# Pitbull Mix attacks polive dog



## DTS (Oct 19, 2010)

a pit mix ran and attacked a police dog while he was tracking a suspect. after the offivers tried to get the pit off, they shot it. the owners cry excessive force, officers say he was protecting his k9 partner. 
thoughts?
opinions?

http://www.ocala.com/article/20110425/ARTICLES/110429816/1439?p=3&tc=pg

great and i cant edit the tittle. its police dog..


----------



## GsdLoverr729 (Jun 20, 2010)

Well, I think there are other ways that they could have removed the pic from the k9 officer rather than shooting it. I've seen police taser such dogs before. However, the pit mix WAS offleash (even if he had been in his yard, he should have been properly fenced in). The picture shows very strong jaws. So I must agree that the officer probably felt that the only way to save his partner was to shoot the pit. And officers are not trained to shoot limbs, because they can miss easily, so he went for the target he was most likely to make. I feel bad for the owners, however the police dog can probably be credited with saving the lives of many people as well as other animals. 
The family should get some sort of apology, as well as something to show sympathy, but in my opinion the officer was not in the wrong. Just an opinion, though!


----------



## WarrantsWifey (Dec 18, 2010)

I have to say, I don't blame the officer at all, everybody always say excessive force. Your dog got out, attacked another animal for no reason. I mean really. I don't blame the officer at all!


----------



## Stevenzachsmom (Mar 3, 2008)

I am a bit confused. I read the story as the police dog ran by the yard - not that he entered the yard. If that is correct and the PB mix was not contained in the yard, it is the owner's fault - not the officers'.


----------



## GsdLoverr729 (Jun 20, 2010)

I read it as the officer was passing the yard and the dog ran up on them. There was no hint of any kind of leash, tie-out or fence.


----------



## CassandGunnar (Jan 3, 2011)

Sounds like an unfortunate situation, especially for the owners of the pit mix. I read the story the same way, the K9 was running by the yard, not through it.
It's not like the deputies have forever to react and deal with the situation. Don't forget, they weren't out for a casual walk when this happened, they were on a track/apprehension. Also, I'm sure the deputy perceived a threat to his partner.
Of course, I'm going to be biased, I admit.
No LEO, ever wants to use their firearm on duty, be it on an animal or a person.

I feel bad for everyone involved, but I also agree that if this happened outside the yard, it's on the dogs owners.


----------



## wilbanks17 (Feb 11, 2011)

Perfectly reasonable response from the officer. I would and will do the same thing if my partner is attacked.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Was the officer in their yard, on their property? Did they have to go over fencing to get into the area?

Police have to be able to do their job. If a police officer chases someone over my fence and into my yard, and my dog was out there in the yard, and was shot, I would be ticked. I do not leave them in the yard, I leave them in kennels within the yard. 

If my dog was loose in my front yard (no fence), and a police dog was tracking someone and they had to go through my front yard, and my dog attacked their dog, I would be ticked at myself. 

We have to protect our dogs. The police have to protect their dog. I think it is sad for the pit mix owner, but maybe they should not have three loose dogs in their yard where someone can jog by with their dog and be attacked.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

If a dog is tracking someone, they are going to go over grass or pavement or whatever the path the fugitive has traveled. They are not going to look for little flags for invisible fencing, property markers or what have you. If the person goes over a wall, the dog will do their best to follow. They will not skirt the property. 

But if the dog was going by in the street in front of the property, then the deputy and sherriff should be PO'd and the dog owner should be facing some sort of charges. If you or I was running along with our GSD and the pit mix ran out and latched on to our dog's throat, wouldn't we be ticked off?


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

In this situation I think it was slightly acceptable. Had they blown it off I would be irate, but they paid the vet bills, gave their condolenscenses, etc. 

There were better ways the officer could have gone about it, IE- taser, pepper spray, or a bullet to the HEAD, not the back. I can underestand that while a team is hot on a chase for a suspect it was probably necessary to save his dog and continue on, though I wonder if they could at all after shooting a dog- he surely didn't just leave him there to bleed out, did he?

