# Frustrated - Come ON People!



## Olivers mama

Virtually ALL of the cop-shoots-dog stories end up being locked. Because little attention is being paid to the facts (which we NEVER know at the outset) & they turn into cop advocates -vs- anti-cop. And, I'm not fooled. People posting these stories know very darn well how the thread will turn out. *I* know how they'll turn out, & I'm a newbie here.

We're all adults (that's a loose assumption) - but do you guys really LIKE the "teacher" coming in to tell us to shut up? I don't - but what else can they do when it always comes to personal blows?

Is there a way to discuss this topic without the crapola personal agendas? And let's be clear - I'm not against people posting their views. I admit up front, I'm normally behind the cops 100%, altho I am able to admit when they make an error. My dad was a cop who taught his daughters to shoot at an early age. I live in Liberal Calif & have a CCW. I am a cancer survivor, still fighting it. I am human. I make mistakes. As are cops. As are all of us.

Does this lock-out of the most recent cop-kills-dog thread mean that we can't discuss anything without resorting to infantile arguments made on a darn computer screen? Can we not stay on topic?

I scoured the net, looking for a picture to illustrate my point, trying to bring a little levity to the hapless arguments. No one even noticed - too busy with their own agendas.

If we - as a computer group - can't discuss this topic with a little intelligence, & less personal stuff - how in Hates do you expect the "professionals" to fix this problem? Isn't it long past time we all grew up?

I dare anyone to respond as an intelligent adult & stop this infantile arguing. Personally, I WANT to continue the discussion, as it hits close to home. But, let's get outta the sandbox, OK?


----------



## msvette2u

I agree, actually...and I think instead of sitting around on the computer, we get out and educate people. 

I think it would be great if there was a free dog behavior seminar offered to police departments. 
I'm not sure how to go about doing things like that (not a "starter" type person) but perhaps the Humane Societies local to the departments would be able to help.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

I read the thread and chose not to comment, why? To many ego's , he's right, she's right, why bother? The original topic got lost in the sauce.


----------



## Olivers mama

I agree TOTALLY. In fact, after work Friday, I went to our local PD to suggest some sort of seminars on this topic. And called a few local vets with whom I have ties to do the same thing. (Didn't contact AC in this area, as I have little, if no, respect for them here.)

But it's not just the cops that need to be educated - it's the population en masse. What we, as dog owners, should be responsible for. And for which we should be educated. Stop the mind-set where we blame everyone else for our woes. And take the initiative up front. If you don't like the way things go in your town, district, country, either be part of the solution, or move.

I want my house safe from criminals & rogue cops. I want me & mine safe. But that means *I* have to take precautions, as well. I cannot leave the welfare of me, my hubby, our cats & our crazy GSD in the hands of others. If I do everything possible to keep us safe & STILL something happens - mybad. If I do nothing but blame others while something else happens - mybad time 1,000.

Jakoda - see, that's an example. The original juice of the thread got "lost". It should not have been. Perhaps the moderators could take a look at that & attempt to bring us back on track. Then again, if we're all adults, why does it take a mod to tell us? Don't they have better things to do than babysit us?

I'm just sayin'...


----------



## msvette2u

LOL excellent, but makes too much sense! 
The issue is many people don't feel that way at all these days, it's very sad.



> I want my house safe from criminals & rogue cops. I want me & mine safe. But that means *I* have to take precautions, as well. I cannot leave the welfare of me, my hubby, our cats & our crazy GSD in the hands of others. If I do everything possible to keep us safe & STILL something happens - mybad. If I do nothing but blame others while something else happens - mybad time 1,000.


----------



## Freestep

Olivers mama said:


> Is there a way to discuss this topic without the crapola personal agendas?


Apparently not... I don't even read "cop" threads anymore, as they all end up the same way: everyone says the same thing they said in the last thread about cops. Sigh.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

> Jakoda - see, that's an example. The original juice of the thread got "lost". It should not have been. Perhaps the moderators could take a look at that & attempt to bring us back on track. Then again, if we're all adults, why does it take a mod to tell us? Don't they have better things to do than babysit us


Well I'm not the moderator for that section, but I would have done the same thing, why should "we" have to go thru umpteen pages of postings and delete all the 'bull' going back and forth? The "bull" should have never been started or continued.

And as for the mods having better things to do, I'm sure we all do, if people posted like adults in the first place, and stayed on track, well our jobs would be much much easier and this forum would have no need of moderators, but apparently that can't happen.

I do think 'freely educating', the PD or any other org, on dog behavior / how to approach certain situations, would be quite beneficial maybe time could be spent on 'how' to implement such a thing.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

The two threads on this forum that will ALWAYS end with being closed are threads about pitbulls and threads about cops. People either love or despise both and (usually) nothing you say will change that.

Also, any time someone posts a "fact" without a source, I would ask where they found this statistic at. 90% of the "facts" posted in arguments are misquoted/manipulated/ or taken from websites that are in no way reliable.

I am no longer even clicking on any thread about cops...the same 4-5 people post the same negative opinions and the same 2-3 people defend cops. What's the point? I agree to disagree lol


----------



## Twyla

Olivers mama said:


> Virtually ALL of the cop-shoots-dog stories end up being locked. Because little attention is being paid to the facts (which we NEVER know at the outset) & they turn into cop advocates -vs- anti-cop. And, I'm not fooled. People posting these stories know very darn well how the thread will turn out. *I* know how they'll turn out, & I'm a newbie here.


Yes, as I replied in the earlier thread I started on this topic: I knew there was a chance it could turn out to be the typical bashing thread, but had hopes (where have we heard that before  ) that it would remain on topic. Obviously we saw how well that did not work.

This is information that would be valuable to any of us on here, regardless if we lived in downtown major city or out in the middle of nowhere.

From experience of what has happened with any of the previous threads, the only way to even attempt to get this information is through a moderated thread. The moderators don't have the time for that, they have their own lives to live as well. And I can't blame any of the LEO on this forum for not wanting to contribute their knowledge to a thread and get mixed up in threads such as the previous ones.


----------



## Nikitta

Hm, I KNEW there was a reason I never post of "cop" threads.


----------



## Olivers mama

We have a Resident LEO on this forum - Sgt. Castle. Can we ask him to offer suggestions? For cops, as well as the general public.

Point is - cops are humans. And the private sector has no idea what it's like to lay your life on the line every day. Does that make it OK to kill someone's dog? Absolutely not. But I'm looking for ways to attempt to FIX the problem, not pitch a biatch AFTER the fact. 

And the fact of the matter is, the number of times this happens - percentage-wise - is far less than what is posted here. The way it sounds here, cops kill people's dogs on a daily basis without provocation - I think we know better than that.

LEOs need to be educated. Moreso, IMO - dog owners need to be educated. I don't "get" people keeping their dogs on a chain or in a crate all day. I want mine to roam the inside of our house like our cats do (ours are inside cats, BTW - poop inside, not in someone else's garden). If I wanted an animal on a string, I'd buy a stuffed toy. If I wanted an animal in a cage, I'd have a hamster.

Point is - this discussion is far too important to ignore or fight about. And taking it to the White House? Please-when was the last time any politician actually helped a situation? IMO, they only hinder. It's up to US - Joe Citizan & LEOs - to fix this. Certainly not politicans - esPECially in an election year.

Suggestions on how to help? Sgt Castle - are you out there to offer your help & expertise?


----------



## martemchik

Some of the risks you talk about are comical to me as well. I like to live my life on how likely is something bad to happen (in a sense). So...people like to rip on dog parks...I calculated in my life I've seen a dog fight at a park less than 1% of the time I've been there. In the dog-shot-by-cop thing its way less than 1% of dogs. So I just don't worry about things like that happening. I get upset at that single situation...but I'd like to know more facts which for some reason are never available or are just left out by the news channel reporting the story.

Many of the situations don't apply to me. I live in an apartment, my dog is never outside without me. I don't ever expect anyone to have contact with my dog unless I'm there. I also know my rights as a citizen of the United States but I'm also a pretty understanding person. If a maintenance guy had to enter my apartment without my knowledge (or even a phone call) and my dog did something to him, I'd question that maintenance guy and the apartment complex in their decision, but I'd also expect that the maintenance guy/apartment complex would understand that there is a high risk doing something like that (they know I have a GSD and a very well trained one at that).

I just really wish we had more information on that last case...I even said that depending on more info I could see it being the fault of the owner.


----------



## CassandGunnar

As a retired, 25 year sheriffs deputy/sergeant, I can offer one viewpoint.
Resource allocation: Where do you want your tax dollars spent? Oftentimes, training costs money that simply isn't available. Either it costs to bring someone in to conduct training or it requires overtime to personnel. In an environment where staff/programs are being cut, how items are prioritized is key.
Where I worked (MN) the demand for ongoing/continuing education for the following items exists: Firearms, use of force/control tactics, pursuit driving, legal updates, domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, mentally ill persons, elderly/dementia patients. This is just a sampling of what administration must provide training for.
I agree that handling of dogs is important, but where does it rank on the list of priorities?
Keep in mind, this is a community of "dog people".

As far as commenting on these threads, I left that drama behind when I went 10-7 for the last time. 
A lot of the news stories are so poorly written, it's hard to know what really happened.


----------



## msvette2u

> A lot of the news stories are so poorly written, it's hard to know what really happened.


This exactly!
And it's written solely for sensationalism...just to sell papers and get readers.


----------



## llombardo

The training is a big part of it, but I wonder if more training is offered if there is not animal control in the area? I would think that there should be one or the other. Where I live there is no animal control, the police handle it and are trained to do so. They also carry stun guns and they are more likely to use those. I have been in this town for about 5 years and I have never seen a stray dog...cats yes, but no dogs. I think based on the need is whether a town will have animal control or not. The police in my area are definitely trained and paid well and they do a magnificent job.


----------



## Packen

Typically on boards you cannot talk against cops or breeders, strange combination but it is fact.


----------



## wildo

x0emiroxy0x said:


> 90% of the "facts" posted in arguments are misquoted/manipulated/ or taken from websites that are in no way reliable.


Do you have a source for that "fact?" :rofl:


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

wildo said:


> Do you have a source for that "fact?" :rofl:


Wow, what a hypocrite I am! lol I wish you could hear my voice rather than just reading my words! In person I always like "like 90 percent' or "like half the people" but when I type I try not to use the word like because it isn't correct. I was not meaning the 90 % as a fact, just a guess and my opinion from all the convos!

Thanks for pointing that out :headbang:


----------



## Olivers mama

Packen said:


> Typically on boards you cannot talk against cops or breeders, strange combination but it is fact.


I don't know where you got THAT idea - that you can't talk against cops? REALLY?? Have you read any of the cop-shoots-dog threads?

That's beside the point - I'm looking for answers. Not the typical "it's all the cops' fault' BS. I want something I can take to our local PD.


----------



## selzer

See, I don't think the site is made up of people who either love cops or hate them. I think there are people everywhere in the middle. 

If you cannot see the faults the dogs you have bred have, you are probably kennel blind. That means you will do nothing to deal with the problems. It is a bad situation. If you blindly believe that if a cop did something it must have been ok, then again, it is not a good place to be in, because you can't fix something if you can't see the leaks. 

But as for cops shooting dogs. As for how cops tend to manage dogs in general, personally, I think that we are freaking out over a couple of isolated incidents. 

I did drag it a little off topic when I took offense to the idea that you would have to be an LEO to question an LEO. But I think threads are going to jump around a bit, and I really don't see the problem with that. When a thread becomes fixated on a tangent and then gets nasty, well yeah that's a problem. 

One last thought. When my SUV dropped dead on 480 just before rush hour, I called my sister and then the cops. They felt the best thing to do was to get me out of the vehicle and I could wait for the tow truck at a gas station -- hours of waiting in the vehicle meant that much more likely to get splattered in it. Thankfully no one hit my car. But the point of this story was that the cops asked me 4 separate times if I had a dog or dogs in the car. It was summer, and the dogs would have died in there. I think they wanted to make sure that I wouldn't be so distracted by the whole scenario that I would leave my animals to roast in the car. I didn't have any dogs with me. But the cops definitely were dog-people, we discussed their dogs on route to the gas station they were going to drop me at.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

Glad you are safe and your car wasn't hit!


----------



## selzer

Olivers mama said:


> I don't know where you got THAT idea - that you can't talk against cops? REALLY?? Have you read any of the cop-shoots-dog threads?
> 
> That's beside the point - I'm looking for answers. Not the typical "it's all the cops' fault' BS. I want something I can take to our local PD.


If you are looking at it from a perspective that LEOs can do no wrong, then maybe you can look at those threads and say people are bashing cops. But I really did not see it. If I said, being an LEO is a dangerous job, but there are other dangerous professions too -- someone takes offense at that? I personally have heard of more farmers getting seriously injured and killed than police officers, at least in my county. There are a lot of dangerous jobs out there, and suggesting that is somehow a dig on police officers, well just wow. 

Not waiting for the jury to come back with a verdict to have an opinion is just fine -- unless it has to do with a police officer?

And, well, suggesting that a police officer over-reacted, or under-reacted, or made a bad decision, well that makes you a cop-hater. Police officers are humans, they make mistakes, sometimes they over-react, sometimes they under-react, sometimes they make bad decisions and you really do not have to be an LEO to have an opinion on that. And suggesting that ONE police officer made a mistake in this case, certainly isn't bashing the profession.


----------



## msvette2u

All you are doing is restarting the entire thing, selzer.
As the OP in _this_ thread said - 



> That's beside the point - I'm looking for answers. Not the typical "it's all the cops' fault' BS. I want something I can take to our local PD.


----------



## Olivers mama

Selzer, come on - even Helen Keller could see all these threads turn into the pro-cops vs anti-cops.

I am not asking that we choose 1 or the other. I am asking for suggestions to take to those in charge to help rectify the situation. And I've already said that these incidents seem isolated here. When, in reality, they don't happen all that often.

What I am asking is: 1)What can we suggest to PDs to lower these incidents even more & 2)What can / should WE as dog owners be responsible for, in terms of protecting our dogs/home/family?

I don't believe cops are out shooting dogs at random. But I also believe J.Q.Public needs to be proactive. In other words, certain breeds make some peoples' hackles go up. GSDs are in that group. How come none of the "stories" listed here involve poodles? Or Shih Tsu's? They're always about Pitties, GSDs, Rotties, etc. (Altho I can say, from personal experience while a Vet Tech, I didn't fear the bigger breeds. More often than not, we "Red-Dotted" the cage tags of the Barking Slippers. Red Dot = Bites.)

I'm not saying cops do no wrong. I'm ASKING what can be done - in terms of training for cops AND dog owners - to lower the incidents even more. It may not happen very often, but I don't want the next incident to be at my house. I'm asking for input, for suggestions. Not mockery or belittlement.


----------



## Mrs.K

CassandGunnar said:


> As a retired, 25 year sheriffs deputy/sergeant, I can offer one viewpoint.
> Resource allocation: Where do you want your tax dollars spent? Oftentimes, training costs money that simply isn't available. Either it costs to bring someone in to conduct training or it requires overtime to personnel. In an environment where staff/programs are being cut, how items are prioritized is key.
> Where I worked (MN) the demand for ongoing/continuing education for the following items exists: Firearms, use of force/control tactics, pursuit driving, legal updates, domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, mentally ill persons, elderly/dementia patients. This is just a sampling of what administration must provide training for.
> I agree that handling of dogs is important, but where does it rank on the list of priorities?
> Keep in mind, this is a community of "dog people".
> 
> As far as commenting on these threads, I left that drama behind when I went 10-7 for the last time.
> A lot of the news stories are so poorly written, it's hard to know what really happened.


Maybe they should start teaching cops how to disarm a double amputee in a wheel chair from a pen before shooting him. 
FOX News - Top Stories - Houston Cop Kills Double Amputee in Wheelchair

I am sorry... I do have a lot of respect for the law enforcement, heck I always wanted to be a cop myself. However, that doesn't change the fact that there are a heck of a lot of incompetent, trigger happy gunslingers out there and those are the cops we all have to worry about because you never know what they perceive as a threat and that's just scary. 

You have the same incompetent people in the military, EMS, as Behaviorists, Dog Trainers... everywhere in the world, but they don't carry guns and have the authority to shoot or arrest you.


