life than the loss of a beloved pet. Those things just aren't equal.

Pretend you love a human and a pet "equally". If given the choice between saving just one of their lives, which would you pick?

this is just silly fam....pretend you had a choice between saving mom or saving your daughter....i mean we cant come up with these extremes to try to prove a point, to you, your dog's life doesnt hold as much value as say your cousin, i get it....why is it so hard to understand that in the same way other people value their dog's life more than they probably do some relatives....



so now you dont want to pick between your dog and lets say wife?
 
they're there to keep the peace and their authority allows them.

if a dog is going to injure them they have to put it down.

I believe it was the only logical choice at that point in time.
I only agree with rubber bullets, tazer, but I don't know if they had them

pepper spray might have just made the dog angrier, so I wouldn't go that route.



And that's my point, my expectations from those given that authority/power is for them to use it with restraint..

Hence why I say the whole thing was bad.. They had numerous opportunities during that video to make better decisions, they choose not to do that.. The individuals with the training and more importantly the power AND authority choose to exercise that power and authority in the manner that the did..


The officer thought it was a good idea to (quoted from their press release): "as the suspect was being taken into custody, his Rottweiler became agitated and jumped out of the car, approaching the officers who were making the arrest. An assisting officer came to aid and attempted to control the Rottweiler, first by gaining control of the leash."

My problem is giving all of the information at hand, he thought it best to deal with the situation in that manner.. And obviously did not consider that the dog would take his actions in a threatening manner considering what the officers were doing and had already done to his owner
 
so now you dont want to pick between your dog and lets say wife?

who would want to pick?....would you like to pick between your mom and your sis?....your dog of 12 years that saved your life from a panther once or your cousin you grew up with but slept with your girl last week, i mean we can get real crazy with the extremes to prove a point in the lamest of ways, instead of just understanding the simplicity of a human loving his dog as much as they would one of their kids.
 
I refuse to believe that even the most fanatic animal lover would value their pet's life as equal to that of their child.

Nope.
 
I refuse to believe that even the most fanatic animal lover would value their pet's life as equal to that of their child.

Nope.

Your example uses a child.

My example uses the 23 year old woman who was raped when she was 11 by her own father.
 
Last edited:
I refuse to believe that even the most fanatic animal lover would value their pet's life as equal to that of their child.

Nope.
Because everyone thinks like you do. Yep.

You deaded your post in the first four words.
 
"It looks like the officer tried to reach down and grab the leash, and then the dog lunges in the direction of him and the other officers there," Hawthorne police Lt. Scott Swain said to the Daily Breeze. "And I know it's the dog's master, and more than likely not going to attack him, (but) we've got a guy handcuffed that's kind of defenseless. We have a duty to defend him, too."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/01/police-shoot-dog_n_3530990.html

They tryna say they were trying to defend the owner from his own ******g dog.

mean.gif
 
The dog was about to go in. A dog is not a person. It's property. Hawthorne police will probably pay the value of the dog to the owner.

There's a Hawthorne police officer that lives up the block from me he's a cool dude.

It's funny to me seeing you guys all upset about police killing a dog for no reason but bout to go eat a hamburger tomorrow. I'm no animal rights activist but the animal double standard makes me laugh.
 
Back
Top Bottom