If they had been there for any other reason (not tracking in hot pursuit...) then I wouldn't feel it justifiable at all. A taser is just as handy as a gun.

eta; I distinctly read it as they were passing by, not in the yard, though it doesn't elaborate. The family had a fenced in yard though; the dog was either carelessly let out the front door or jumped the fence.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Danielle, have you ever witnessed two dogs fighting -- really fighting, trying to kill each other. I have. GSDs. I would be having a hard time shooting the dog anywhere without putting my dog in danger. Pepper spray or a taser might have injured his dog as well. The officer was doing his job. His dog was attacked. They tried to separate the dogs, but could not, and went ahead and shot the dog where he could should the dog. He took a shot that was available that would not injure his partner or the dog or anyone else. A head shot may not have been available. 

It is simple, people need to contain their dogs better. If this was a GSD doing the attacking, and a pit or anything else doing the trailing my answer would be the same.


----------



## CassandGunnar (Jan 3, 2011)

The story doesn't elaborate the conditions at the time. Normally, when I was on a track or an apprehension of this nature, if we came upon a fenced yard we had to go through, I'd ask the people to remove their dog or take it inside. In the story, it doesn't say if the owners were present at the time. It is also unlikely that the suspect is going to hop a fence, encounter a loose dog and stay in that yard, normally, they would get out of that yard, if at all possible.
Zero should have been ignoring any other dogs while he was working, again, this story doesn't really say. I'm guessing it all happened in the blink of an eye, as most dog fights do.
I did have occasion to encounter loose dogs while on a track, but never had any problems with the dogs coming after my K9. Either the owners would remove their dogs or my spotter/cover officer could keep the other dog away from mine. My dogs never paid any attention to the other dogs we came across while they were on a track.

As has been said, just a bad situation all around. It sounds like the other dog was taken to an animal hospital ASAP and got immediate care. It's too bad that this happened.
Most (all that I ever did) tracks/apprehensions take place with at least one other officer, sometimes more to act as a spotter or cover for the handler. I was always more focused on my K9 to read them and to look for unsafe areas/situations along the way. It sounds like that is what happened in this case.


----------



## CassandGunnar (Jan 3, 2011)

Also, for the most part, the mace/OC/chemical irritant carried by officers is not very effective on dogs. I have heard that you can purchase agents that are, but I don't know.
All of the dogs I worked all had training in an environment where chemical agent was present and were expected to perform without distraction. (I had to wear a mask/breathing apparatus so I know it was there)
I'm not sure that chemical irritants would have been effective in seperating dogs that were "locked up" in an honest to goodness kill fight.


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

selzer said:


> Danielle, have you ever witnessed two dogs fighting -- really fighting, trying to kill each other. I have. GSDs. I would be having a hard time shooting the dog anywhere without putting my dog in danger. Pepper spray or a taser might have injured his dog as well. The officer was doing his job. His dog was attacked. They tried to separate the dogs, but could not, and went ahead and shot the dog where he could should the dog. He took a shot that was available that would not injure his partner or the dog or anyone else. A head shot may not have been available.
> 
> It is simple, people need to contain their dogs better. If this was a GSD doing the attacking, and a pit or anything else doing the trailing my answer would be the same.


I have witnessed numerous dogs fighting, trying to kill each other. It does not sound like either dog was trying to kill the other in this case. My point is, if he was going to shoot blindly ANYWAY (a back shot could not have been that readily available without putting his own dog at risk) then why not shoot him in the head, or approach them, and if they had already grabbed the dog, a quick shot in the head would not be that big of a deal. I understand that a head shot may NOT have been available, but it would have been nice if he had tried. 

They make no note of his dog sustaining any injuries, could anyone find any information on that? I find it hard to believe a pit bull attacked a defenseless dog and the GSD walked away without wounds. 

Did they continue the trail right after? I didn't read the last paragraph or so after the facts were given.


----------



## CassandGunnar (Jan 3, 2011)

The story is not really well written, but it sounds like the K9's wide leather collar helped prevent any serious injuries. It also sounds like the woman was taken into custody a short time later and doesn't appear that the dog was part of that. I don't imagine they continued, but it's hard to say.

As for the shooting itself, I'm sure the deputy took whatever shot was available and it was probably at a very close range. It doesn't say much except that it pierced the spine, I think. Hard to say where the shot entered the dog. Bullets can do a lot of crazy stuff, especially in a canine chest cavity with all the ribs, etc. I could have bounced around quite a bit before coming to rest.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Usually when you have a dog attacking the throat of the other dog and you cannot get the dog separated, I would take it that the dog was trying to kill mine. 

I would not want to use pepper spray around a dog that might have to use its nose in the course of his work. 