----------



## msvette2u

> But I also believe J.Q.Public needs to be proactive. In other words, certain breeds make some peoples' hackles go up. GSDs are in that group. How come none of the "stories" listed here involve poodles? Or Shih Tsu's? They're always about Pitties, GSDs, Rotties, etc. (Altho I can say, from personal experience while a Vet Tech, I didn't fear the bigger breeds. More often than not, we "Red-Dotted" the cage tags of the Barking Slippers. Red Dot = Bites.)


Well there is something to the "OH, come on in, they don't bite", because I've dealt with it even before my ACO days!
I delivered pizza in my early 20s and I appreciated folks who kept their dogs put up, and if I asked "Does it bite", answered in the affirmative.

People do have a blind spot when it comes to their dogs, because the dog typically doesn't bite...the owner! 

I think education is going to have to be multipronged.
I'd ask about doing a training seminar, on 2-3 different days in a department so overtime isn't having to be paid, and they aren't having to come in on their days off.
Make it a "public service announcement" type situation, even suggesting having a news story on it - kind of a "preemptive" training session.

I'd start by saying, "Not sure if you've noticed all the news stories lately about these dogs being shot, and was thinking perhaps we could come in and do a short training session". On the other end, ask about putting PSAs out on TV or whatever, and if officers saw citizens were working on prevention, maybe they'd work harder.

I can't imagine how many times criminals have "sicced" their dogs on officers, or at the very least, didn't stop the dogs at the door or whatever, so maybe that plays into the preemptive shootings that have taken place.


----------



## msvette2u

Mrs.K said:


> Maybe they should start teaching cops how to disarm a double amputee in a wheel chair from a pen before shooting him.
> FOX News - Top Stories - Houston Cop Kills Double Amputee in Wheelchair
> 
> I am sorry... I do have a lot of respect for the law enforcement, heck I always wanted to be a cop myself. However, that doesn't change the fact that there are a heck of a lot of incompetent, trigger happy gunslingers out there and those are the cops we all have to worry about because you never know what they perceive as a threat and that's just scary.
> 
> You have the same incompetent people in the military, EMS, as Behaviorists, Dog Trainers... everywhere in the world, but they don't carry guns and have the authority to shoot or arrest you.


With all due respect to you and this situation, this is really OFF TOPIC and will just succeed in taking this thread in a direction it wasn't meant to go.


----------



## Mrs.K

msvette2u said:


> With all due respect to you and this situation, this is really OFF TOPIC and will just succeed in taking this thread in a direction it wasn't meant to go.


That was towards the training money and where it should go. Apparently there is a bigger need for training than just for "How not to shoot a dog". 

It is what it is. They need training, lot's of it. Some stuff will be neglected. Question is, which training do you want to be neglected? The State is broke, departments are broke and have to fundraise to even afford K9 programs. Cops are laid off... 

So what exactly do we expect if the money isn't there, it isn't there. Maybe just maybe, somebody should check at the root problem. 

For example, 10 000 bucks for a green dog. That is ludicrous. Back in Germany, my breeder sells his dogs, to the German police for 1300 Euros because that is the budget they have. 

So why in the world is the police paying that much money for a green dog? We wouldn't pay that much for a green dog... that is one of the issues and that money could be saved for training the cops. 

I am not trying to take this topic to a certain term because I honestly believe there is a much bigger issue than just "cops shooting dogs" and you can find the same issue within the education system or health care system.


----------



## msvette2u

You speak as if the system is broken and in some ways I'm sure it is.
The legal system period could stand some improvements, but in the situation you posted the link to, there's a legit reason the guy was shot, it's not lack of training, it's just how the situation played out. 
I remember a few years ago where a mentally handicapped boy was shot in his yard because he had a toy gun that looked very real. The cops thought it was real, and when you saw it, you'd think that too. It wasn't pink plastic, it was black and looked real.

Would you say more training would have prevented that? 

Sometimes things aren't "right" or "wrong", they just _are._

PS. The details may be wrong on the shooting, it's been a few years. Just in case they are wrong. 
But it happens, that's the main point.


----------



## Syaoransbear

I have no stigma against cops at all. I just disagree with shooting dogs, because I would always take a bite before shooting a dog. I'd rather end up in the hospital than wonder if that dog was just bluffing and I killed a very beloved family member for no reason, and because it would probably be easier than having to go through some sort of investigation. But that's just me.

My parent's friend have a very protective german shepherd that is a nasty resource guarder. On several occasions she has growled at me or attacked my dog, because she resource guards her owners. And she's just kind of crazy. One time she growled at me when I was half asleep in a chair. Another time when I was eating supper. Both times I was paying zero attention to her and was completely minding my own business. She's just plain unstable, and probably the only dog I'm afraid of. I make a point to stay away from her.

A few days ago we went to retrieve my dad's boat from his friend's acreage where this dog lives. We called first, and they put the dog away otherwise the dog would eat us since they weren't going to be home when we picked up the boat. We arrived there and the dog was put away and no one was home.

But while we were getting the boat, the son came home. They forgot to tell the son not to let the dog out and he had no idea we were there. So here we were on their property trying to attach my dad's boat to the truck when we see their german shepherd come around the corner. She went crazy and charged us. We didn't really know what to do, so we started making happy noises and saying "Hi puppy!!", and then we continued with what we were doing and pretended to be uninterested in the dog. Miraculously, she stopped before reaching us, briefly wagged her tail, and then left.

I thought if there was any dog in the world that was likely to bite me, it was for sure this one. And during the most likely scenario for her to bite, she didn't, even though I was positive she was going to. I would always take that chance instead of shooting the dog first.

I don't care if someone is a cop. I just never agree with shooting a dog that only had potential to bite, because the vast majority of dogs are all bark and not bite.

Personally I generally see very little cop bashing, but I see oodles of people misinterpreting people to be cop bashing when they are only bashing the cop's actions. Just because you disagree with what a cop did doesn't mean you hate cops. I think those threads are a good thing, because people are going to be a little more aware of what can happen and they can try to plan for it. I think it took me several cop-shooting-dog threads before I seriously sat down and thought up what I could do to prevent it.


----------



## Mrs.K

msvette2u said:


> You speak as if the system is broken and in some ways I'm sure it is.
> The legal system period could stand some improvements, but in the situation you posted the link to, there's a legit reason the guy was shot, it's not lack of training, it's just how the situation played out.
> I remember a few years ago where a mentally handicapped boy was shot in his yard because he had a toy gun that looked very real. The cops thought it was real, and when you saw it, you'd think that too. It wasn't pink plastic, it was black and looked real.
> 
> Would you say more training would have prevented that?
> 
> Sometimes things aren't "right" or "wrong", they just _are._
> 
> PS. The details may be wrong on the shooting, it's been a few years. Just in case they are wrong.
> But it happens, that's the main point.


Honestly, I think it is broken. But it's not only the US System. It's everywhere. Greece, Germany, France... anywhere you turn and look, the systems seem to be broken. 

However, I don't want to make this too political. 

Speaking from experience, I used to sit in a wheelchair for a year because of my right leg. People that have seen me personally may have noticed a slight limp, sometimes even a moderate limp. It doesn't impair me, I can do what i have to do and even do SAR, however, the limp is there and that accident is the reason why I'm not a Cop or in the Military. 

Anyhow, I know what it is like to sit in a wheelchair and depending what type of wheel chair you have, if you are an athlete or not. 

Anyhow, that guy had one arm and one leg. He was waving with a metal object which turned out to be a pen. How hard can it possibly be to overturn and restrain a double amputee with one leg and one arm. This doesn't go towards you but "Give me a break!" 
I know, I could have easily been overturned and restrained, no need to shoot, just knock that darn wheelchair over but don't shoot!

Anyhow, since I don't want this to turn political, I'll leave it at that. I just wanted to make a point that I believe that there is a much bigger issue at hand than just "Cops shooting dogs".


----------



## Olivers mama

I live in Calif - where we overpay for everything. At least in my region, we don't pay $10K for a K9, so I don't know where that came from. Another example of people moving their mouths without benefit of facts.

Saying a cop is wrong for shooting a dog is not bashing. Demeaning an entire profession is bashing.

I did not start this thread to be pro- or anti-cop. I started it to search for answers to help us all.  Private citizens who happen to have large dogs, LEOs - ALL of us. I'm asking for suggestions - I like the idea of training seminars. PSA to serve all of us would be helpful. TV & the web are the best places to start, IMO. I don't think it would hurt any of us to re-think our practices regarding our homes & dogs.

And this isn't just about cops. It's about any emergency that may happen at our home or nearby. Firemen. EMS. If we need help & dial 9-1-1, don't we want/need those people to be able to enter to help us (as we've asked them by dialing for an emergency) without being harmed? And if so, how can we turn this around?


----------



## Mrs.K

Olivers mama said:


> I live in Calif - where we overpay for everything. At least in my region, we don't pay $10K for a K9, so I don't know where that came from. Another example of people moving their mouths without benefit of facts.
> 
> Saying a cop is wrong for shooting a dog is not bashing. Demeaning an entire profession is bashing.
> 
> I did not start this thread to be pro- or anti-cop. I started it to search for answers to help us all. Private citizens who happen to have large dogs, LEOs - ALL of us. I'm asking for suggestions - I like the idea of training seminars. PSA to serve all of us would be helpful. TV & the web are the best places to start, IMO. I don't think it would hurt any of us to re-think our practices regarding our homes & dogs.
> 
> And this isn't just about cops. It's about any emergency that may happen at our home or nearby. Firemen. EMS. If we need help & dial 9-1-1, don't we want/need those people to be able to enter to help us (as we've asked them by dialing for an emergency) without being harmed? And if so, how can we turn this around?


the question is, was it always like that and do we just now find about these cases more and more because of the fast presentation of news on the internet, or is this just something that started happening with the increased ownership of dogs?


----------



## GSDolch

Watching an old episode of Bones last night, Bones and Booth go into the killers home and there is his Doberman barking at them like he's going to eat them. Booth proceedes to tell the dogs "Oh come on, sit down or I'm gonna shoot you!!!"

The dog complies.....


See, that's all it takes.


----------



## Olivers mama

VERY GOOD point, Mrs K - hadn't thought about that! 

GSDolch - so we need to train our dogs better?!  BTW - I appreciate the levity - helps us all (or maybe just me ) in finding solutions. When you're fighting cancer, Humor is indeed, a necessary part of treatment!


----------



## GSDolch

Olivers mama said:


> VERY GOOD point, Mrs K - hadn't thought about that!
> 
> GSDolch - so we need to train our dogs better?!  BTW - I appreciate the levity - helps us all (or maybe just me ) in finding solutions. When you're fighting cancer, Humor is indeed, a necessary part of treatment!



*nods* I couldn't help but bust out laughing, my husband looked at me like I was crazy, "It's not that funny"....I just told him it was a dog thing and left it at that lol.

If only it _were_ that easy.


----------



## lhczth

IF people actually want these threads to remain open then people need to remain civil to one another. I would bet that the majority of people posting in these threads would NEVER say the things they do if they were face to face. 

IF people can not remain civil then the moderators and Admin have two options. We can go through and edit posts and send a LOT of warnings, probably putting many of you on "time outs" and even banning a few of you (since you have run out of "chances") OR we close the thread. 

So, those are your options. You guys make the choice. 

ADMIN Lisa


----------



## LouCastle

The OP asked me to come to this thread and give some insight from the LEO POV. I retired as a Sergeant with nearly 30 years of service on two police agencies. I spent one year as a Reserve Police Officer and three years as a full-time Police Officer at Azusa (California) PD, and the remainder of my time at the Culver City PD in the City of Culver City, (also in CA). In addition to working as a Patrol Officer, I've worked many specialized assignments including as a K-9 handler, K-9 Trainer and Instructor, as a Traffic Officer, in Vice and Narcotics, SWAT, Detectives, as an investigator on SIT (a liability/shooting investigation team), Field Training Officer, Personnel and Training, and Department Rangemaster and Use of Force Instructor. 

While I think that education programs that teach LEOs how to deal with dogs are a good idea, I don't think that they'll be effective on those who are afraid of dogs. Through my experience as a K−9 trainer, I learned how to prevent a dog from biting but I know that it's not going to work on all dogs. If I come up against one that it doesn’t work on, I'm would not risk my career or my life by "taking a bite" to prevent having to shoot a strange dog that was trying to bite me. I've seen too many dog bites up close and personal. Usually in these cases where an officer shoots a dog, there's no one around who is going to quickly call the dog off if he stops fighting. The bite will go on until the dog tires or he's stopped by the officer. In many of these cases, the officer is alone and so the burden of preventing or stopping the bite would be on him. It's far easier to stop a dog before a bite occurs, than it is to stop a dog that is already attached to you. 

Training may help some officers deal with these situations but you are never going to make an impression on someone who is very fearful of dogs. You can't pick and choose who you send on calls where dogs might be present. Since most of those officers have seen the damage that the police dogs can inflict on someone who is fighting the dog, they're even more afraid than they were when the bites were only in their brain. 

As to why those threads get closed, it has nothing to do with being pro or anti police. It has to do with some people letting their emotions get the better of them and turning arguments into personal attacks and making rude comments. Sometimes this happens when they feel they are losing the argument. That behavior isn't limited to these types of discussions, the Ecollar debates frequently go down that road too. 

Rarely are all the facts given in a news story. It's their job to sell advertising and to stay in business. When I was a journalism student and then a stringer reporter/photographer for a couple of newspapers, the three most important things in journalism were "accuracy, accuracy and accuracy." Now the direction has changed and the slogan is "If it bleeds, it leads." 

So saying something like (to the effect) "Couldn't they just tip his wheelchair over." (to address one such comment about an incident that was brought up) just shows that the author may be ill informed. We used to deal regularly with a man in a wheelchair who would barricade himself in a blind hallway, making it impossible to tip his chair over. So the answer is, "Perhaps they could and perhaps they couldn't." Assuming that they could, and then making statements based on that may just cloud the issue. 

It's pretty easy to sit in the safety of one's living room and spend 30 minutes going over a decision an officer made in an instant, that may have cost him his life. Instead, _"The 'reasonableness' of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular situation."_ (Graham v. Connor − the USSC decision that gives guidelines for the use of force by LEOs). 

As someone who personally arranged for the firing of several cops who "did the wrong thing" I'm hardly a "The cops are always right" kinda guy. I know that there are some who do the wrong thing sometimes, and a few who do the wrong thing frequently. We're chosen from the same gene pool as everyone else. We have the same flaws and faults as the rest of the people walking the planet. I like to think that because of the rigorous background investigations that most cops go through to get the, job that most of the bad guys get weeded out, but still, some slip through. It's never going to be a perfect system. Even if everyone tried to do the right thing, there would be mistakes. 

So I really don't have any definitive answers to the problem of LEOs shooting dogs that they think are going to bite them. Since we weren't there, we shouldn't be passing judgment on those officers without having all the facts necessary to do so. Rarely does the average news story have enough information to make an intelligent decision. Those incidents will continue to occur until we get armament that takes people and dogs who are attacking us out of play quickly and reliably, without killing them. Such a tool does not exist at this time. 

As far as threads that get locked, that's a matter of self−control, something that not everyone uses. I think it's very much a matter of people making assumptions without having enough facts to base them on, and running with what they "think" happened.


----------



## GSDolch

While I agree that we should have as many facts as possible before we pass judgement, the public can't keep quiet about something that they feel is wrong. To do so, or to be told that we shouldn't voice our opinion about something IMO does a disservice. Sometimes, without public outcry, an incident will go without an investigation and then, if the event its a bad cop, is left to continue to do as he has been doing.

In all honesty, I only see a few people who seem to be either "pro" or "anti" with many more people taking a middle ground. Cops are people, but sometimes, nothing is done about a cop that does something wrong until people begin to speak up.


----------



## Mrs.K

> So saying something like (to the effect) "Couldn't they just tip his wheelchair over." (to address one such comment about an incident that was brought up) just shows that the author may be ill informed. We used to deal regularly with a man in a wheelchair who would barricade himself in a blind hallway, making it impossible to tip his chair over. So the answer is, "Perhaps they could and perhaps they couldn't." Assuming that they could, and then making statements based on that may just cloud the issue.


