Jump to content



Photo

Police shoot rottweiler in front of owner

video

  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#31 xMorpheousx416

xMorpheousx416

    Neowinian

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 04

Posted 13 July 2013 - 19:56

I've seen this video a couple times now... and if I were that man's lawyer, I would have taken every cops badge that stood around and watch this happen.

 

My proof?  The video.

 

Watch very closely as the dog approaches the cops and it's owner.  Sniffing around on the ground, trying to figure out what is going on.

 

Cop antagonizes the dog once.  It made a move..the cop moves back.  Smart move for the cop.

 

Now... here's the next part.

 

Is the cop a trained animal control specialist?  No.

Is it there job to contain animals?  No.

Does any cop there have containment of the situation?  No.

Do they know it's a dangerous breed?  Yes.

Have they called animal control to contain the animal, leaving the owner there so it calms down?  No.

 

Next move.. cop goes for the dog AGAIN.. dog lunges forward because this is a stranger about to touch him.

 

Dog reacts as they should.

Cop knows this.

 

Cop shoots and kills the dog in cold blood.

 

Witnesses?  Many..

 

Wouldn't take me but 10 mins in a courtroom to have that a**hat's badge, and his right to ever carry a sidearm again.

 

The cop was not trying to resolve the situation to the best he could.. but rather decided to take matters into his own, untrained hands.. and ended in the death of someone's friend../ pet.. family member.

 

The facts of the situation are right there on camera... opinions in court be damned.




#32 adrynalyne

adrynalyne

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,344 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 09

Posted 13 July 2013 - 20:03

Looks to me like he was trying to grab the leash.

 

You consider that antagonism?



#33 OP +warwagon

warwagon

    Only you can prevent forest fires.

  • 26,271 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 01
  • Location: Iowa

Posted 13 July 2013 - 20:03

Have they called animal control to contain the animal, leaving the owner there so it calms down?  No.

 

A cop would get in more trouble "Leaving the owner there" had something gone wrong, than shooting a lunging dog.

 

Had they uncuffed the owner and let him tend to his dog and something went wrong, I can just hear the police captain now...

 

"WHAT!! You uncuffed someone you didn't  searched just so he could tend to his DOG?!! SO THEN YOU DIDN'T KNOW HE HAD A GUN INSIDE HIS LEFT POCKET!!! Next time use your god damn head and just shoot the ****ing dog! Now we have 2 fatalities!!!! You are suspended pending investigation!!!



#34 JaredFrost

JaredFrost

    Neowinian

  • 1,343 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 04

Posted 13 July 2013 - 20:26

A cop would get in more trouble "Leaving the owner there" had something gone wrong, than shooting a lunging dog.

 

Had they uncuffed the owner and let him tend to his dog and something went wrong, I can just hear the police captain now...

 

"WHAT!! You uncuffed someone you didn't  searched just so he could tend to his DOG?!! SO THEN YOU DIDN'T KNOW HE HAD A GUN INSIDE HIS LEFT POCKET!!! Next time use your god damn head and just shoot the ****ing dog! Now we have 2 fatalities!!!! You are suspended pending investigation!!!

 

 

Had they arrested him for a real reason, other than he was there, I would agree.

 

The situation was hardly out of control to the point the animal had to be shot, and the one cop made the first aggressive move towards the dog

Had the dog made the first aggressive move I would agree, but it didn't and would have likely calmed down a little had their first reaction been

to step back and not try and go for something around it's neck.

 

Had they done those things and it was still trying to lunge at them, I would agree he was out of control to the point it needed to be shot, but they

didn't, so I side with the dog on this one.

 

That said, the back windows should have been closed to the point the dog couldn't jump out, that's just common sense so it doesn't jump out

while driving down the road, plenty of blame to go around, but not towards the dog.



#35 Enron

Enron

    Windows for Workgroups

  • 9,332 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 11
  • OS: Windows 8.1 U1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900

Posted 13 July 2013 - 23:33

I've seen this video a couple times now... and if I were that man's lawyer, I would have taken every cops badge that stood around and watch this happen.