I am really tired of owners being all upset and complaining when stuff like this happens. If you leave your dog in a situation where it can run out into the street or go after another dog, then you have to expect that your dog will be seriously injured or killed, or that your dog may seriously injure or kill another dog or hurt a person. Instead of complaining about excessive force, kick yourself in the butt and LEARN something. Contain your dog properly. Don't trust your dog to e-fences or learning the boundaries. Sorry, that does not stop the dangerous stuff from coming in. 

I do not blame the lady who was running from the cops for the dog's death. If she was not there, then the next day the dog might have attacked someone out jogging with their dog. The lady who was running from the cops has charges to face for whatever the cops were after her for, and for fleeing and eluding. Usually those people were not blessed with an adequate amount of intelligence or common sense or both. If the dog couldn't get to the police dog, it would not have gotten shot. 

The owners of the dog are not taking responsibility, so they will probably not protect their other dogs or future dogs either. Because they did not do anything wrong. Or they do not see it that way.


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

selzer said:


> Usually when you have a dog attacking the throat of the other dog and you cannot get the dog separated, I would take it that the dog was trying to kill mine.
> 
> I would not want to use pepper spray around a dog that might have to use its nose in the course of his work.
> 
> ...


Usually when a pit bull fight is seperated and no wounds are left, the pit bull was not trying to kill a thing. In this case the collar may have helped, but I find it hard to believe a pit bull on a death mission didn't put a hole in a GSD that it had "by the throat". But we don't know that he didn't.

We also can't blame the owners entirely, we have no idea why the dog was loose in the yard as they didn't commen on it. For all we know, the dog slipped through the door as someone was leaving and it was a complete accident and they aren't irresponsibley leaving the dog unattended. Or perhaps a child thought it cute to let the dog greet a family member arriving home and let the dog out, not realizing the dangers of doing so. I would like more facts before believing anything or blaming anyone, personally.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

I didn't see it anywhere, but did anybody hear where the pits owners were during the attack? I.E. if they were around where their dog was loose then why didn't they just call the pit off. like a recall? My pure guess would be that either they weren't there or the dog would not listen.

If either case were true, then I feel the cops were totally justified in the shooting. Just like they would have been if a human PO were in mortal danger from an attacker.

Anyone thinking the cops used excess force think about what your reaction would be if it were your GSD whose neck was in the pit's jaws. I know what mine would be.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x (Nov 29, 2010)

Usually if a pitbull grabs a dog by the throat and doesn't leave marks, it wasn't trying to kill it?

Then what was it trying to do????


------------
This is in Washington:

*RCW 16.08.020** Dogs injuring stock may be killed.*

*It shall be lawful for any person who shall see any dog or dogs chasing, biting, injuring or killing any sheep, swine **or other domestic animal*, including poultry, belonging to such person, on any real property owned or leased by, or under the control of, such person, or on any public highway, to kill such dog or dogs, and it shall be the duty of the owner or keeper of any dog or dogs so found chasing, biting or injuring any domestic animal, including poultry, upon being notified of that fact by the owner of such domestic animals or poultry, to thereafter keep such dog or dogs in leash or confined upon the premises of the owner or keeper thereof, and in case any such owner or keeper of a dog or dogs shall fail or neglect to comply with the provisions of this section, *it shall be lawful for the owner of such domestic animals or poultry to kill such dog or dogs found running at large.

*
I couldn't find anything on the area they were in ... but I am pretty sure this law is common in most places
----------------------



I don't care if it is a chocolate lab, a pitbull, or a poodle. If any dog ever runs up, and grabs Rocky by the throat while we are innocently walking along and I feel like his life is threatened, I will shoot it. That is, once I get my license and a gun in 6 months. I would feel bad for killing an animal, but I wouldn't feel bad enough for the dog to let it kill ROcky.


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

x0emiroxy0x said:


> Usually if a pitbull grabs a dog by the throat and doesn't leave marks, it wasn't trying to kill it?
> 
> Then what was it trying to do????


It was likely being dominant, aggressive, or playing very rough. People completley underestimate the play style of bully breeds. 

The point is, when a bully breed has time to go off on a dog and wants to kill it, it will at LEAST get a bite in. It's pretty much unheard of for a pit bull meaning to do damage NOT to in a fight. They're very powerful dogs and it doesn't take them much to fatally wound another animal. 

So if the dogs were in a tussle and the pit had the GSD on the ground long enough for the officers to fight trying to get the pit bull off and then get back and shoot it, it's unlikely that it was "fighting to kill."