That would be me, but honestly, I cannot see a guy, with just one arm and one leg to be so dangerous that a cop feels the need to shoot the guy, especially when it turns out that that metal object was just a pen. Seriously... again, I am not anti-cop but maybe cases like that should be used for training and maybe these are the cases that should be learned from. If you have to shoot a double amputee in a wheel chair... personally to me, that is unacceptable. Unless he's got a bomb belt around his chest and threatens to pull that trigger. 

Plus, doesn't a cop learn self-defense? How disarm somebody? What about non-lethal methods like pelet guns or a that taser? 

Sorry, I can't keep my mouth shut about a case like that. It makes me extremely angry. There are so many other options to deal with a double amputee in a wheelchair. Lethal Force should be the LAST OPTION!

But whatever, I'm out. Before this one gets locked too.


----------



## LouCastle

GSDolch said:


> While I agree that we should have as many facts as possible before we pass judgement, the public can't keep quiet about something that they feel is wrong. To do so, or to be told that we shouldn't voice our opinion about something IMO does a disservice. Sometimes, without public outcry, an incident will go without an investigation and then, if the event its a bad cop, is left to continue to do as he has been doing.


No one is asking anyone to _"keep quiet."_ But how about NOT jumping to conclusions and assuming the worst, before knowing the evidence? It's one thing to call for an investigation, it's quite another to "rush to judgment."


----------



## LouCastle

Mrs.K said:


> honestly, I cannot see a guy, with just one arm and one leg to be so dangerous that a cop feels the need to shoot the guy, especially when it turns out that that metal object was just a pen.


I've dealt with folks like this and they can be as dangerous as anyone else. They may lack the mobility, but if one is close enough and they have a stabbing weapon, it's simply a matter of pushing it into the officer's body. Stabbing in this fashion with any weapon is extremely dangerous. 

As to _"especially when it turns out that that metal object was just a pen."_ I have a couple of comments. A pen can be just as deadly as a knife, when it's used against the right target on the body. And the officer DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A PEN until after the incident was over. You can't reasonably base your opinion on what the officer did, knowing what you know NOW. In order to do that, you have to place yourself in his position knowing ONLY what he knew at the moment he decided to use force. If you want to be fair, rational and reasonable, that is. 



Mrs.K said:


> Seriously... again, I am not anti-cop but maybe cases like that should be used for training and maybe these are the cases that should be learned from.


Such cases are extremely rare. But the facts remain that while you are unable or unwilling to _"see ... danger"_ here, it exists. 



Mrs.K said:


> If you have to shoot a double amputee in a wheel chair... personally to me, that is unacceptable.


That's because you're not there, you're not the one dealing with him and you've conveniently forgotten that he was using a deadly weapon to stab the officer. It makes no difference that he's in a wheel chair or that he's a double amputee. ONLY his actions and his capabilities are to be judged when deciding to use force and what level of force to use. If the officer is close enough, it's easy to stab him with a pen, potentially killing him. 



Mrs.K said:


> Unless he's got a bomb belt around his chest and threatens to pull that trigger.


This is a typical response from someone who's really never been in many dangerous situations and thinks that things happen in real life, as they do on TV and in the movies. 



Mrs.K said:


> Plus, doesn't a cop learn self-defense? How disarm somebody? What about non-lethal methods like pelet guns or a that taser?


The best martial artist on the planet will not try to take someone on who has a stabbing weapon unless he is cornered and has no choice. Again, this is a case of too much TV and not really knowing how these incidents occur. A stabbing instrument, such as a screw driver, a pencil, a knife, an ice pick or a pen constitute deadly force. The correct response to them, is deadly force, NOT _"self defense" or a "Taser" especially in a rapidly unfolding situation. 

*IF *there is time to form a plan then the Taser might be an option, but in the heat of the moment, it's not. They only provide one shot, often fail and are ineffective at close ranges. In "drive stun" mode (where the Taser is pressed against the body of the suspect) it relies on pain to be effective. If the suspect is not responsive to pain, it has no effect. 

I’m not sure what "pellet gun" you're talking about, (perhaps a shotgun with less lethal munitions) but again, that would be an option IF THERE WAS TIME. If the assault from the suspect comes as a surprise, it's not. 

Keep in mind that police officers don't decide what weapon to use arbitrarily. Suspects decide what happens to them. If they submit to arrest, then no force (beyond force of voice) is used. If they bring out a deadly weapon, we do the same. 



Mrs.K said:



Sorry, I can't keep my mouth shut about a case like that. It makes me extremely angry. There are so many other options to deal with a double amputee in a wheelchair. Lethal Force should be the LAST OPTION!

Click to expand...

Not if the officer is very close, as he would be while making an arrest, and the stabbing instrument comes out as a surprise to the officer. Sorry, you're entitled to hold any opinion that you like, but here, your opinion, is wrong. The FIRST OPTION to deadly force, is deadly force. You don't have enough facts to reasonably have such an opinion. You base it on two absolutes, 1. "wheelchair" and 2. "double amputee." NEITHER prevents a suspect from stabbing an officer who comes close to them to make an arrest. 

The emphases are mine in the following quotations. 

Here are some updates to the incident. From this source, Double amputee in wheelchair shot dead by Houston police - Boston News | Examiner.com



He trapped an officer in a corner.

Click to expand...

Per this video the incident happened at a "group home for the mentally ill." https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eRRAl0I1wEg 
The suspect suffered from Schizophrenia and had threatened workers in his facilty with violence. One of his caretakers, when asked if he ever felt threatened by the suspect, responded, "he had a temper. He could fly off once in a while." The suspect "cornered the two officers in the room after numerous reqauest (from them) to drop the pen (they didn't know it was a pen at the time) one of htem fired. 

Per this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GLt1qYZxmHg

The officer who fired said, "The man was waving something in a threatening manner." This video cites a statement from the manager of the facility that the suspect suffered from schizophrenia and bipoliar disorder. Per the reporter, "The quarters in there (in the home) were very cramped, which was a factor in that officer's decision."

I'm sure that some are picturing a neat, well groomed, well dressed man in a well lit, large room but take a look at the photo of the suspect in this article from the Houston Chronicle, (I’m certainly not saying that his unkept appearance gave permission for the shooting, but it certainly contributes to how the officers perceived him). Double Amputee In Wheelchair Shot Dead By Houston Police | Texas Liberal | a Chron.com blog 




A schizophrenic double amputee waving a writing pen from his wheelchair was fatally shot early Saturday by a Houston police officer, authorities said….Police were called to the East End personal care home around 2 a.m. because resident Brian Claunch had become agitated after his caretaker refused to give him a soda and a cigarette…. *”He was approaching them aggressively,” *said Houston Police Department spokes*woman Jodi Silva. *“He was attempting to stab them *with what is now found to be a pen.”..Claunch, who had been living at the home for the past 18 months with two other men, *ignored officers’ commands *and made threats against them and other occupants of the home… * Claunch trapped one of the officers in a corner, * authorities said…Claunch told him that he lost his right leg to just above the knee and all of his right arm when he was hit by a train… The victim, who was in his mid-40s, came to the East End personal care home more than a year ago, as part of a placement by the Harris County guardianship program. …Claunch liked to “doodle” and two days ago…(was) given…a black felt pen to draw with.

Click to expand...

From this source, Houston police fatally shoot threatening wheelchair-bound amputee in head - CNN




A Houston police officer fatally shot in the head a schizophrenic, wheelchair-bound double amputee * threatening people with a pen at a group home for the mentally ill after authorities said the man advanced on the officer's partner, * police said.

The shooting occurred early Saturday morning after police responded to a call that resident Brian Claunch was acting aggressively after his caretaker refused to give him a cigarette and a soda, the owner of the home and police said.

* "The officers made verbal commands for the suspect to drop whatever he had in his hand, to stay still and to speak with the officers, but the suspect continued to make threats," * Jodi Silva, a police spokeswoman, told CNN affiliate KTRK in Houston. 

Claunch, who lost an arm and a leg in a train accident, * trapped one officer with his wheelchair in the corner of a room "where he couldn't get out," * said a Houston police department spokesperson who declined to be identified. * The double amputee was "advancing towards" the officers and "refusing to show his hands." * 

According to police accounts reported in the media, including by KTRK, * Claunch attempted to stab the officer with an object that turned out to be a pen. * 

Officer Matt Marin, "in fear of the safety of his partner and the safety of himself, discharges his duty weapon, striking the suspect," Silva said.

Click to expand...

_


----------



## GSDolch

LouCastle said:


> No one is asking anyone to _"keep quiet."_ But how about NOT jumping to conclusions and assuming the worst, before knowing the evidence? It's one thing to call for an investigation, it's quite another to "*rush to judgment*."



Personally I see that as a moral thing. /shrug

People judge, its the way of it. Jumping to conclusions that are not there, yes, I agree with you, but its because people are making judgements based on what they see or hear that things get noticed. Good or bad though is completely situational, sometimes needed, sometimes not.

When someone tells others I shouldn't have an opinion because I'm not a cop (not saying that you have said that) and I don't "understand", I equate that with them saying to "keep quiet" on the matter.


----------



## msvette2u

I take it you mean me. 

I never said "keep quiet", I said, if you were a police officer or worked with them, you'd understand better, it's about perspective. 

While we pet owners are concerned with, and focus on our dogs, police officers work with _people_. 
Their job is to protect people, not dogs. 

It'd be like an ambulance driving along the road, and someone's dog just got ran over so they expect the ambulance to stop and help. Maybe you'd get a dog lover and he'd try, but maybe you'd get someone who doesn't even like dogs and they'd say "get it to the vet". Or maybe they are on their way to a traffic accident and they don't have time to stop and help the dog. 
Either way, that's not _their _job, is it? Their job is to work with humans. 

Cops are being payed to protect human lives, and dog lives get in the way at times, unfortunately. 
That's what animal control is for, to work with and get the dogs out of the way, and unfortunately most often a/c has to be called out to deal with the dogs. By the time they arrive, things have already happened.


----------



## Syaoransbear

The guy was in a wheelchair, how can you be trapped? You just.... jump over lol.


----------



## Olivers mama

First - Thank You, Sgt. Castle, for reading this thread & offering a lot more insight than I'd had before. An officer friend had explained this to me similarly but, not ever having been in such situations, I would not have been able to explain it coherently.

Actually, your explanation just makes me have even stronger thoughts that dog owners need to accept the reality for what it is - & take precautions with our critters. I watched my next-door neighbor's Barking Slipper run up to the mailman & attached itself to his leg. The whole time, the owner was standing there, saying her dog had never done that before. Then got mad at the mailman when he said he'd make an incident report & wouldn't deliver parcels to her front door any more - she'd have to retrtieve them herself at the post office. After *I* (she did nothing) kicked the dog off the mailman's leg & he left, she was indignant that he'd talked to her in the manner he did. I asked WTH she was talking about, when we BOTH knew that darn dog snapped at EVERYone!! And had been doing so for years! The mailman's "lucky" it was a little runt & not a GSD, or Pittie, etc. And my neighbor's lucky the mailman was not an armed LEO.

Point is, a LEO cannot take the word of a dog owner that his dog doesn't bite. And msvette is right - LEOs are there to protect humans, not dogs. What WE need to do, is take the necessary steps to ensure the safety of all.

Just as an aside, my former BIL is a double amputee from the VietNam war. With PTSD. Strong upper body & an even stronger mind-set when angry. Wheelchair or not, there is NO way I'd approach him - even if I could see no weapon - when he was in 1 of his 'episodes'. Dangerous, to say the least.

Thanks very much again, Sgt. Castle, for your time & background.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

> Point is, a LEO cannot take the word of a dog owner that his dog doesn't bite.


I soooooo agree with that ^^..How many people say "oh he's friendly!",,and then have a big issue,,if I had some big german shepherd charging me and the owner yelled "he's friendly' I wouldn't believe him

Just to add, I don't condone anyone going nilly willy shooting dogs no matter who they are, but I'm sure since COPS are HUMAN, their are certainly some who may be afraid of dogs and have only moments to react


----------



## GSDolch

Actually msv I wasn't talking about anyone in particular, if I were I would say so, and with quotes if possible.

But since you mentioned it, I think your stance only works if you are talking to someone with whom you yourself KNOW about and their own experiences. IMO, it shouldn't be a prerequisite for anyone to have to make their experiences known when stating an opinion or judgement on a matter. It's one thing to mention it I guess, but to many people on the internet have an elitist attitude and it turns into "what I say is better because...." nonsense. But that's my take it or leave it stance I guess.


----------



## msvette2u

The reason I say it is that they have a much different point of view than your average pet owner. And I say it because people are up in arms over these things and it's like...when I told my husband about this situation, he completely understood why they'd shoot a dog, when the dog is in the way of their doing their duty, of them doing their job. My husband's perspective is as a Paramedic, not a dog owner (although we have plenty of dogs, _and_ rescue dogs). 

When out doing their job, dogs are not seen as Fluffy and Muffy, dogs are seen as a hindrance to their duties as an officer.

If you are going to insist you don't "get it" that is fine, but what I'm saying is plenty of us "get it" because we understand these guys have a job to do and dogs get in their way of doing their job. 
How they handle the dogs in the way is really up in the air and individual to each person and each situation.


----------



## Syaoransbear

Why can't both point of views be valuable? The pet owner may not understand the situation the cop was in, and the cop may not understand the important role the pet played in that person's life.


----------



## msvette2u

It's not a question of valuable, really. 

Whenever I've posted, I just would say, "Well think of it this way", and that seems to really bother some folks.

They don't want it to be that way and they don't like it that way, and I understand that. 
But not _wanting_ it to be that way doesn't mean it's not going to be, just like most of life.
Life isn't fair and never will be.
So this not being "fair' shouldn't be a surprise?


----------



## GSDolch

msvette2u said:


> The reason I say it is that they have a much different point of view than your average pet owner. And I say it because people are up in arms over these things and it's like...when I told my husband about this situation, he completely understood why they'd shoot a dog, when the dog is in the way of their doing their duty, of them doing their job. My husband's perspective is as a Paramedic, not a dog owner (although we have plenty of dogs, _and_ rescue dogs).
> 
> When out doing their job, dogs are not seen as Fluffy and Muffy, dogs are seen as a hindrance to their duties as an officer.
> 
> If you are going to insist you don't "get it" that is fine, but what I'm saying is plenty of us "get it" because we understand these guys have a job to do and dogs get in their way of doing their job.
> How they handle the dogs in the way is really up in the air and individual to each person and each situation.



Who said they don't "get it".

This is what I was talking about. Many people at the very least judge something based on the situation that happened. I mean sure you're going to have your people who paint everything with a broad brush, but that happens with cops to.

The FACT is, some cops shoot dogs because they need to, some shoot them because they want to, some shoot them because they are afraid and don't know any better.

To paint cops as always doing what is right is just as bad a painting them as always doing wrong.

It has nothing to do with anything about life being fair or not. In LIFE, when you screw up you have consequences, and this should be for anyone, cops included.