 

My proof?  The video.

 

Watch very closely as the dog approaches the cops and it's owner.  Sniffing around on the ground, trying to figure out what is going on.

 

Cop antagonizes the dog once.  It made a move..the cop moves back.  Smart move for the cop.

 

Now... here's the next part.

 

Is the cop a trained animal control specialist?  No.

Is it there job to contain animals?  No.

Does any cop there have containment of the situation?  No.

Do they know it's a dangerous breed?  Yes.

Have they called animal control to contain the animal, leaving the owner there so it calms down?  No.

 

Have they called animal control? Are you kidding? The dog was actively going after the police officer, unleashed. They had no choice but to put it down. Watch the video again and you'll see the dog snapping at the officer's arm just before it gets blasted.



#36 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 13 July 2013 - 23:44

Have they called animal control? Are you kidding? The dog was actively going after the police officer, unleashed. They had no choice but to put it down. Watch the video again and you'll see the dog snapping at the officer's arm just before it gets blasted.

You mean after the owner clearly was able to get the dog to back off, while in handcuffs mind you, and then the police provoked it some more?I am assuming that is the part you are talking about. You know, right after he walked up to the police and turned around so they could arrest him. Yes, clearly this man had a master plan to get arrested so he could then get uncuffed again to... well I'll stop right there because any theory like that is moronic beyond explanation. The man was peacefully arrest and even put his dog up before so it could be done safely. He made a mistake expecting his dog to not jump out the window and as a fair and just punishment for making a simple and none life threatening mistake, police shot a member of his family. Sorry, the police are the only ones to blame for the death of this dog as they choose to provoke it further. They deserve to get sued which is what the owner of the dog is doing. Anyone watching the video can see them not allow the owner to calm the dog down. Watch the entire video. Stop taking bits and pieces out of context.



#37 Javik

Javik

    Beware the tyrrany of those that wield power

  • 5,934 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 13 July 2013 - 23:53

The guy did sod all wrong from what I could see so the arrest was unjustified from the get go. The police are to blame for what happened.



#38 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 13 July 2013 - 23:55

I am still waiting for an explanation for this master plan this guy apparently had according to some of you. You claimed he couldn't be uncuffed because the police didn't know if he had a hidden gun or if he would run. So I will play along with this theory, regardless of how retarded it is.

 

We see a video that has 3 cops arrest 1 man on a non violent charge. We also know there are more police around because of the number of police cars we see. So the man's plan was to put the dog in the car in a way so that he could get out, walk up to police and let them arrest him. Even walks to them so they don't have to walk as far and turns around with his hands behind his back. So we are left with two questions....

 

1. Why would a man that is wanting to run walk CLOSER to the police so they can arrest him in the first place when he could have just got in his car and driven away?

2. Why would a man with a gun hidden either on him or in his car walk over to his car, then walk to the cops so they can arrest him without incident? What was his plan, get arrested, get uncuffed, then shoot them? Shouldn't he have shoot before they put cuffs on him and while they were at a distance so he actually had a chance?

 

Can anyone else think of the guys master plan? These are the only two even remotely plausible situations I can come up with so what is the argument for not letting him put his dog safely back in the car? He clearly had no plans for running or shooting anyone since letting himself be arrested without incident makes that at least a small amount harder to do.



#39 Javik

Javik

    Beware the tyrrany of those that wield power

  • 5,934 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 14 July 2013 - 00:00

The police didn't arrest or subdue him straight away, so it's pretty obvious he wasn't their initial target. He must have been arrested for what he did at the time, and as I saw no evidence of him doing anything hostile, simple fact he wasn't a threat to them. The police caused this altercation not the man's dog.



#40 OP +warwagon

warwagon

    Only you can prevent forest fires.

  • 26,271 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 01
  • Location: Iowa

Posted 14 July 2013 - 00:02

I don't care if the police did or did not caused the altercation.