----------



## x0emiroxy0x (Nov 29, 2010)

I understand what you are saying, that definitely makes sense. There is no way to know if the dog was fighting to kill or just fighting until he is taken off the other dog though, right? I feel bad for the pit, but I understand the cops point of view. I wish the pits owner had kept it contained. ( if it did escape from the backyard ) --> The news story isn't clear on that detail.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

One day I was early taking Rush and Arwen up to the groomers, so we stopped in a field at the fair grounds and I let them run about a bit. Rush was an overgrown puppy about a year old, and Arwen was an older bitch. Rush blasted into Arwen nearly knocking her off her feet. She turned and gave him and educational nip. I was right there. 

Rush turned and went off on her. 

I put my hand in there and got it all bit up. 

I went and got my SUV, pointed it toward them and drove it toward them. They stopped and looked at me and I wisked one then the other into their crates in to the car, bleeding profusely. I wrapped up my hand and took the dogs to my dad's and had him help me look them over. Rush was indeed unscathed. Arwen seemed to be as well. I put each back up in the car, took them home and kenneled them, and then went to the hospital. 

The next day, I found a deep neck/shoulder wound on Arwen.

If I could not see a bloody wound on my GSDs neck when I had just her out of the truck, and my Dad and I were BOTH looking her over, than how is a police officer supposed to figure out that the dog latched on to his dog's throat doesn't mean business???

If you have an interesting dog breed, and you want to keep it safe, (this includes GSDs), then there are no excuses for this. If the dog slips out of the door, then you need to train it to only go out the back where there is a fence, or that it must sit and get its leash on before you open the door. Slipping out is not responsible on the owner's part. If you have kids and dogs, you have to train your kids and your dogs. Sorry, it is unexcusable for a child to let the dog out the front door, and give it free access to passers by. If you cannot train your kids, train the dog not to go through the door without you letting him. If you cannot do that, then maybe kids and dogs are too much for you.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x (Nov 29, 2010)

Well said. I agree 100%. eace:


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

I would still blame the owners of the Pitbull. They did not properly control their dog. I would have liked to see more to the story for both sides may clear up some things. Not the way I would have handled it, but thats just me.


----------



## Girth (Jan 27, 2011)

Alachua County Sheriff's Deputy Rich Howell fatally shot a pitbull | Gainesville.com

The incident happened in Gainesville. I haven't read the Ocala article but I do know the Sheriff's department had both dogs taken to the emergency vet for care.


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

selzer said:


> If you have an interesting dog breed, and you want to keep it safe, (this includes GSDs), then there are no excuses for this. If the dog slips out of the door, then you need to train it to only go out the back where there is a fence, or that it must sit and get its leash on before you open the door. Slipping out is not responsible on the owner's part. If you have kids and dogs, you have to train your kids and your dogs. Sorry, it is unexcusable for a child to let the dog out the front door, and give it free access to passers by. If you cannot train your kids, train the dog not to go through the door without you letting him. If you cannot do that, then maybe kids and dogs are too much for you.


My point is, things happen that do not make the owners irresponsible. I stated a scenario that happened to a member here, and I don't think she or her family are irresponsible in the least. She came home from a trip and her younger sister (mid teens from the sounds of it?) let her dog out to greet her in the yard. Dog missed the car and accidentally ran into the street, getting hit by a car. The dog didn't bolt out the door because he was trained not to, but the sister thought it would be nice to let him greet his owner, it just went a little wrong. I'm sure the sister has great dog knowledge and manners and was taught what to do/not to do with the dog, but sometimes there are lapses in judgment, especially with kids/teenagers that you can't expect. 

Or perhaps the dog jumped through an open window, only covered by a screen. The family had no clue that the dog would do such a thing so certainly didn't avoid the screens. Does that make them irresponsible, too? They can't train the dog not to jump through screen doors when they don't even know he does it, so they shouldn't own dogs? Stuff happens. We don't know WHAT happened here, so I'm certainly not judging.


----------



## CassandGunnar (Jan 3, 2011)

If you follow the link to the actual story and read the comments, the owners of the dog that was killed are on there, spouting off against everyone who has anything negative to say or anyone who doesn't agree with their point of view. (You know, like sometimes happens on here)
At one point, both the owner and another woman with the same last name give out their phone number and challenge people to call them. They claim that their entire yard is fenced and they were there and witnessed the incident. They also claim that their dog didn't touch the K9.
I get the impression that they're not exactly the most responsible pet owners, but that's just my opinion.
If they were there at the time, why didn't they remove their dog (no recall perhaps).