----------



## Mrs.K

LouCastle said:


> I've dealt with folks like this and they can be as dangerous as anyone else. They may lack the mobility, but if one is close enough and they have a stabbing weapon, it's simply a matter of pushing it into the officer's body. Stabbing in this fashion with any weapon is extremely dangerous.
> 
> As to _"especially when it turns out that that metal object was just a pen."_ I have a couple of comments. A pen can be just as deadly as a knife, when it's used against the right target on the body. And the officer DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A PEN until after the incident was over. You can't reasonably base your opinion on what the officer did, knowing what you know NOW. In order to do that, you have to place yourself in his position knowing ONLY what he knew at the moment he decided to use force. If you want to be fair, rational and reasonable, that is.
> 
> 
> 
> Such cases are extremely rare. But the facts remain that while you are unable or unwilling to _"see ... danger"_ here, it exists.
> 
> 
> 
> That's because you're not there, you're not the one dealing with him and you've conveniently forgotten that he was using a deadly weapon to stab the officer. It makes no difference that he's in a wheel chair or that he's a double amputee. ONLY his actions and his capabilities are to be judged when deciding to use force and what level of force to use. If the officer is close enough, it's easy to stab him with a pen, potentially killing him.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a typical response from someone who's really never been in many dangerous situations and thinks that things happen in real life, as they do on TV and in the movies.
> 
> 
> 
> The best martial artist on the planet will not try to take someone on who has a stabbing weapon unless he is cornered and has no choice. Again, this is a case of too much TV and not really knowing how these incidents occur. A stabbing instrument, such as a screw driver, a pencil, a knife, an ice pick or a pen constitute deadly force. The correct response to them, is deadly force, NOT _"self defense" or a "Taser" especially in a rapidly unfolding situation.
> 
> *IF *there is time to form a plan then the Taser might be an option, but in the heat of the moment, it's not. They only provide one shot, often fail and are ineffective at close ranges. In "drive stun" mode (where the Taser is pressed against the body of the suspect) it relies on pain to be effective. If the suspect is not responsive to pain, it has no effect.
> 
> I’m not sure what "pellet gun" you're talking about, (perhaps a shotgun with less lethal munitions) but again, that would be an option IF THERE WAS TIME. If the assault from the suspect comes as a surprise, it's not.
> 
> Keep in mind that police officers don't decide what weapon to use arbitrarily. Suspects decide what happens to them. If they submit to arrest, then no force (beyond force of voice) is used. If they bring out a deadly weapon, we do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Not if the officer is very close, as he would be while making an arrest, and the stabbing instrument comes out as a surprise to the officer. Sorry, you're entitled to hold any opinion that you like, but here, your opinion, is wrong. The FIRST OPTION to deadly force, is deadly force. You don't have enough facts to reasonably have such an opinion. You base it on two absolutes, 1. "wheelchair" and 2. "double amputee." NEITHER prevents a suspect from stabbing an officer who comes close to them to make an arrest.
> 
> The emphases are mine in the following quotations.
> 
> Here are some updates to the incident. From this source, Double amputee in wheelchair shot dead by Houston police - Boston News | Examiner.com
> 
> Per this video the incident happened at a "group home for the mentally ill." https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eRRAl0I1wEg
> The suspect suffered from Schizophrenia and had threatened workers in his facilty with violence. One of his caretakers, when asked if he ever felt threatened by the suspect, responded, "he had a temper. He could fly off once in a while." The suspect "cornered the two officers in the room after numerous reqauest (from them) to drop the pen (they didn't know it was a pen at the time) one of htem fired.
> 
> Per this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GLt1qYZxmHg
> 
> The officer who fired said, "The man was waving something in a threatening manner." This video cites a statement from the manager of the facility that the suspect suffered from schizophrenia and bipoliar disorder. Per the reporter, "The quarters in there (in the home) were very cramped, which was a factor in that officer's decision."
> 
> I'm sure that some are picturing a neat, well groomed, well dressed man in a well lit, large room but take a look at the photo of the suspect in this article from the Houston Chronicle, (I’m certainly not saying that his unkept appearance gave permission for the shooting, but it certainly contributes to how the officers perceived him). Double Amputee In Wheelchair Shot Dead By Houston Police | Texas Liberal | a Chron.com blog
> 
> 
> 
> From this source, Houston police fatally shoot threatening wheelchair-bound amputee in head - CNN_


_


A guy, in a wheelchair, with one arm... threatening... gimme a break... sorry, no matter what you say it won't change my mind. Pull out the darn pepper spray and pepperspray him, overpower and restrain him. If the other LEO get's a little pepper spray, too bad, tough luck, suck it up, a life could have been saved. The End!_


----------



## msvette2u

> In LIFE, when you screw up you have consequences,


And that's the problem. _You_ think they screwed up, but that's using your own perspective.
From other people's perspective they are simply doing what they need to do to protect themselves and others. 
From other people's perspective, dogs' lives don't rate as high as human ones. 

As lou stated, we only heard part of the story, the gory "headlines" part, so how do you "know" they screwed up?


----------



## Lilie

Mrs.K said:


> A guy, in a wheelchair, with one arm... threatening... gimme a break... sorry, no matter what you say it won't change my mind. Pull out the darn pepper spray and pepperspray him, overpower and restrain him. If the other LEO get's a little pepper spray, too bad, tough luck, suck it up, a life could have been saved. The End!


Let's try to get back to the point of this thread. It's an interesting one and I'd like to try to learn from it. 

It's obvious that there won't be an answer that everyone agrees with. Wouldn't that mean that as a dog owner, we'll need to take greater responsibility regarding keeping our dogs safe? Even if that means within our own homes?


----------



## msvette2u

Lilie said:


> It's obvious that there won't be an answer that everyone agrees with. Wouldn't that mean that as a dog owner, *we'll need to take greater responsibility regarding keeping our dogs safe? Even if that means within our own homes?*


Best post EVER :thumbup:


----------



## GSDolch

msvette2u said:


> And that's the problem. _You_ think they screwed up, but that's using your own perspective.
> From other people's perspective they are simply doing what they need to do to protect themselves and others.
> From other people's perspective, dogs' lives don't rate as high as human ones.
> 
> As lou stated, we only heard part of the story, the gory "headlines" part, so how do you "know" they screwed up?



I think you missed the point I made about investigations, I never said anything about being judge, jury and executioner. I'm not painting everything with a wide brush either, I think you are reading to much into it and trying to put something that isn't there. Unless you think that a cop should not be held accountable if he messes up....


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

Mrs.K said:


> A guy, in a wheelchair, with one arm... threatening... gimme a break... sorry, no matter what you say it won't change my mind. Pull out the darn pepper spray and pepperspray him, overpower and restrain him. If the other LEO get's a little pepper spray, too bad, tough luck, suck it up, a life could have been saved. The End!


Sorry but when someone is trying to kill an officer or threatening with a weapon, they deserve what they get. Your opinions would be quite different if your life was at stake....


----------



## msvette2u

> I think you missed the point I made about investigations,


Which "point" was that, where was that "point" made in this thread?

And why the urge to be condescending? I'm not being that way, so why do you feel the need to be?
This is where things always go south, btw. 

BTW - we'll never hear the outcome of some investigation, because that part is boring and doesn't make headlines.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

I suggest you come to Houston and go for a ride-a-long  Then we will see what your opinion is after dealing with drug dealers/child molestors/ people ON drugs that are waiting to attack you at any second to get away with what they are doing.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

Out of 111 deaths in Houston, 69 were GUN FIRE from people they were trying to help or people they were serving warrants to or just pulling over for a traffic violation. THIS is why they are always careful.

Houston Police Department, Texas, Fallen Officers


----------



## msvette2u

A ride-along is a great idea, and many departments allow, even encourage them. Of course you'd have to sign a waiver...


----------



## LouCastle

GSDolch said:


> When someone tells others I shouldn't have an opinion because I'm not a cop (not saying that you have said that) and I don't "understand", I equate that with them saying to "keep quiet" on the matter.


I'd never tell someone that they _"shouldn't have an opinion because [they're] not a cop."_ but I do have a strong opinion on people who don't have the education, training or experience passing judgment on tactical situations. It seems a bit like someone telling their surgeon where to cut, their plumber how to solder or their electrician how to wire up their house. Expertise in such things is necessary before an opinion can have value in such matters. I doubt that many on this forum have the knowledge or the experience to reasonably and rationally pass judgment on police operations. 

The problem is that we've all seen the cop shows where the officer shoots a gun out of the crook's hand from 100 yards away and think that it's really possible that every officer can do that. Also common is the "shoot him in the leg" response. More nonsense. 

It's a bit like Mrs.K's question _"doesn't a cop learn self defense?"_ Yes, they do, but in this situation it's not the appropriate response. One doesn't use empty hand techniques against a stabbing instrument.


----------



## Mrs.K

Lilie said:


> Let's try to get back to the point of this thread. It's an interesting one and I'd like to try to learn from it.
> 
> It's obvious that there won't be an answer that everyone agrees with. Wouldn't that mean that as a dog owner, we'll need to take greater responsibility regarding keeping our dogs safe?* Even if that means within our own homes?*


I do not want to sound anti-American, but reading your words and letting them sink in... something seriously is wrong with a country when you have to fear for the life of your dogs in that kind of manner. 

And the sad part is, it's not out of this world. It's not something that happens to others and not to you. It COULD happen to you and easily happen and that is the scary part about it. It's not something that happens only when a dog runs amok. 
No, all a dog has to do is sit in front of a door and bark. That's it. EMS can't enter, calls in the cops, cops shoot the dog, end of story. 

Something is wrong in this country. To be honest and if I may be frank. With all that shooting, and that includes the shooting of the man in the wheelchair and that is when it actually gets really apparent. 

It's sad, it's really really sad. Land of the free... maybe not so free anymore when you can't even enjoy the freedom in your own home and have to lock up your dog so it won't get shot by some maniac cop that went to the wrong house which ends up to be yours.


----------



## LouCastle

Syaoransbear said:


> The guy was in a wheelchair, how can you be trapped? You just.... jump over lol.


I can't tell where the _"lol"_ applies or if you are you seriously suggesting that someone could jump over the suspect in the wheel chair and not be injured by the stabbing instrument. Do you recall that the new reports said that _"the quarters in there (in the home) were very cramped?"_ Do you really think that this tactic is possible to accomplish safely?


----------



## LouCastle

Mrs.K said:


> A guy, in a wheelchair, with one arm... threatening... gimme a break... sorry, no matter what you say it won't change my mind. Pull out the darn pepper spray and pepperspray him, overpower and restrain him. If the other LEO get's a little pepper spray, too bad, tough luck, suck it up, a life could have been saved. The End!


Yep as I said, you're hung up on two things 1. "wheelchair" and 2. "double amputee." 

_"Pepper spray"_ has a pretty high failure rate, LAPD reports as high as 30%, particularly on the emotionally or mentally disturbed. It's ALSO NOT an appropriate response to someone who is threatening an officer with deadly force. And even when it takes effect immediately it doesn't root someone to the ground. I've been sprayed during training, with a full face hit, and still managed to draw my gun and shoot my [simulated] attacker. It hurt like ****, my vision was blurred, snot was all over my face (yes, I know TMI). But it didn't stop me from doing what I had to do. It's doubtful it would have stopped this man instantly, either. 

_"Overpower[ing] and restrain[ing]him"_ means making contact, something that only an idiot would do considering that the officers perceived that he had a stabbing weapon in his hand. 

This is real simple according to what has been reported in the news. Here's what the officers knew. This man was living in a home specifically for the mentally disturbed. He had created a disturbance and the caregivers had called the police. When the officers went to talk to him, they entered "very cramped quarters" where one of them was cornered by the man. They saw that he had something in his hand and was uncooperative when they told him to drop it. Fearing that it was some sort of stabbing instrument, one officer shot the man when he approached his partner. 

If there's more to this I'm sure it will come out. But right now this is a "clean shoot" an appropriate use of force and your thoughts that because he was in a wheel chair and only had one arm is interesting, but means nothing, it just shows how far from reality some people can go. 

One of the things that I've done as a use of force expert in several fields, is to train juries as to what police officers REALLY do. All of their experience has come from the TV and the movies. I'd bet that's your source for this too. Several times I've set up demonstrations that the jurors have recreated back in the jury room so they can see for themselves how reality works. You've not had that opportunity. There's no script in real life and no director to call "CUT!" when the SHTF. This man brought his death on himself. That's the REAL _"The End!"_


----------



## msvette2u

> I do not want to sound anti-American, but reading your words and letting them sink in... something seriously is wrong with a country when you have to fear for the life of your dogs in that kind of manner.


Oh come on now. 
You care for your dogs anyway, "in that kind of manner"!
How is what anyone is saying different than just making sure they are inside and don't bite anyone?
If someone's coming to your home, do you let your dogs run greet them at the door? Or do you make sure they are put up, or however you maintain sanity in your home when visitors arrive?
If you chain your dog, do you chain it where it can reach the door where it may in fact bite someone, anyone, approaching, or do you chain it so it can't get to the door? 
Do you put your dogs away when you leave, or do you leave them so they can get out and run away? 

This is so much just common sense, not a statement about police officers!



> I'd never tell someone that they "shouldn't have an opinion because [they're] not a cop." but *I do have a strong opinion on people who don't have the education, training or experience passing judgment on tactical situations. *It seems a bit like someone telling their surgeon where to cut, their plumber how to solder or their electrician how to wire up their house. Expertise in such things is necessary before an opinion can have value in such matters. I doubt that many on this forum have the knowledge or the experience to reasonably and rationally pass judgment on police operations.


 :thumbup:

This is what I've been saying, and I'm finding it very freaky that I actually agree with Lou


----------



## Mrs.K

LouCastle said:


> I can't tell where the _"lol"_ applies or if you are you seriously suggesting that someone could jump over the suspect in the wheel chair and not be injured by the stabbing instrument. Do you recall that the new reports said that _"the quarters in there (in the home) were very cramped?"_ Do you really think that this tactic is possible to accomplish safely?


So you are trying to say that a cop, with all the self-defense training, maybe even Krav-Maga, with all his bells and whistles (peper spray, stick, etc) has no other choice to shoot a disabled person with just one arm and one leg that is waving a pen? 

There is really NO OTHER WAY OUT than shooting the suspect? 

Don't believe it! 

Again, it's unbelievable... It goes beyond my comprehension and it's beyond sad and laughable....


----------



## Mrs.K

> How is what anyone is saying different than just making sure they are inside and don't bite anyone?


It's not about them biting anyone. That is not what we have to keep them safe from.


----------



## Lilie

Mrs.K said:


> It's sad, it's really really sad. Land of the free... maybe not so free anymore when you can't even enjoy the freedom in your own home and have to lock up your dog so it won't get shot by some maniac cop that went to the wrong house which ends up to be yours.


Ahh...Mrs. K..... I can't even begin to reply to this without skirting dangerously on the quicksand of politics. 

But I'll say that I will take all precautions needed to keep my pets safe. What ever that includes, I'm willing to do. I respect those who are civil servants. I'll do what I can to make their jobs safer for them when it comes to MY home. Because by doing that, I'm making my home safe for my family and my pets. 

My home is my little slice of paradise that I can control.


----------



## Mrs.K

So what's the reality. How much of a chance is there that something could happen? 

Maybe, we should look at it from a different angle. 

What do you think, what is the chance for a cop to show up at your doorstep? 

- Do you always crate your dog as soon as the doorbell rings? 

I don't because generally it's not necessary. By the time I've crated my dogs, the person may already be gone.


----------



## msvette2u

Mrs.K said:


> It's not about them biting anyone. That is not what we have to keep them safe from.


What I'm saying is that the SAME MEASURES you would use for keeping them SAFE from biting someone - or the public safe, as it were - are used for keeping them safe from being shot! How is that not making sense?
If you allow your dogs to roam, anything could happen, a shooting or they bite someone.
If you let them rush the door, a shooting or them biting someone could occur!
Are you such an unsafe owner that you allow them to do those things?



> It goes beyond my comprehension


Apparently so.


----------



## LouCastle

Mrs.K said:


> Something is wrong in this country. To be honest and if I may be frank. With all that shooting, and that includes the shooting of the man in the wheelchair and that is when it actually gets really apparent.


You're still wrong. Based on the facts at hand, that shooting was completely justified. 



Mrs.K said:


> It's sad, it's really really sad. Land of the free... maybe not so free anymore when you can't even enjoy the freedom in your own home


Reactionary rhetoric gets us nowhere. 



Mrs.K said:


> and have to lock up your dog so it won't get shot by some maniac cop that went to the wrong house which ends up to be yours.


The cop who goes to the wrong house ... exactly what makes him a _"maniac?"_ the fact that he got an address wrong? Or the fact that he felt threatened by a dog and shot that dog?


----------



## Mrs.K

msvette2u said:


> What I'm saying is that the SAME MEASURES you would use for keeping them SAFE from biting someone - or the public safe, as it were - are used for keeping them safe from being shot! How is that not making sense?
> If you allow your dogs to roam, anything could happen, a shooting or they bite someone.
> If you let them rush the door, a shooting or them biting someone could occur!
> Are you such an unsafe owner that you allow them to do those things?
> 
> 
> Apparently so.


There is a big difference of the dogs being at home and the dogs being out in public. 

My dogs are allowed to roam the house because it's their home, but they are not allowed to roam the public. 

