This entry was posted
on Tuesday, January 15th, 2008 at 11:14 am by Radley Balko
and is filed under Police Militarization.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
The $64,000 question is, was the dog tied up (article doesn’t say) and if not was it actually threatening the officers? While I’m certainly not in favor of aggressive police procedures, I’d also suggest that we should perhaps not take the word of somebody who admitted to being involved in a domestic dispute to the point where she needed to be handcuffed (the article indicates she’s not suing over that) at face value. Particularly since she’s suing the city and has an incentive to embellish her side of the story. If the St. Bernard was threatening the officers, they had cause to defend themselves.
I will say that no mention of shots fired in the police report is extremely suspicious, though. The police may very well be wrong, but we also haven’t heard their side of it so it’s probably a bit unfair to pass judgment so quickly.
Police are certainly wrong in any case where the dog is not a direct, active threat to the officer or his ability to carry out his ostensible duty. Cops do that because they can. Full stop. Because they can. It is at least cowardly and swinish, but their precious pink asses are obviously more important than any citizen’s beloved dog. And “puppycide” is inexcuseably flip, there, sonny.
The dog shouldn’t need to be tied up, it was in the lady’s home, not in a back yard. They intruded on her and grabbed her arm when she answered the door. Takes a real man to murder a dog that isn’t causing any trouble. Thugs.
One comment we constantly get from police officers is that we should give them a break because their job is so dangerous. Well, if they go around shooting everything in sight before assessing the situation and trying to diffuse it, how in the hell can their job be dangerous… to them?
And why do we accept their demands for safety? Shouldn’t part of the danger of the police officer’s job be intercept the risk of harm to the citizen and the citizen’s property. They’re supposed to protect US! All of the rules protect THEM.
Here is the questions I always have when I hear about these sorts of incidents.
If I am carrying a handgun (with appropriate permits, of course) and I perceive someone’s dog to be threatening me, can I shoot it with impunity? Or is this a special power that police have?
Persona non grata |
January 15th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Yet another example of “professional” assholes on patrol.
“Farnsworth was investigating a vandalism case and approached a man in a yard. The man’s dog appeared from behind him. Farnsworth said in a report the dog charged and lunged at him, and Farnsworth shot the dog to protect himself. The dog owner disputed the animal was a threat. ”