This whole thing stinks, for everyone, but I guarantee the next you'll hear from these people is a mega lawsuit against the SO.


----------



## Girth (Jan 27, 2011)

Cass--

You are right. My wife's a Capt with the ACSO and got the call when the incident happened. They are already set for the lawsuit to follow. Having meet all the K9 deputies they are a sharp bunch of folks who know their business. The deputy did the right thing.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Arguing and fighting about who is right and who is wrong, who is responsible and who is not, at the end of the day there is a dog dead, that if their owners were more responsible, would not be. 

Pointing fingers and laying blame takes the responsibility off or the owners. When you own a dog, it is up to you to protect the dog. It is sad that a young person allowed the dog to run out and meet their owners coming home on vacation, and it just happened to run in the street and get hit by a car. I am sure that girl feels terrible, and kids do not make the best decisions, and accidents do happen. I highly doubt that they are suing the young family member or the driver of the automobile -- that is what this lady is spouting. She is pointing blame on the driver for running over her dog. Only the driver in this case was a deputy with a k-9 trying to do his job. 

Frankly, I would have charged the woman with an at large or uncontrolled dog. I think they felt bad because they had to shoot the dog and decided not to site them, and even are paying the vet bills. They probably will not be so nice next time this happens. And that is sad, because not everyone is extreme like this.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

suing the city for your own negligence will not bring your dog back. I guess if the dog is dead anyway, might as well choke up the court system and try to make some money off of the dog's demise. Every good owner maybe should forget about containing, and training, and just have a lawyer lined up to sue if something ever happens.

It is good we are mortal, the more exposure I have to some things, the more I like the idea that all of this is just temporary.


----------



## Girth (Jan 27, 2011)

It's the age we live in...unfortunately.


----------



## CassandGunnar (Jan 3, 2011)

Girth said:


> Cass--
> 
> You are right. My wife's a Capt with the ACSO and got the call when the incident happened. They are already set for the lawsuit to follow. Having meet all the K9 deputies they are a sharp bunch of folks who know their business. The deputy did the right thing.


I said before that I'm HUGELY biased, as a former K9 handler/sergeant so you can color my responses accordingly. There is usually a long line of officers who want to be in the K9 unit and only the good officers (normally) are selected.
I'm sure the deputy feels as bad as anyone else in this situation, but I don't see, given the little information available, that he had much choice. I'm 100% positive I'd have done the same thing if a dog (or a person, for that matter) placed my partner in that situation.
Imagine the bond you have with your dogs and what you would do to protect them, given how you feel about them and the amount of time you spend with them and what they mean to you and your family.
K9 handlers don't feel any different about their partners and, in most cases, spend a lot more time with them than the "average" person spends with their dog. You do what you have to do to keep them safe, while at the same time knowing that, at times, you have to send them into a situation where they may be hurt or even killed.
I've had people tell me that police K9's are "just another tool" and should be "used" as such. While that may be true on some level, it's not the same as a flashlight, tazer or a radio.
Again, if your dog is "just a dog" why do we get so attached that we'll go to any length to make them comfortable when they are sick or spend the money that we spend to prolong their life and make it better.

I think most people on this forum know and truly "get it" when it comes to the bond between your dog and you.


----------



## WarrantsWifey (Dec 18, 2010)

I had to write a comment. I'm sorry but that article was POORLY written. I feel so bad for both sides of the people involved! Very SAD.....


----------



## Bridget (Apr 5, 2004)

Amen Sue.

Sounds to me like a very sad thing, but there was really no help for it. If blame must be assigned, then the dog owner was to blame. If the partner was a human and was attacked by another human, trying to kill/injure him, I would also agree with the officer. I am also impressed by the department's attitude and their willingness to apologize, take the other dog to the vet, etc. So different from what we usually hear about.


----------



## WarrantsWifey (Dec 18, 2010)

Bridget said:


> I am also impressed by the department's attitude and their willingness to apologize, take the other dog to the vet, etc. So different from what we usually hear about.


I strongly agree with this statement.....


----------



## JKlatsky (Apr 21, 2007)

Did what they had to. This is another good reason why I don't leave my dogs unattended in the yard.


----------