I don't know how these two things are even comparable.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

Mrs.K said:


> So you are trying to say that a cop, with all the self-defense training, maybe even Krav-Maga, with all his bells and whistles (peper spray, stick, etc) has no other choice to shoot a disabled person with just one arm and one leg that is waving a pen?
> 
> There is really NO OTHER WAY OUT than shooting the suspect?
> 
> Don't believe it!
> 
> Again, it's unbelievable... It goes beyond my comprehension and it's beyond sad and laughable....


I can tell it goes beyond your comprehension since three people have told you the same thing in the most simple terms possible and you are still arguing...


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

PS>>> The constitution was written for HUMANS, not DOGS!!!!


----------



## Mrs.K

x0emiroxy0x said:


> I can tell it goes beyond your comprehension since three people have told you the same thing in the most simple terms possible and you are still arguing...


Yes, it goes beyond my comprehension. I could understand if the person hadn't been disabled. 

But we are talking about somebody with one leg and one arm, in a wheel chair. If a cop can't even think of anything but lethal force, for a DISABLED PERSON WITH ONE ARM AND ONE LEG, to defuse a situation, that says a lot, and it's scary. Very very scary. 

I am sorry, I am from a place where lethal force is used as the last resort.

ps: got to stop now. Things like that really get to me and make me furious, so I apologize for being emotional and upset.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

I completely understand you being emotional and upset, since you haven't experienced a love one being shot at by a 12 year old in a gang  Police can't underestimate anyone


----------



## Gharrissc

This has been something that our rescue has been trying to suggest for years to our local PD,but have only gotten resistance.I agree that it is a lot better to be proactive to make a change. 




msvette2u said:


> I think it would be great if there was a free dog behavior seminar offered to police departments.
> I'm not sure how to go about doing things like that (not a "starter" type person) but perhaps the Humane Societies local to the departments would be able to help.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

this thread is heading down the wrong path as well, I highly suggest if people don't want to see this one closed, they get back to the original topic


----------



## llombardo

x0emiroxy0x said:


> PS>>> The constitution was written for HUMANS, not DOGS!!!!


And this is exactly why things won't change. Dogs don't have rights and as long as the majority of people believe that, then their is no way to protect them. I do think that eventually down the road things will change somewhat...look at the fire department, lots of them carry the oxygen for pets now and that was unthought of years ago.


----------



## Olivers mama

I thoroughly understand the OP doesn't "own" the thread he/she started. But I DO understand when Enough is Enough of the sandbox bickering. At the very beginning, I made the comment:

"But it's not just the cops that need to be educated - it's the population en masse. What we, as dog owners, should be responsible for. And for which we should be educated. Stop the mind-set where we blame everyone else for our woes. And take the initiative up front. If you don't like the way things go in your town, district, country, *either be part of the solution, or move."*

You wanted input from a LEO - Sgt Castle was good enough to visit this Funny Farm & do just that. And so what happens? Some go off on a tangent, focus on a wheelchair or how bad our country is - instead of focusing on the original question / problem!

Can we get back to it? If all you want to do is argue, pack up your toys & go home. This is EXACTLY why these threads get locked. And EXACTLY what I was trying to avoid.:crazy:


----------



## llombardo

msvette2u said:


> What I'm saying is that the SAME MEASURES you would use for keeping them SAFE from biting someone - or the public safe, as it were - are used for keeping them safe from being shot! How is that not making sense?
> If you allow your dogs to roam, anything could happen, a shooting or they bite someone.
> If you let them rush the door, a shooting or them biting someone could occur!
> Are you such an unsafe owner that you allow them to do those things?


I agree that they need to be kept safe, BUT how do you do that when police are shooting dogs at houses they weren't even suppose to be at to begin with? The last three threads all were about dogs shot because they were pretty much in the wrong place at the wrong time. The argument is not so much on how to keep them safe, its more about the police being 100% sure they are at the right place *AND* they need to be at that place. I stress the need to be, because I can't comprehend why the last police officer was in the people's back yard to begin with? Why not just use the front door? It was about a ladder...a dog is dead because of a stolen ladder? If a police officer has a warrant and they break down the door to get to the suspect, what does one do if its there house and its the wrong house that the police were at...now a dog is dead because of a mistake, what is done about that? Its completely different then if that person called the police, they would be responsible to put the dogs up, but a surprise visit?


----------



## llombardo

LouCastle said:


> The cop who goes to the wrong house ... exactly what makes him a _"maniac?"_ the fact that he got an address wrong? Or the fact that he felt threatened by a dog and shot that dog?


So if the cop makes an error and goes to the wrong house and kills the dog because he was threatened(but shouldn't have been there to begin with), this is okay? I wouldn't call him a maniac for this, but I would question what he did and I think some explaining is needed. And by explaining I mean that he needs to admit he made a mistake.


----------



## msvette2u

There is no way to answer your posts, because you don't want to hear the answers.
Your "tone" says to me, there is no answer that will make you happy.


----------



## llombardo

Lilie said:


> Ahh...Mrs. K..... I can't even begin to reply to this without skirting dangerously on the quicksand of politics.
> 
> But I'll say that I will take all precautions needed to keep my pets safe. What ever that includes, I'm willing to do. I respect those who are civil servants. I'll do what I can to make their jobs safer for them when it comes to MY home. Because by doing that, I'm making my home safe for my family and my pets.
> 
> My home is my little slice of paradise that I can control.


Your missing the point. Its fine to be able to take precautions if you are prepared. But if you are sitting there having dinner and you hear your door getting broken down, how much time do you have to get to your dogs before they are shot? This is a reality that everyone's not seeing. How do you protect your dogs in a case of the the wrong place? Are you saying that in this situation you would understand what the police did? What would your reaction be if this happened to you?


----------



## llombardo

msvette2u said:


> There is no way to answer your posts, because you don't want to hear the answers.
> Your "tone" says to me, there is no answer that will make you happy.


I'm being 100% serious...how does a person protect their dogs if they don't know what is about to happen? The OP wants to know how to educate everyone. Well lets start here. There is a MAJOR difference if a person calls the police and they are expecting them and the police coming into a home or yard because its in the area of the crime or they simply got the wrong address. How do we make sure they don't have the wrong address?


----------



## msvette2u

I'm reposting in hopes you can glean something from this...

_What I'm saying is that the SAME MEASURES you would use for keeping them SAFE from biting someone - or the public safe, as it were - are used for keeping them safe from being shot! How is that not making sense?
If you allow your dogs to roam, anything could happen, a shooting or they bite someone.
If you let them rush the door, a shooting or them biting someone could occur!
Are you such an unsafe owner that you allow them to do those things?_

Even if a cop showed up THIS MOMENT into my driveway, they are at zero risk of being bitten, and thus, there is zero risk they'll be shot.
That's because my dogs are safely contained either behind a very strong, tall fence away from the drive and my porch, and if they aren't out there, they are in my house. 
I have signs all over my property warning of the presence of those same dogs.

The same security measures I'd take to ensure my dogs will not bite anyone or run away or be ran over, will keep them safe from being shot by anyone, even police.


----------



## Twyla

Olivers mama said:


> Can we get back to it? If all you want to do is argue, pack up your toys & go home. This is EXACTLY why these threads get locked. And EXACTLY what I was trying to avoid.:crazy:


It doesn't even require a news story now <sigh>

I wonder if just having one person selected for questions about how to keep the dog safe in and around the home in an emergency situation to be sent to and then for the LEO who aren't so po'd at this kind of stuff (and I can't blame them) be kind enough or forgiving enough to respond once all the questions have been forwarded to him/her. Would that be possible or the end result would be something like happens now after response is posted?

Dang those are some long sentences lol


----------



## llombardo

msvette2u said:


> Even if a cop showed up THIS MOMENT into my driveway, they are at zero risk of being bitten, and thus, there is zero risk they'll be shot.
> That's because my dogs are safely contained either behind a very strong, tall fence away from the drive and my porch, and if they aren't out there, they are in my house.
> I have signs all over my property warning of the presence of those same dogs.
> 
> The same security measures I'd take to ensure my dogs will not bite anyone or run away or be ran over, will keep them safe from being shot by anyone, even police.


Okay now we are getting somewhere. What happens if they choose your yard to make a permitter and go in even with the signs(dogs are outside)? What if they have the wrong address and bust down your door(and your not home), but its the wrong place? These are the situations that need to be fixed. If I seen the police coming to my home, I would either put the dogs up or meet them outside. This is not a problem. I understand 100% the things that can be done in normal situations, but what about those situations that just aren't that simple? There is probably only seconds to figure out what to do, but by that time its to late. How would you feel if your dogs were killed after all of the precautions you took?


----------



## LouCastle

msvette2u said:


> I'm finding it very freaky that I actually agree with Lou


That's how you know that you're right, when you agree with me! I'M KIDDING ........ I'M KIDDING! Lol


----------



## LouCastle

Mrs.K said:


> So you are trying to say that a cop, with all the self-defense training, maybe even Krav-Maga,


Perhaps you missed my mention of the fact that _"The best martial artist on the planet will not try to take someone on who has a stabbing weapon unless he is cornered and has no choice."_ Neither _"self defense training"_ nor _"even Krav Maga"_ is a steel suit that protects someone from being stabbed to death. No officer should ever even think of using self defense techniques, NO MATTER HOW SKILLED HE IS against someone who has a stabbing instrument. The slightest slip could mean death. It is COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE for an officer to use such methods against someone who is using deadly force. 



Mrs.K said:


> with all his bells and whistles (peper spray, stick, etc)


You seem to think that these tools are something that will instantly render a suspect motionless or helpless. Fact is they may not have any effect at all. I'm a baton instructor and so I'm pretty darn good with a stick. I've hit people who were under the influence of drugs or alcohol or were mentally or emotionally disturbed and had them laugh. Only someone who is in a normal state (whatever that mean) reacts as you imagine. 



Mrs.K said:


> has no other choice to shoot a disabled person with just one arm and one leg that is waving a pen?


The perception of the officers was that it was a stabbing instrument. Your repetition of the fact that was LATER discovered to be a pen, means less than nothing. This small fact, seems to keep tripping you up. 



Mrs.K said:


> There is really NO OTHER WAY OUT than shooting the suspect?


I don't know and neither do you. Had there been more time, other tactics may have been appropriate. But when the officers perceive that the suspect has a potential deadly weapon and he approaches, disobeying all orders to stop and/or to drop that weapon, there's really no time for fooling around with _"self defense, pepper spray or sticks."_ It does appear that shooting was that officer's best option at that moment that he perceived that his partner's life was in jeopardy. There is nothing here to indicate any malice on the part of either officer. There is nothing to point to any wrong doing on their part. One officer appears to have been trapped by a man who had, what they saw as a deadly weapon and was advancing on that officer. His partner took action to stop that assault. It doesn't make any difference that the man was in a wheelchair, how many limbs he had or didn't have or anything else. Their perception was that he had a deadly weapon, the means and the ability to use it. 



Mrs.K said:


> Again, it's unbelievable... It goes beyond my comprehension and it's beyond sad and laughable....


Perhaps if we had some idea of your training and experience in this field? Have you ever been in a serious fight? Have you ever tried to subdue someone without injuring them? Have you ever been assaulted with a deadly weapon by someone who wanted to kill you? Are you a "martial arts expert?" Ever studied them seriously?


----------



## LouCastle

Mrs.K said:


> Yes, it goes beyond my comprehension. I could understand if the person hadn't been disabled.


Here's the point, yes he was disabled. But he was not *UN*able. He had the means and the ability to use that stabbing instrument and it looked to the officers as if he was going to. 



Mrs.K said:


> But we are talking about somebody with one leg and one arm, in a wheel chair. If a cop can't even think of anything but lethal force, for a DISABLED PERSON WITH ONE ARM AND ONE LEG, to defuse a situation, that says a lot, and it's scary. Very very scary.


They did think of other things. The man was ordered both to stop his advance and to drop the weapon. He did neither. It sounds as if you'd be OK if he killed one of the officers, as long as they didn't shoot him. 



Mrs.K said:


> I am sorry, I am from a place where lethal force is used as the last resort.


To any reasonable person, this was the last resort. It has nothing to do with where you come from. 



Mrs.K said:


> ps: got to stop now. Things like that really get to me and make me furious, so I apologize for being emotional and upset.


Perhaps more reason and logic and less emotion would help you see this incident for what it was. A tragedy for all concerned, but one that two officers walked away from, only through their good luck and their training. The suspect decided what happened to him. 

That being said, my opinion is based on the information we have at this time. That may change, and I reserve the right to change my mind, based on information that may come out later. I shoulda put that disclaimer into my first post.


----------



## LouCastle

Gharrissc said:


> This has been something that our rescue has been trying to suggest for years to our local PD,but have only gotten resistance.I agree that it is a lot better to be proactive to make a change.


Any idea what the _"resistance"_ is about? Is there some "expert" on the department decrying it? Is there some dissension about who is competent to teach such a class? Is there simply no interest.


----------



## msvette2u

> These are the situations that need to be fixed.


We could "What if??" until the cows come home.
I will not play that game - my dogs are safe, and I've never had one of the "what ifs" happen to me.
I guess if I ever do, I'll come back here and say "Well, I'm so sorry I did not listen".


----------



## Seer

Perhaps if we had some idea of your training and experience in this field? Have you ever been in a serious fight? Have you ever tried to subdue someone without injuring them? Have you ever been assaulted with a deadly weapon by someone who wanted to kill you? Are you a "martial arts expert?" Ever studied them seriously?[/QUOTE]


I have had a bit of training and find your opinion on the threat assessment of a person in a wheel chair to an able body person not pinned down or backed to a wall a bit laughable. I have not reviewed any video of this but on face value a little wacky is thought process. 

Are there times when you will step up and identify behavior that is not befitting to those you serve sir, I think the answer to that is no.


----------



## Twyla

I can see the moment coming for the decision to lock this thread as well


----------



## msvette2u

> Perhaps more reason and logic and less emotion would help you see this incident for what it was.


I think this could be said about all these related threads, and I'm not sure why people think getting upset and emotional _themselves_ will help, or change the situation?


----------



## GSDolch

msvette2u said:


> Which "point" was that, *where was that "point" made in this thread?*
> 
> And why the urge to be condescending? I'm not being that way, so why do you feel the need to be?
> This is where things always go south, btw.
> 
> BTW - we'll never hear the outcome of some investigation, because that part is boring and doesn't make headlines.



No, it goes south when people read more into things than what is really there, instead of taking a breath and looking at it from a different angle, its easier to just take things on a kneejerk reaction sometimes. It's pretty normal though I think for the internet, written word without body language and facial expressions and all.

The point about the investigations have nothing to do with headlines. I could care less about that. The point is that if a cop screws up, sometimes it takes a public outcry for it to be even looked into. Better for something to get looked into to either clear them or punish them, than to just look the other way and let them continue. Heck, we have a local judge that is finally being charged with selling and using drugs, he's been on the bench for years, has a history of going easy on drug offenders and plenty of people for years complained about it, but oh no, he's a judge, he couldn't POSSIBLY be guilty of anything. Yeah, whatever, the fed. gov. finally started investigating I guess and now they have him in court charging him. I can't remember how much time the paper said he could face.

If someone says "cops are human!" and then says "you shouldn't question because you aren't one" makes no sense to me whatsoever. Cops are people, not all make mistakes, some do, some make big mistakes, if no one every says anything how is anything suppose to get done about the cops that do wrong?

WHY some people have a problem with others pointing out that cops are HUMAN and have FLAWS and should be held to the same standards as everyone else when it comes to having consequences is really beyond me.

/shrugs

I think I'm done, yall have fun 


ETA: To the bold: Its under Lou's first post in the thread I believe.



> While I agree that we should have as many facts as possible before we pass judgement, the public can't keep quiet about something that they feel is wrong. To do so, or to be told that we shouldn't voice our opinion about something IMO does a disservice. Sometimes, without public outcry, an incident will go without an investigation and then, if the event its a bad cop, is left to continue to do as he has been doing.
> 
> In all honesty, I only see a few people who seem to be either "pro" or "anti" with many more people taking a middle ground. Cops are people, but sometimes, nothing is done about a cop that does something wrong until people begin to speak up.