 

As far as I'm concerted the only thing that matters is that an aggressive rottweiler jumped at a police officers arm. END OF STORY!



#41 neuroticdave

neuroticdave

    Gates

  • 116 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 07
  • Location: NYC Area
  • OS: OS X Mavericks
  • Phone: Galaxy S5; Rooted, Custom ROM

Posted 14 July 2013 - 00:12

That idiot with the camera is anything but a poor victim. He was being an ###### who wanted to instigate a situation, and get a little bit of the spotlight. At the end of the day, I only feel bad for the dog. He was cursed with having such an idiotic and pompous owner. And yea, the whole ordeal is horrible, but in the heat of the moment and with a gun in your hands, what would your self defense move be? holster the gun and try to pet the dog and be nice? Let's be realistic. 



#42 ILikeTobacco

ILikeTobacco

    Neowinian Senior

  • 4,789 posts
  • Joined: 08-July 10

Posted 14 July 2013 - 00:12

I don't care if the police did or did not caused the altercation.

 

As far as I'm concerted the only thing that matters is that an aggressive rottweiler jumped at a police officers arm. END OF STORY!

That fact that you are using "an aggressive rottweiler" to describe the situation shows that you are ignorant to the fact of how peaceful rottweilers are. Notice how he was doing what ANY dog, including a 5 pound poodle would do. You are saying that it is perfectly justifiable for police to shoot anyone or thing even though the other reason they were a threat was because the police were doing something to agitate it. Watch the video. The dog approached his owner to see why strangers were handling him. The owned made the dog back down. Instead of letting the man continue to make him back down, the police swung him away from the dog, the very action that made the dog come in the first place. The police are not legally allowed to force a situation that involves shooting their weapon which is what they did. They handled the entire situation wrong. Stop trying to justify them killing someones loved one just because you are scared of a dog that wasn't doing anything wrong until provoked. Or do you think it is okay for me to use the self defense clause and provoke you until you jump at me and then shoot you at point blank. Clearly you do.



#43 Dot Matrix

Dot Matrix

    Neowinian Senior

  • 10,525 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11
  • Location: Upstate New York
  • OS: Windows 8.1
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 920

Posted 14 July 2013 - 00:16

Police or any sort of third party won't frak around with animals. They're not people, and they're quite unpredictable.

I'm asked all the time by city workers before they even come in my house to restrain my dog. The police acted within their authority to protect themselves and others from danger.

#44 Javik

Javik

    Beware the tyrrany of those that wield power

  • 5,934 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 14 July 2013 - 00:17

That idiot with the camera is anything but a poor victim. He was being an ******* who wanted to instigate a situation, and get a little bit of the spotlight. At the end of the day, I only feel bad for the dog. He was cursed with having such an idiotic and pompous owner. And yea, the whole ordeal is horrible, but in the heat of the moment and with a gun in your hands, what would your self defense move be? holster the gun and try to pet the dog and be nice? Let's be realistic. 

 

I think we must have been watching a different video because I am at odds to even see what he did wrong.



#45 adrynalyne

adrynalyne

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,344 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 09

Posted 14 July 2013 - 00:34

That idiot with the camera is anything but a poor victim. He was being an ******* who wanted to instigate a situation, and get a little bit of the spotlight. At the end of the day, I only feel bad for the dog. He was cursed with having such an idiotic and pompous owner. And yea, the whole ordeal is horrible, but in the heat of the moment and with a gun in your hands, what would your self defense move be? holster the gun and try to pet the dog and be nice? Let's be realistic. 

 

 

This.  The owner even admitted he was taping police trying to find wrongdoing.  He was looking for the spotlight and he got his dog killed int he process.


I think we must have been watching a different video because I am at odds to even see what he did wrong.

Yes.

 

There are other videos where even claimed he was basically trying to butt in to police business and "find civil rights violations".

 

Typical d-bag looking for a few seconds of fame.  What kind of moron blares music and snoops around a crime scene? The kind that WANTS to be arrested to make a victim of himself.  Its a shame the dog ended up dead over it.