M
missperky
Guest
You say mauled to death? By a dog that is tied up? Ok, sure...tom88 said:
Charles County officer murders dog
- Thread starter allan1058
- Start date
M
missperky
Guest
Still don't have to shoot it 7 times, come on.tom88 said:
sockgirl77
Well-Known Member
Oh puhleeze. If the officer was really attacked the damn pictures would have surfaced by now. He is going to do anything to clear his name.tom88 said:
I don't know if it is him or if it his department! I sure wouldn't make any public statements with the way people have been talking about suing me! It seems that most have already made up their mind without using rational thinking, but more emotional thinking!sockgirl77 said:Oh puhleeze. If the officer was really attacked the damn pictures would have surfaced by now. He is going to do anything to clear his name.
M
missperky
Guest
If I wasn't guilty or I had a reason to kill the dog, then yes I would have made a statement by now, that's just me.tom88 said:
Bustem' Down
Give Peas a Chance
That's no fun. We here in the forums like to jump to wildly irrational conclusions.tom88 said:
M
missperky
Guest
Hush. Don't ruin it.Bustem' Down said:That's no fun. We here in the forums like to jump to wildly irrational conclutions.
Dork
Highlander's MPD
From what I read here, it does seem like the deputy over reacted but the key words are "from what I read here." You are right. This needs to be played out though the department and the courts, not the media or on forums. It would be really stupid for the deputy to make any kind of statement to the media. They don't always report things the way they should be reported. What story would sell papers? The one that showed an officer doing nothing wrong or one that shows an officer murdering a poor helpless animal. I would be the sheriff's office doesn't allow the deputies to speak directly to the media because of spin they tend to put on the information they get. If you believe everything you read in the news, I would like to sell you some ocean front property in Kansas, cheap! or you must be related to Forestal.tom88 said:
No excuse, a trained cop, no one home on three tries, walking by the dog, ignorant to a barking dog on a leash who was on a leash until after the shooting, no respect for property or the owner's or the owner's dog. If you are in a dogs reach, you are invading his property, I suspect yelling at the dog, man in uniform, you do NOT turn your back on a dog that can reach you, how stupid is that. Nothing will bring this family member back and with such a minor bite, done by a scared dog, the cop must have simply lost it. If a 125 pound dog meant harm it would have been a lot worse than a bandaide, as they say the dog was doing what was the right thing, the cop did a devastating bad thing and I hope he is more than punished for it. to call back up, animal control, etc when the dog is bleeding to death is even worse, hiding his mistake I'm figuring.
Coventry17
New Member
camily said:
Sometimes good people do bad things.
Coventry17
New Member
tom88 said:
The word is "bitten"... and no, he was not. The dog lunged and snapped at him, but never actually bit him.
Coventry17
New Member
The officer came to the house, ticked off that he had to drive out to the middle of nowhere to deliver a warrant. He goes to all the doors he can find, because there's no way he wants to have to drive out here again. It's probably the end of his shift and he should've been home an hour ago. Dog lunges at him and it's the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back. He shoots said dog SEVEN TIMES. That's not self defence, people, that's rage.
krazd_kat
Help "Invisible Dogs"
I hope the truth comes out soon. I can't imagine the grief the family is feeling and I have to be honest I have less than any sympathy for the officer, judging from the story that has been reported.
You come to my property, my dogs will bark and if you have any smarts, you will be scared, they are all contained so they can't bite, but even so, no matter who you are, or why you are on my property, you have NO BUSINESS getting close enough to claim self defense, they are warning you loud and clear that you are not welcome on their property. Unless I committed murder, find another way to reach me.
This officer and the department owes the public an answer. Someone that reacts this way, has no business "protecting the public". (Again, only going on the reported facts)
You come to my property, my dogs will bark and if you have any smarts, you will be scared, they are all contained so they can't bite, but even so, no matter who you are, or why you are on my property, you have NO BUSINESS getting close enough to claim self defense, they are warning you loud and clear that you are not welcome on their property. Unless I committed murder, find another way to reach me.
This officer and the department owes the public an answer. Someone that reacts this way, has no business "protecting the public". (Again, only going on the reported facts)
tagryn
Member
Two things that don't add up for me:
* The family says their son with the warrant on him does not live there (and is estranged from them?), but in the same email says their son came by and was the first to find the dog. I'm hoping this isn't talking about the same person, because if not it sure sounds like the police had justified reason to think he was living there, if he stopped by regularly.
* Police usually are trained that pulling the gun is the measure of last resort, if for no other reason than ricochets can go in any direction and hit bystanders at a distance. Shooting seven times, regardless of whether you hit anything, is an automatic procedural inquiry in most departments AFAIK, and its a hassle officers prefer to avoid if at all possible. Its possible the cop saw a dog growling on a leash and decided to unload on it just because he hated dogs, but not likely considering the consequences.
Like others have said, I'm sure there's more to this story than what the media has covered.
* The family says their son with the warrant on him does not live there (and is estranged from them?), but in the same email says their son came by and was the first to find the dog. I'm hoping this isn't talking about the same person, because if not it sure sounds like the police had justified reason to think he was living there, if he stopped by regularly.
* Police usually are trained that pulling the gun is the measure of last resort, if for no other reason than ricochets can go in any direction and hit bystanders at a distance. Shooting seven times, regardless of whether you hit anything, is an automatic procedural inquiry in most departments AFAIK, and its a hassle officers prefer to avoid if at all possible. Its possible the cop saw a dog growling on a leash and decided to unload on it just because he hated dogs, but not likely considering the consequences.
Like others have said, I'm sure there's more to this story than what the media has covered.