----------



## LouCastle

Seer said:


> I have had a bit of training and find your opinion on the threat assessment of a person in a wheel chair to an able body person not pinned down or * backed to a wall * a bit laughable. [Emphasis Added]


I guess you missed the part of the news story that said that the suspect *"cornered the two officers in the room *_after numerous requests (from them) to drop the pen (they didn't know it was a pen at the time) one of them fired."_ There was also information that the room was _"cramped."_ You missed some very pertinent facts that fit almost exactly into the situation you described. Still laughing? 



Seer said:


> I have not reviewed any video of this but on face value a little wacky is thought process.


Perhaps you should either review the video or read my quotations from it and get back to us? 



Seer said:


> Are there times when you will step up and identify behavior that is not befitting to those you serve sir, I think the answer to that is no.


I guess you also missed my statement where I wrote, _"As someone who personally arranged for the firing of several cops who "did the wrong thing" I'm hardly a "The cops are always right" kinda guy. I know that there are some who do the wrong thing sometimes, and a few who do the wrong thing frequently. We're chosen from the same gene pool as everyone else. We have the same flaws and faults as the rest of the people walking the planet. I like to think that because of the rigorous background investigations that most cops go through to get the, job that most of the bad guys get weeded out, but still, some slip through. It's never going to be a perfect system. Even if everyone tried to do the right thing, there would be mistakes."_ 

I know it's a PITA to read all the posts before jumping in, but sometimes you miss some very important information.


----------



## selzer

Ok, I am trying to go on the original question, what can we do to protect our dogs or improve police responses in these situations? 

I think that there is no way to ensure that there will never be a mistaken address. It might be improved upon, but I really don't think it is that frequent of a mistake. I mean, there may have never been a mistaken address in a small town, but that doesn't mean there never will be, and it only takes one mistaken address to have a bad outcome, and well, resources are not unlimited so unless there is a significant problem with mistaken addresses, I do not see departments putting more resources in that area. 

I also think it is is not reasonable for people to keep their dogs by their sides or crated 24/7. I do not like the idea of leaving a dog unattended in a single-fenced yard, but if that fence is secure, people should feel reasonably safe doing so. And I do not think it is a good idea to train dogs not to bark at people in uniform. So, I guess, I really put dog-owners off the hook here.

As for police departments, I wonder if there is a different response or feeling, both with officers and with the public if a dog gets shot and killed while the police are dealing with a thug who has committed a crime, as opposed to an ordinary citizen minding his own business. Personally, I pretty much feel that if you are making meth and you have formidable dogs because of the people you generally deal with, and the cops come in and shoot your dogs while coming after you, I figure that is your hard luck, and while I hope the dogs don't suffer, I am not going to petition anyone to force cops to use kindler/gentler methods when dealing with thugs' dogs.

The problem is, that when you have the wrong address, you don't know you have the wrong address. If you think this is a thug's house, and you respond to the dog as as you would any thugs' dogs, well it is ugly if the owner was not the thug. I am remembering the video where the police went into the apartment, raided it, and killed the dogs, while holding the family back, and one of the dogs, the pit bull was in a crate. I think they found a minimal amount of marijuana in that one, but why would anyone feel they needed to kill a dog that was crated? Couple of years old, and the vid no longer available, but I remember it:
http://www.pixiq.com/article/mo-cop...-harass-family-for-small-amount-of-weed-video

The reason why we remember this from 2010, the reason why we are hearing about these incidents, is because it really is rare. It is news. It kind of bothers me that people living in this country really think our cops are a bunch of trigger happy jerks -- or something like that. I think it would be helpful for people to get an accurate count of active police officers currently employed in the country, and then you can say 5 or 10 incidents (I pulled this figure out of the air) out of 400,000 (I pulled this figure out of the air) officers, in four years time, and you would maybe think it is really not as gruesome as it appears. Maybe compare it to the number of dogs injured or killed by burglars, or the number of dogs killed when lightning or tornadoes strike. 

Another one, the people are in the car, and the dog is loose in the car, and the police shot the dog. How awful. We as dog owners can always crate our dogs in vehicles, well, we could if our vehicles have room for crates. Or we can trust that what happened there was pretty rare, and take our chances. 

It is human nature to want to be in control all the time. The fact is we are not always in control of circumstances. We want to blame the police, or do something to make things safer, or do something to keep our dogs safer, because the alternative, the fact that sometimes bad shtuff happens that we cannot do anything about, well that is just harder to stomach.


----------



## Olivers mama

Well, I tried. I stupidly thought we could reach some equitable solutions in an effort to help ourselves AND the cops here. But there's a couple who just want to argue for argue's sake.

You're right, Twyla - this thread will be locked too. I do hope the mods will address the deliberate troublesome posters - those that just want to lash out & argue - so that PERHAPS this topic can be discussed as adults some time in the future. This didn't start out as a discussion of a bad guy in a wheelchair - that was meant as an example & a couple just had to run with it. And this thread was in no way meant to be political, altho some want it that way.

Most of us will never experience our dogs being killed by a cop when in the throes of their work. For those that insist on ruining these threads, have at it. No one can say I didn't try. And I'll certainly never ask a professional for his/her opinion on a computer forum, only to have that person attacked. I apologize, Sgt. Castle.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

It seems that people would rather have police officers risk their lives than defend them.....but I understand this attitude coming from someone not married to or the child of a police officer. They have absolutely no idea what dangers police officers face every day from supposed "innocent" people and also have no idea what protocol is.

Unless you have training in defending yourself or have been attacked by someone with a weapon and had to avoid a weapon, you really have no room to comment about "how dangerous" this guy was. In mixed martial arts, we were taught how to fight/defend against a person *without weapons*. We were told to run, run, run fast away from anyone with ANY type of weapon.

And movies don't count as training....


----------



## x0emiroxy0x

PS>>>> I do liquor promotions on 6th street in Austin until 2am every Thursday/Friday/Saturday.....on the way to my car I had a hobo follow me begging for money and at one point he grabbed my shirt and I started screaming and flipped open my mace and pressed the button....and NOTHING happened. He thought I was merely threatening him and ran the opposite direction when I started screaming. I was 2 blocks from the nearest person and no one came to my aid. The rest of the way to my car, I did everything I could to make the mace work and it didn't,

For an officer to use something that is know to not work 30% of the time, against a person with a weapon is stupid.


----------



## msvette2u

> I do hope the mods will address the deliberate troublesome posters - those that just want to lash out & argue - so that PERHAPS this topic can be discussed as adults some time in the future.


:thumbup:
And when you try to explain, they just argue more? Yah. 
I always get lulled into thinking they actually want an answer


----------



## Gharrissc

We've talked to the head of the department several times and he just didn't feel that it was worth the officers time to pursue it right now. We were willing to cover the costs of providing the training and everything. He knows about our organization and has even made donations,but really had an ' are you kidding me?' look on his face when we were making the proposal to him about this.



LouCastle said:


> Any idea what the _"resistance"_ is about? Is there some "expert" on the department decrying it? Is there some dissension about who is competent to teach such a class? Is there simply no interest.


----------



## GSDolch

Olivers mama said:


> I do hope the mods will address the deliberate troublesome posters - those that just want to lash out & argue -


While I agree that sometimes that is the case and should be addressed, it shouldn't be confused with those who get upset because someone doesn't agree with them, so therefore, they are a trouble maker.


----------



## msvette2u

:help:


----------



## Olivers mama

GSDolch - it's not a matter of 'disagreement'. It's a matter of the complete refusal to abide by the rules to stay on topic. I don't need to hear how "lousy" this country is because there's a few incidences where dogs were killed by cops. That has NOTHING to do with the topic. I should know - I posted the darn topic. In hopes of an ADULT discussion to find answers - for ALL of us.


----------



## LouCastle

selzer said:


> I think that there is no way to ensure that there will never be a mistaken address.


After our "incident" of going to the wrong house, I made it a point to have someone else check the address we were going to. But there's no way to completely eliminate errors, by definition. 



selzer said:


> As for police departments, I wonder if there is a different response or feeling, both with officers and with the public if a dog gets shot and killed while the police are dealing with a thug who has committed a crime, as opposed to an ordinary citizen minding his own business.


I had to shoot a dog. He started out by trying to get into a fight with my police dog and then, when I closed the door of the police car so he couldn't get to him, transferred his aggression to me. I backed him down on the first attack with my baton, but he came back at me a moment later. When he squatted down on his back legs to launch at my face, I shot him. At the moment of the shooting I felt great relief that I had stopped his attack. But to this day, I'm sorry that he forced me into that position. 



selzer said:


> Personally, I pretty much feel that if you are making meth and you have formidable dogs because of the people you generally deal with, and the cops come in and shoot your dogs while coming after you, I figure that is your hard luck, and while I hope the dogs don't suffer, I am not going to petition anyone to force cops to use kindler/gentler methods when dealing with thugs' dogs.


Another war story. I was sent to assist the DEA who had come to our town to serve a search warrant on a package delivery. (They had intercepted a package at UPS, and had the package that contained cocaine delivered). Now they were going to go to the home to arrest the occupants behind the search warrant. 

They said that their informant had told them that there was a defensive/aggressive pit bull at the location that would bite anyone who came onto the property. They brought me along to handle the dog. (I was a K−9 handler at the time). 

I told them that we need to drive down to the airport (about 15 minutes away) and get a CO2 fire extinguisher. I'd used one many times with aggressive dogs by spraying them in the face and then backing them into a corner of the yard. I'd never found a dog that didn't fear those extinguishers. The DEA Agent told me that they didn't have time for me to go get the extinguisher. If the dog came at anyone, I was to shoot him. 

I walked away, got into my car and started to drive away. The Agent asked where I was going. I replied that I was going to the suspect's home to warn him that they were coming, that I had no intention of needlessly killing a dog because they "didn't want to take the time" for me to get the extinguisher. 

The agent relented. When we went to the home with the extinguisher at the ready, I called the dog up to the fence. His tail was between his legs and he just wanted someone to pay him some attention. I didn't use the extinguisher. I just hopped the fence and held onto his collar while the big bad DEA agents served the warrant. When they came out, he was curled up in my lap while I rubbed his belly. I asked the Agent if he still needed me to shoot the dog, sometimes I just can't keep my trap shut. 

He tried to beef me but I threatened to call the press and tell them that he wanted to kill a helpless, scared little dog, because he was in a hurry. He just went away. 



selzer said:


> The reason why we remember this from 2010, the reason why we are hearing about these incidents, is because it really is rare. It is news. It kind of bothers me that people living in this country really think our cops are a bunch of trigger happy jerks -- or something like that. I think it would be helpful for people to get an accurate count of active police officers currently employed in the country, and then you can say 5 or 10 incidents (I pulled this figure out of the air) out of 400,000 (I pulled this figure out of the air) officers, in four years time, and you would maybe think it is really not as gruesome as it appears. Maybe compare it to the number of dogs injured or killed by burglars, or the number of dogs killed when lightning or tornadoes strike.


In 2004 (the last year I have figures for) there were about 837,000 full time sworn LEO's in the US. I'd guess that number has fallen a bit as the economy dropped.


----------



## LouCastle

Gharrissc said:


> We've talked to the head of the department several times and he just didn't feel that it was worth the officers time to pursue it right now. We were willing to cover the costs of providing the training and everything. He knows about our organization and has even made donations,but really had an ' are you kidding me?' look on his face when we were making the proposal to him about this.


I have no answer for this, except to say that I'm disgusted. I fought such stupidity and ignorance my entire career. WTH is wrong with this guy? 

Try this, go to the local newspaper and tell them that you want to run a class on this but the local Chief didn't seem to be interested. Before they write the story they'll probably call him for a statement. I bet you get a phone call from him REAL QUICK!


----------



## selzer

Olivers mama said:


> GSDolch - it's not a matter of 'disagreement'. It's a matter of the complete refusal to abide by the rules to stay on topic. I don't need to hear how "lousy" this country is because there's a few incidences where dogs were killed by cops. That has NOTHING to do with the topic. I should know - I posted the darn topic. In hopes of an ADULT discussion to find answers - for ALL of us.


If you do not want people arguing, stop arguing.
If you do not want people to get off-topic, stop going off-topic.
If you do not want people to mock, don't mock.
If you want people to have an adult discussion, then act like an adult. 

But on that last note, this site does not require that we all be adults, sorry, kids can be on here. 

There is not much you can really do about others' behavior, but you can lead by example. 

The biggest reason threads go off on tangents, go downhill, get ugly, is because people answer what they consider rudeness with rudeness, attacks with attacks, arguing with arguing, and then they harp on everyone else to watch their behavior.


----------



## GSDolch

Olivers mama said:


> GSDolch - it's not a matter of 'disagreement'. It's a matter of the complete refusal to abide by the rules to stay on topic. I don't need to hear how "lousy" this country is because there's a few incidences where dogs were killed by cops. That has NOTHING to do with the topic. I should know - I posted the darn topic. In hopes of an ADULT discussion to find answers - for ALL of us.



eh, 'tis the way of the internet, if there is one thing that anyone can agree on its that nothing ever stays on topic lol. It's not always nice, or pretty, but I know I've learned to just roll with it. Other than just education, on both sides of the fence (dog owners and cops) I don't think there is a universal solution. At least not in the US where each police dept. is ran independently and have a wide range from next to no funds, to plenty of funds. Speak up for the things that you (general you) feel is wrong, praise for the things that you feel is right. It's a hard topic for some, and it bleeds into other things unfortunately.


----------



## msvette2u

> I just hopped the fence and held onto his collar while the big bad DEA agents served the warrant. When they came out, he was curled up in my lap while I rubbed his belly. I asked the Agent if he still needed me to shoot the dog, sometimes I just can't keep my trap shut.


Makes me smile - I had to go pick up two big mean pit bulls once and when I arrived, the guys had peppersprayed the dogs! They told me I'm going to need my catch pole.

They had somehow managed to get them into a kennel run, and I got there, it was dark but I approached and was like, "Hi guys!!!" to the dogs.

They came over wagging and panting and happy. I took the 1st one and looped a slip around it's neck and got it in the rig. The guys were amazed.
I still don't know why they thought they were mean!?

The 2nd dog was when I realized they'd sprayed them - and forgot to tell me - and triggered an asthma attack.
The guys harmed me worse than the dogs...!


----------



## Seer

LouCastle said:


> I guess you missed the part of the news story that said that the suspect *"cornered the two officers in the room *_after numerous requests (from them) to drop the pen (they didn't know it was a pen at the time) one of them fired."_ There was also information that the room was _"cramped."_ You missed some very pertinent facts that fit almost exactly into the situation you described. Still laughing?
> 
> Reviewed: How is it enter in a cramped room with a man with only one arm waving a shiny object and you dont know its a pen? Rhetorical.
> 
> Still laughing at the one arm man that threatened two fully able police officers with pen.... Yes!
> 
> I guess you also missed my statement where I wrote, _"As someone who personally arranged for the firing of several cops who "did the wrong thing" I'm hardly a "The cops are always right" kinda guy. _
> 
> Great, you should be on the side of right. Please link to a time that you where, with regards to animals shot and not to a time that you would. That seems fair.
> 
> The facts regarding the automatic use of weapons on pets are unarguable. Its has gotten alot better in recent months due to judgments, social media and the realization that departments with public favor are immediately striped of any earned, when they allow the use of deadly force as the first option with our pets.
> 
> No one wants an officer hurt while responding to a call. No one wants one of their best friends killed because its easier then proper training. The fact that you applied to and took a job that has a extreme chance of injury gives you no right to use inappropriate force.
> 
> I have never seen nor most likely ever will see an officer that will call a spade a spade in a public forum. Not in their nature or programming when it comes to a fellow LEO. Many people also do not step back and see dogs in real acts of aggression where there is no logical choice but the use of deadly force.
> 
> Both the Leo and their can do no wrong cheerleaders as well as the cops are all evil crowd make this issue toxic.


----------



## Mrs.K

llombardo said:


> And this is exactly why things won't change. Dogs don't have rights and as long as the majority of people believe that, then their is no way to protect them. I do think that eventually down the road things will change somewhat...look at the fire department, lots of them carry the oxygen for pets now and that was unthought of years ago.


Actually, if the owners rights were enforced and not violated, that would be enough. There are enough laws in place to protect you, they at includes the constitution but step by step these rights are taken away. 
They more rights you give to a dog, they more you take away from the owner. 

That does not help us in the least bit because you may no longer be able to seek legal repercussions (is that correct wording?) for they have done to you. Wasn't there a link posted about what you can do if your dog is shot?


ps: found it: http://www.animallaw.info/articles/dduspoliceshootingpets.htm



> *III. FOURTH AMENDMENT SEIZURES/TAKINGS*The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable seizures, shall not be violated . . .​U.S. CONST. Amend. 4
> All too often incidents involving shooting of pets occur when police are executing search warrants, which bring them directly onto the property or into the homes of the pet owners. Direct confrontations with pets can occur and the pets are usually the losers when they are injured or killed by the officers. * This brings us to the question of whether the injury or destruction of a pet can be classified as an unlawful seizure in violation of the pet owners’ rights to be free from unreasonable seizures of their property under the Fourth Amendment.*


----------



## arycrest

I thought y'all might like to read this article since you've been discussing it.

Part of the article states: "McClelland said Monday he would enlist the FBI's help in the investigation and reassured the public his officers are trained to deal with people with mental problems."

"Police spokeswoman Jodi Silva said she didn't know if the department requesting FBI assistance in officer-involved shootings was rare but said "it's the step we're taking at this point."" FWIW McClelland is Houston Police Chief Charles McClelland.
FBI to investigate officer shooting double-amputee - CenturyLink


----------



## Packen

Olivers mama said:


> REALLY?? Have you read any of the cop-shoots-dog threads?


No, I don't read stupid topics normally but this one fooled me!


----------



## LouCastle

Earlier I wrote,


> I guess you missed the part of the news story that said that the suspect *"cornered the two officers in the room *_after numerous requests (from them) to drop the pen (they didn't know it was a pen at the time) one of them fired."_ There was also information that the room was _"cramped."_ You missed some very pertinent facts that fit almost exactly into the situation you described. Still laughing?





Seer said:


> Reviewed: How is it enter in a cramped room with a man with only one arm waving a shiny object and you dont know its a pen? Rhetorical.


It looks as if you omitted a word in the sentence. I think that you're asking _"how is it [possible] to enter a cramped room ... and not know it's a pen."_ If that's your question, it's easy. He's holding the object in his hand so you can't get a clear view of it. It's dark in the room and you can't see what he's holding, only that it's shiny. I can conceal a quite large knife in the palm of my hand, with the blade running behind my forearm. They could tell he was holding something and their impression was that it was a stabbing instrument. I can (and have) demonstrated this for juries. I can't do it in this medium. 



Seer said:


> Still laughing at the one arm man that threatened two fully able police officers with pen.... Yes!


Then you must be the best martial artist on the planet. I've studied under quite a few trainers. NONE of them would try any of their empty hand techniques against someone they thought had any kind of weapon, unless they had no choice. These men had a choice. It's foolish to use less than deadly force against someone that you perceive has a deadly weapon. 

Earlier I wrote,


> I guess you also missed my statement where I wrote, _"As someone who personally arranged for the firing of several cops who "did the wrong thing" I'm hardly a "The cops are always right" kinda guy. _





Seer said:


> Great, you should be on the side of right.


I am. 



Seer said:


> Please link to a time that you where, with regards to animals shot and not to a time that you would. That seems fair.


I don't believe that I've been involved in one of those discussions here. I don't even think that I've seen one of them here until the OP asked me to join this discussion. 



Seer said:


> The facts regarding the automatic use of weapons on pets are unarguable.


Nonsense. There is absolutely no evidence to support your statement that that the _"use of weapons on pets is automatic."_ In fact it's extremely rare, that's why it make headlines. Doubtless there are thousands of incidents that start out like these stories but no shots are fired and the dog is NOT killed. Those don't make the news. I was involved in 8- 12 of them during my career. 



Seer said:


> Its has gotten alot better in recent months due to judgments, social media and the realization that departments with public favor are immediately striped of any earned, when they allow the use of deadly force as the first option with our pets.


It's absurd to assert that _"deady force is the first option with our pets."_ Incidents where deadly force are used against a pet are extremely rare given the millions of interactions between police officers and civilians every day. 



Seer said:


> No one wants an officer hurt while responding to a call. No one wants one of their best friends killed because its easier then proper training.


I'm guessing that you mean _"proper training"_ of the officers on how to handle situations where they are confronted by apparently aggressive dogs. All the training in the world won't prevent these shootings. There are some dogs who will press the issue and some officers who will over react because they are afraid of dogs. 



Seer said:


> The fact that you applied to and took a job that has a extreme chance of injury gives you no right to use inappropriate force.


I agree. But it DOES give me the right to use appropriate force. The officers v. the disabled man is one such example. 



Seer said:


> I have never seen nor most likely ever will see an officer that will call a spade a spade in a public forum. Not in their nature or programming when it comes to a fellow LEO.


It's clear that you skipped most of the early part of the thread where I clearly called _"a spade a spade."_ Just because I don't agree with you hardly means that I'm avoiding this. It does not appear that the officers in the incident with the disabled man did anything wrong. It has nothing to do with the fact that I'm a _"fellow LEO."_ It has to do with them following proper procedure while they were dealing with an uncooperative, assaultive suspect who was armed with what they perceived was a weapon.


----------



## ozzymama

To the original question to this thread, we do have to protect our dogs. In public and in our homes. People are stupid, people make mistakes, people are sue happy, all of this we have to remember. Owning a dog in my mind isn't so much a right as it is a privilege.
There is a gate between my hall and front door - now it's for our child, but you know what, even once she is older and in whatever new home we have, I'll probably keep one. My dogs don't rush the door and they cannot get near the door because they are behind the gate. It's incredible, I bring groceries in, they can't meet me at the door, I answer the door, I don't have a curious head sticking between my legs. 
The point is, it is reasonable to expect your dogs are contained and you keep them safe. 
My neighbor's house alarm went off one night, the police responded, they were going through backyards, in addition, we have a coyote problem, I never let my dogs out without scanning the yard and stepping out myself - overkill? Possibly, but a coyote can clear a 8' fence, someone not directly authorized might be in my yard and the last thing I want is worrying about the dogs, calling them off while trying to call 911. These are precautions I take in my own home, on my own property. I don't need my dogs biting someone (not that I believe they would, but they are dogs and do have teeth) and being taken away or destroyed and becoming involved in a lengthy court process or being sued for both dimes I can rub together  because I failed my dogs and failed to scan my yard. Just like before I go out to play with my child I have to walk around the yard and scan for peanut shells a squirrel might bring in. I should be able to reasonably expect with the knowledge of peanut allergies, people would not feed squirrels peanuts - they are scavenger tree rats, it's not like they are suffering a population problem. Someone in my neighborhood is feeding the bloody things. 
One of the houses dh and I like backs on to a brand new school - my dogs may never leave my yard, but you bet I'll be ensuring that fence is secure and no little fingers can get through it. I'll probably double fence it with a gate and a garden to protect against kids jumping the fence or sticking their fingers through. To me that is a reasonable, sensible solution to what could potentially be a problem. Having a fire sticker with the names and breeds of my dog on the front door, to me that is a reasonable, sensible thing to do, not just in the case of a fire, but in the case a cop had the wrong house, maybe it would give him a bit of a warning animals are in there. Keeping a second line of defense against a door escape, we had an issue with weatherstripping where the door sucked in, unlocked and Dolly escaped. That gate being up and closed, gives me just one more line of defense, one more type of protection.
I've never been a cop lover in my adult life, my father was one for 18 years, still doesn't change my opinion, but they are human, they are not infallible. Mistakes happen and if I have to take a few extra precautions - even in my own home, then that is what I have to do. I don't want to see my dogs shot, I sure as heck don't want my child seeing it, so if the onus is on me to protect everyone, it's one I gladly undertake to the best of my abilities.


----------



## lhczth

*Let's stay on topic. The discussion about the man in the wheel chair will end NOW. Anymore posts on this topic will be deleted. *

*No more last words, either!!* 

Admin Lisa


----------



## DharmasMom

llombardo said:


> I agree that they need to be kept safe, BUT how do you do that when police are shooting dogs at houses they weren't even suppose to be at to begin with? The last three threads all were about dogs shot because they were pretty much in the wrong place at the wrong time. The argument is not so much on how to keep them safe, its more about the police being 100% sure they are at the right place *AND* they need to be at that place. I stress the need to be, because I can't comprehend why the last police officer was in the people's back yard to begin with? Why not just use the front door? It was about a ladder...a dog is dead because of a stolen ladder? If a police officer has a warrant and they break down the door to get to the suspect, what does one do if its there house and its the wrong house that the police were at...now a dog is dead because of a mistake, what is done about that? Its completely different then if that person called the police, they would be responsible to put the dogs up, but a surprise visit?



This was my entire point in starting the last thread. HOW can we possibly keep our dogs safe if the police show up completely unannounced and just shoot our dogs because they are barking. No where had it said that the dogs were biting. I doubt either one of my dogs would actually bite, but they sure to do give a good impression of it.

What happened to the owner in the last thread could easily happen to any one of us. Their dog WAS contained- albeit it was on a chain- but it was contained. The cop had the wrong address and came to the back door. Where the dog happened to be contained. The cop decided to shoot the dog when confronted. That could easily be me. I let my dogs out in my back yard when I am home. I will leave them out for 30- 45 min without me, especially if I am cleaning the floors. Suppose the cops are responding to another home in my neighborhood and I don't know it and they choose to come in my backyard for some reason. My gate has the latch on the outside so the lawn people can get in. The police could easily open my back gate and come on in. My dogs would definitely bark and run at them. BUT it is THEIR yard and I have them contained. The police would be the trespassers, yet they would shoot them. How am I supposed to protect them? 

I told my best friend about this case she has two Chesapeake Bay Retrievers and a Belgian Bouvier de Flanders. She had taken one of the CBR out for a potty run one night. Her back yard is not fenced but her dogs are trained not to leave her yard. Her neighbor across the street had reported a break in and the police were in the neighborhood. My friend did not know this when she took her dog out. One of the officers came up through her trees and into her backyard while she was outside with her dog. Her dog immediately started barking and went at the officer. The officer started yelling at her to get her dog or he would shoot the dog. My friend grabbed her and dragged her in the house. But again, what an awful thing it would have been if he had shot her. My friend had no idea what was going on, had no idea the cops were in the neighborhood much less her yard. Her dog was only doing her job, trying to protect her home and master. She certainly didn't deserve to be shot. Thankfully she wasn't. 

There HAS to be a better way. For some of us, our dogs ARE our family and the police NEED to be aware of this and not so quick to kill them. I understand they don't want to be bitten, no one does. So they need to be more aware and need better training. But something needs to be done. Something needs to change. Innocent dogs shouldn't die this way. They just shouldn't.


----------



## LouCastle

DharmasMom said:


> This was my entire point in starting the last thread. HOW can we possibly keep our dogs safe if the police show up completely unannounced and just shoot our dogs because they are barking. No where had it said that the dogs were biting. I doubt either one of my dogs would actually bite, but they sure to do give a good impression of it.


My best advice is to try to get some training for the local police department. Have your dogs on leash or under close control when you take them off your property or out of a fenced area where they are contained. Place signs on all your gates, and if there's a long run between gates, intersperse them on the fence, that there are dogs, that may bite, on the property. The signs I use have a picture of a dog with his teeth showing, so that there's no problem with someone who does not speak English (an issue here). Lock your gates with padlocks. That will stop someone, including the police from "casually" walking onto your property. It may mean that the police won't check your back yard if your burglar alarm goes off (some won't jump fences) but if they do, they'll be on notice that there are dogs present. If they won't jump the fence, well, that's what insurance is for. 

Many times I chased fleeing suspects through residential neighborhoods. Usually he'd awaken the sleeping dogs that lived in the back yard and then they'd chase me. Back then I was fast enough, and lucky enough not to get bitten.


----------



## RocketDog

DharmasMom said:


> This was my entire point in starting the last thread. HOW can we possibly keep our dogs safe if the police show up completely unannounced and just shoot our dogs because they are barking. No where had it said that the dogs were biting. I doubt either one of my dogs would actually bite, but they sure to do give a good impression of it.
> 
> What happened to the owner in the last thread could easily happen to any one of us. Their dog WAS contained- albeit it was on a chain- but it was contained. The cop had the wrong address and came to the back door. Where the dog happened to be contained. The cop decided to shoot the dog when confronted. That could easily be me. I let my dogs out in my back yard when I am home. I will leave them out for 30- 45 min without me, especially if I am cleaning the floors. Suppose the cops are responding to another home in my neighborhood and I don't know it and they choose to come in my backyard for some reason. My gate has the latch on the outside so the lawn people can get in. The police could easily open my back gate and come on in. My dogs would definitely bark and run at them. BUT it is THEIR yard and I have them contained. The police would be the trespassers, yet they would shoot them. How am I supposed to protect them?
> 
> I told my best friend about this case she has two Chesapeake Bay Retrievers and a Belgian Bouvier de Flanders. She had taken one of the CBR out for a potty run one night. Her back yard is not fenced but her dogs are trained not to leave her yard. Her neighbor across the street had reported a break in and the police were in the neighborhood. My friend did not know this when she took her dog out. One of the officers came up through her trees and into her backyard while she was outside with her dog. Her dog immediately started barking and went at the officer. The officer started yelling at her to get her dog or he would shoot the dog. *My friend grabbed her and dragged her in the house.* But again, what an awful thing it would have been if he had shot her. My friend had no idea what was going on, had no idea the cops were in the neighborhood much less her yard. Her dog was only doing her job, trying to protect her home and master. She certainly didn't deserve to be shot. Thankfully she wasn't.
> 
> There HAS to be a better way. For some of us, our dogs ARE our family and the police NEED to be aware of this and not so quick to kill them. I understand they don't want to be bitten, no one does. So they need to be more aware and need better training. But something needs to be done. Something needs to change. Innocent dogs shouldn't die this way. They just shouldn't.



Wouldn't a simple solid recall avoid this problem? My last dog would've recalled immediately with one "come", even if he were still suspicious; no issue with police. This is what I'm working on for my new pup. 

Dogs who are fully obedience trained probably would go a long way to avoiding issues with police, IMHO.


----------



## msvette2u

> *The same security measures I'd take to ensure my dogs will not bite anyone or run away or be ran over, will keep them safe from being shot by anyone, even police.*


:thumbup: to my own post which addressed people's questions of "HOW am I going to keep MY DOGS SAFE?"


----------



## GSDolch

RocketDog said:


> *Wouldn't a simple solid recall avoid this problem? *My last dog would've recalled immediately with one "come", even if he were still suspicious; no issue with police. This is what I'm working on for my new pup.
> 
> Dogs who are fully obedience trained probably would go a long way to avoiding issues with police, IMHO.


It would for dogs who are already trained, but really, how many dogs do you know that are like that? It would be nice if we could assume every dog could recall, but some dogs just aren't that reliable. Puppies, new dogs, rescues with issues, a dog that is in its own yard by itself, etc etc.

Its great that you are working with your pup, but these things take time. When this stuff happens with cops, it's usually random, the owners don't know about it and who's to say that it wont randomly happen to someone with a dog that, even though they are training recall, doesn't have a solid one just yet.

While I think its a good idea and that it helps, I don't think its enough.


----------



## RocketDog

Of course. I agree. But while we seem to want LEO's to take full responsibility for their own actions, it appears many dog owners do not want to show the same responsibility with their dogs.


----------



## Mrs.K

RocketDog said:


> Of course. I agree. But while we seem to want LEO's to take full responsibility for their own actions, it appears many dog owners do not want to show the same responsibility with their dogs.


If my dog is shot in his own home because somebody along the line screwed up and gave the cop the wrong address or a cop shoots my dog in pursuit of a suspect while coming *by *my privacy fenced in yard because the cop felt _threatened _even though he never entered... do I still have to take responsibility for my dogs action?
Now, if my dog got lose and went on a rampage and then is shot, I'd be the first to say that I screwed up and was negligent because if I had paid better attention, my dog would have never gotten loose in the first place.


----------



## msvette2u

RocketDog said:


> Of course. I agree. But while we seem to want LEO's to take full responsibility for their own actions,* it appears many dog owners do not want to show the same responsibility with their dogs.*


That's exactly it! 
We could "what if" this thing to death.


----------



## GSDolch

Mrs.K said:


> If my dog is shot in his own home because somebody along the line screwed up and gave the cop the wrong address or a cop shoots my dog in pursuit of a suspect while coming *by *my privacy fenced in yard because the cop felt _threatened _even though he never entered... do I still have to take responsibility for my dogs action?
> Now, if my dog got lose and went on a rampage and then is shot, I'd be the first to say that I screwed up and was negligent because if I had paid better attention, my dog would have never gotten loose in the first place.



I think this is the point some people are trying to make. If I am at home sitting on the couch with my dog and the cops raid my house because they got it wrong, its all on them, not me. If I am sitting outside on my porch with my dog in his own yard at night and a cop comes around the corner and shoots my dog, that's not on me. I can't tell the future, and while a recall would be nice, sometimes its a matter of seconds, not minutes. I should not have to worry about my dog getting shot in the confines of my own home.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty." is the quote by Ben Franklin I believe.

While the chances of this happening are still low for the majority of people, it still seems that this is a problem that at times need to be addressed.


----------



## Freestep

You all realize this thread is going to be locked, right? All cop threads end up locked, and this one will be no exception.


----------



## Blanketback

Society isn't what it once was, and when we can admit that then we can protect our dogs. Just as we do our children. Can you believe that when I was a child, I was allowed to wander all over the neighborhood, alone? The only rule I had was to make sure I came home when the street lights came on. Nobody would let their daughter (or son, for that matter) have that kind of freedom today, because humans have become predators. LE deals with the dregs of society, and it aint pretty. Some place are worse than others, but I think it's only reasonable to expect this evil can exist anywhere. The freedoms we once knew are gone, including thinking our backyards are safe. I don't think it's a simple matter of educating LE on canine behavior. And I don't want to sound like an extremist who wants her own bunker, lol. But these days, anything can happen and we need to acknowledge it.


----------



## Olivers mama

So - what types of preventative measures would you guys suggest? We have signs on our gates that say a GSD lives here. Our gates are padlocked from the inside. There is a sign @ the front door for Firemen / EMS - saying there is a GSD & 4 cats inside. Our rescue does not have a solid Down or Recall. If I had to call 9-1-1, she'd either be crated or put into another room (door closed).

Our PD is right around the corner. At least once a month, there is a chopper overhead, looking for yet another 'individual'. There's always either a police car or fire/EMS in the neighborhood (ah, the joys of living in Calif...) During those times, the dog gets locked up. If she's out back & there's police activity, we have plenty of time to retrieve & crate her. 

But I'm definitely open to suggestions as to how to handle a situation similar to what we've read. She's never chained out back, so she's not a sitting duck in that regard. A bunker? hhmmmm, something to consider!


----------



## msvette2u

Blanket, exactly.
Whining about it on the internet is not the way to deal with it, either.



> We have signs on our gates that say a GSD lives here. Our gates are padlocked from the inside.


I agree. Make your home a Fort Knox because what measures make it to where the dog can't get out, make it so others can't get in. 
A Sheriff coming to our door won't be accosted because the fenced area is off to the side, and there is no chance of the dogs rushing up when they come to our place. NONE.


----------



## RocketDog

The thing is this: If you're a law-abiding citizen, rarely will you have encounters with the police. If you're sitting at home, and due to an error, your dog is shot, it's a mistake. 

While we wish those would never happen, they do and will always happen. It's _very rare_ that this happens, when you look at how many house calls LEO's make across this nation every single day. Unfortunate, but I'd rather that than no law enforcement at all.


----------



## GSDolch

RocketDog said:


> The thing is this: If you're a law-abiding citizen, rarely will you have encounters with the police. If you're sitting at home, and due to an error, your dog is shot, it's a mistake.
> 
> While we wish those would never happen, they do and will always happen. It's _very rare_ that this happens, when you look at how many house calls LEO's make across this nation every single day. Unfortunate, but I'd rather that than no law enforcement at all.



And I agree with you, but for me this is were I feel it should be a two way street. Dog owners need to realize that sometimes, things happen, and I think Polices officers need to realize that if they make a mistake, something needs to be done about it.

I don't think anyone is saying anything about having no law enforcement at all, just that the rights of the people and them having to do their job needs balance.

As far as what I do. My dog doesn't go off property without a leash on and I am outside with him when he is in the back yard. Unless its a situation I know about, in which case I would crate/leash/put in the bedroom, I don't feel I should have to do anymore. Not if I am on my property and he is contained as per law. If a cop comes through my back door and shoots him, well, its going to depend on the situation as to what should happen IMO.


----------



## Olivers mama

GSDolch said:


> As far as what I do. My dog doesn't go off property without a leash on and I am outside with him when he is in the back yard. Unless its a situation I know about, in which case I would crate/leash/put in the bedroom, I don't feel I should have to do anymore. Not if I am on my property and he is contained as per law. If a cop comes through my back door and shoots him, well, its going to depend on the situation as to what should happen IMO.


Cops couldn't get thru our back doords without jumping our fence - gates are padlocked. They'd have to come bursting thru the front. Better them than the bad guys. We can yank up the dog quickly for the cops. But the bad guy will leave on a stretcher.


----------



## ozzymama

Olivers mama said:


> Cops couldn't get thru our back doords without jumping our fence - gates are padlocked. They'd have to come bursting thru the front. Better them than the bad guys. We can yank up the dog quickly for the cops. But the bad guy will leave on a stretcher.



See this is the thing a responsible dog owner gets, if someone breaks into your home and gets bit, there is precedence of civil cases where the perpetrator of the crime, can sue for compensation. My dogs could be viewed as a deterrent, if I honestly was frightened, I'd have an alarm system. In my mind, this isn't really an issue for most of us, because we have dogs that are under control.
Again maybe, I don't get the idea of worrying about a cop breaking down my door and shooting my dog. I'm pretty sure if not by name, by face all the cops in town know who I am and where I live. Cops are pretty intuitive and observant, they see me out walking with the stroller and dogs, maybe out jogging, they see me in my car out and about, know it's never driven through a ride program - possibly because we go to bed at 8pm many nights  Very seldom do we see cops on the street, around when school lets out, or the night our neighbors (long gone now) had a domestic, but dh, the baby, the dogs and I slept through all of that, or when my neighbor's wonky alarm goes off - ADT, I don't know about that company LOL, she's had some serious problems with her alarm. Once they knocked on my door, again the neighbor's alarm (why she needs an alarm, her father is practically the mayor, she's lived here her whole life, everyone knows her and that it's her house...) the alarm company called her and she asked to please not break down her door, to ask me for the key to her house, so I guess they knocked twice, once to get the key, once to return the key


----------



## arycrest

This really isn't an answer to the original question since it's not a suggestion on training LEO's about dealing with dogs, but my only suggestion would be to have potential recruits spend a lot of time with a psychologist/psychiatrist and attempt to weed out the candidates for law enforcement positions who shoot first and ask questions later (if that's possible).


----------



## selzer

Olivers mama said:


> Cops couldn't get thru our back doords without jumping our fence - gates are padlocked. They'd have to come bursting thru the front. Better them than the bad guys. We can yank up the dog quickly for the cops. But the bad guy will leave on a stretcher.


Both you and Lou mentioned padlocks, but one of these dogs in the most recent locked threads WAS in a padlocked yard. Yes it was a pit bull, but it was in its yard and the cops weren't even going to that house, the dog was in their way to set up a perimeter to catch some yayhoo who _might have been_ in a house two doors down. They killed the nine-year-old pet in its securely padlocked yard. The owners should have felt their dog was safe. 

That issue, and two dogs being killed while on chains and the cops got the wrong address. 

And the cop killing the husky in the dog park -- that one still burns me up.

And the cop killing the dog when they pulled the people out of the car, left the car door open, and the dog was just running back and forth, possibly threatening getting hit by a car, but not threatening the officers.

And the cop killing the dog in the crate while they raided a house.

And the cop that killed the lab or labs, when they raided some Mayor's home.

I am counting seven issues off the top of my head, but that is over a number of years, and say, 800,000 cops. Let's go ahead and round it up to 10, ten out of eight hundred thousand. So what is the likelihood of this happening to you? 1 out of 80,000. 

Or we can look at it a different way. The humane society said in 2011 that there were 78.2 million dogs in the US. Ok, so lets say 10 dogs get killed by out of bounds police officers. Your dog has a 1 in 7.82 million chance of being killed by a cop when you and your dog are totally innocently minding your own business. 

Personally, I think there are bigger fish to fry.


----------



## codmaster

RocketDog said:


> *Wouldn't a simple solid recall avoid this problem?* My last dog would've recalled immediately with one "come", even if he were still suspicious; no issue with police. This is what I'm working on for my new pup.
> 
> Dogs who are *fully obedience trained* probably would go a long way to avoiding issues with police, IMHO.


 
How many people have dogs that will do a recall under heavy duress or heavy distraction?

I.E. chasing a rabbit or another dog? How about even once you tell them to fetch a dumbbell?

Not very many at all, from what I have seen.

Heck, most OB competitors, even withsupposedly advanced highly trained dogs, get upset if there are people and/or dogs just around th ring.


----------



## RocketDog

It's possible. I had one.


----------



## Jack's Dad

I don't usually read these threads and I remember why.

Some people worry about everything, some hardly worry at all and then there are a whole bunch in between.

Those who worry about all the possible things in life that can happen will continue to do so. There will never be enough precautions to satisfy them. If they solve or think they solved one problem then there will be something new to worry about.

Until I see one of these threads, it never occurs to me that some cop may someday have a reason to be in my yard or house and will shoot my dog.

I,m an old guy and have never personally known anyone who's dog was killed by a police officer. Does it happen? Yes, but probably with worse odds than being struck by lightning.

I'm with selzer the odds are too great to spend any time worrying about it.

You dogs stand a better chance of being poisoned by eating something they shouldn't or being killed by a vehicle.

I live in California, so I think I'll get off here and worry if the next earthquake will kill my dogs or maybe even me.


----------



## Jax08

I"m going over to a friends house tonight who is a retired Philly LEO...I have to remember to ask him this


----------



## Olivers mama

@ JacksDad - I LMAO when reading this! But you & selzer are right.

I too, live in Crazy Calif. Probably have a bigger chance the dog will fall into a earthquake crevice. Or a flooded street. Or hit by lightening.

Actually, I'd be ecstatic if my neighbor's Barking Slipper would just STOP pooping on my lawn!

So, in the greater scheme of things....


----------



## Courtney

Jack's Dad said:


> I don't usually read these threads and I remember why.
> 
> Some people worry about everything, some hardly worry at all and then there are a whole bunch in between.
> 
> Those who worry about all the possible things in life that can happen will continue to do so. There will never be enough precautions to satisfy them. If they solve or think they solved one problem then there will be something new to worry about.
> 
> Until I see one of these threads, it never occurs to me that some cop may someday have a reason to be in my yard or house and will shoot my dog.
> 
> I,m an old guy and have never personally known anyone who's dog was killed by a police officer. Does it happen? Yes, but probably with worse odds than being struck by lightning.
> 
> I'm with selzer the odds are too great to spend any time worrying about it.
> 
> You dogs stand a better chance of being poisoned by eating something they shouldn't or being killed by a vehicle.
> 
> I live in California, so I think I'll get off here and worry if the next earthquake will kill my dogs or maybe even me.


Andy, can you hear my applause from Ohio because of your post?? Thank you, I feel the same way.


----------



## msvette2u

> Those who worry about all the possible things in life that can happen will continue to do so. There will never be enough precautions to satisfy them. If they solve or think they solved one problem then there will be something new to worry about.


Best post here yet


----------



## Mrs.K

> Those who worry about all the possible things in life that can happen will continue to do so. There will never be enough precautions to satisfy them. If they solve or think they solved one problem then there will be something new to worry about.


Yes, I believe I've said in the other post that got locked that while you are scared you can't let fear rule over your life.


----------



## Jax08

Mrs.K said:


> Yes, I believe I've said in the other post that got locked that while you are scared you can't let fear rule over your life.


So I can get rid of the bubble wrap, Charmin and bullets?


----------



## selzer

Jax08 said:


> So I can get rid of the bubble wrap, Charmin and bullets?


Better not, but I think you can let him out of his crate/fallout shelter between the hours of 3AM and 4AM. While cops have been known to shoot innocent dog owner's innocent dogs, it has never yet happened between the hours of 3am and 4am, so you would probably be safe letting the dog loose inside your house then.


----------



## Mrs.K

Jax08 said:


> So I can get rid of the bubble wrap, Charmin and bullets?


Naw, keep it. You never know when you'll need it.


----------



## DharmasMom

Of course I realize that I have better odds of winning the Powerball than I do of this occurring. I certainly did not let it affect my sleep today. I also have better odds of winning the lottery than of being accidentally killed by police involved in a high speed chase of bad guys on my way to work tonight. That does not mean that I don't want police using the utmost caution every time they decide to pursue someone. 

I also don't like what seems, at least to me, the apathetic attitude by the police departments when the police screw up and a dog dies. Because dog are considered "property", it seems like they just go "oops my bad. sorry about your dog". There needs to be some sort of recourse or compensation when these things happen. Not the "oh well. it was just a dog" attitude.


----------



## GSDolch

Jax08 said:


> So I can get rid of the bubble wrap, Charmin and bullets?



Don't do that! You can sit sit on the Charmin while popping the bubble wrap with the bullets.


----------



## Lilie

Jax08 said:


> So I can get rid of the bubble wrap, Charmin and bullets?


What? And take your chances with the Zombies? Are you utterly insane?


----------



## selzer

DharmasMom said:


> Of course I realize that I have better odds of winning the Powerball than I do of this occurring. I certainly did not let it affect my sleep today. I also have better odds of winning the lottery than of being accidentally killed by police involved in a high speed chase of bad guys on my way to work tonight. That does not mean that I don't want police using the utmost caution every time they decide to pursue someone.
> 
> I also don't like what seems, at least to me, the apathetic attitude by the police departments when the police screw up and a dog dies. Because dog are considered "property", it seems like they just go "oops my bad. sorry about your dog". There needs to be some sort of recourse or compensation when these things happen. Not the "oh well. it was just a dog" attitude.


Who is compensating though, I mean really? The police officer? The department? The municipality? The chances are it will be the people that the government represents. How is that for an insult to injury? Not only are you now worried about how your dog might get killed because the police killed your neighbor's dog, but now the city has been sued for the value of the dog, and they are starting to recognize that dogs have a value beyond their purchase price, which is good in general, but, if the city has to come up with 100k because they wrongfully killed a dog, then that is coming out of your pockets. Not the whole amount, but your local taxes will increase if the city is sued for enough things. So, while we want for people to be compensated for having lost their dog, it is the people that will be paying for that. 

If the police officer lets the dog bite him before he shoots, well, there too medical expenses, insurance rates, time off work, etc, that is a huge cost to the people. No, the dog owner should NOT have to pay if a police officer comes onto the property and gets bit. Sorry, the dog is protecting the property, and no one should be faulted for having a dog that bites an intruder. So who does all this compensating? We do. 

If cops are bitten and cost the city money due to loss of time, medical costs or insurance hikes, then BSL is going to rear its ugly head. If the city is sued because cops defended themselves, I can see BSL and ownership requirements increasing.


----------



## Curious

Sgt Lou Castle,
I just got through reading this monster thread and wanted to say thanks for your well thought out intelligent answers/comments. Thank you for sharing your experience and perspective with the members of this forum. Last but not least thanks for your service.


----------



## Olivers mama

Curious said:


> Sgt Lou Castle,
> I just got through reading this monster thread and wanted to say thanks for your well thought out intelligent answers/comments. Thank you for sharing your experience and perspective with the members of this forum. Last but not least thanks for your service.


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Courtney

I was late to work this morning because there was a funeral procession as far as the eye could see for a fallen police officer who lost his life last week in the town I work in.

I couldn't help but sit in my car and cry as they passed.

It's weird the thoughts you have at that moment...I thought of this thread for a second.

I also thank Lou Castle for his contribution to this thread.


----------



## Olivers mama

Same here, Courtney. 

But the flip side - 'Bodie' has had his last surgery & looks to return to work in December. (Bodie is a Sacramento K9 injured in the line of duty - was shot thru a forepaw & jaw. He's been a HUGE hit with the kids - an elementary school even raised funds to go toward his medical bills.)


----------

