Saturday, February 25th, 2012

A New Mexico woman called the state police to report that she had been the victim of an Internet scam. The police told her they couldn’t come right away. She asked them to call before showing up at her house. They didn’t.  Instead, an officer arrived while she wasn’t home, ignored the woman’s “Beware of Dog” sign, hopped the woman’s fence . . . and then killed her dog.

The department tells our media partners at KOB-TV that it will investigate the incident, but initially sees no cause for disciplinary action. KOB-TV did not indicate whether the officer’s name was made public.

“Was there things that could have done different? Absolutely, however that’s the situation that occurred and so now we’ll deal with it,” Lt. Robert McDonald said . . .

State police said the officer thought Baca was home and entered her property.

Police called Baca after the shooting and when she and her children arrived home, Jilly was dead on the front porch of their home.
“My 4-year-old’s response was, ‘Did they shoot our dog?'” Baca said. “My son walked up the stairs and started shaking her, trying to wake her up.” . . .

“I called for help and instead I ended up with the loss of a family member,” Baca said.

McDonald told KOB-TV it appears the officer was only acting in self defense and he said the department apologizes to the family for the tragic event.

So they’re going to conduct an investigation, but before they start, they’re say it “appears the officer was only acting in self defense” and they “initially see no cause for disciplinary action.” Inspires confidence in the impartiality of this forthcoming investigation, doesn’t it?

Also, whether or not the officer legitimately acted in self-defense doesn’t address the alleged fence-hopping, ignoring the “Beware of Dog” sign, and failure to call before coming to the woman’s home. It isn’t really clear what else the woman could have done to protect her dog, here. I mean, short of not calling the police at all.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

77 Responses to “Puppycide”

  1. #1 |  Michael S | 

    Brazen. Next someone who failed to notice a crime, and failed to even call the police, will have their pet murdered.

  2. #2 |  SJE | 

    Hows that new professionalism coming along, Justice Scalia?

  3. #3 |  SJE | 

    Of course: “the officer was only acting in self defense” rationale ignores the responsibility of the officer in putting himself in danger that requires self defense. Do the cops go to the zoo and jump into the tiger cage and then kill them on the theory that they were only acting in self defense: wouldnt someone ask WHY they did the stupid thing in the first place.

    I also wonder if the cops can escape liability. They had no legitimate reason to be where they were. They weren’t engaged in an emergency, or chasing bad guys across people’s back yard, but were investigating the victim of an internet scam. Can’t do that without actually talking to the victim.

    The most likely reason the cop went into the back yard is that they wanted to check out the place, in case there were drugs or some other reason to bring down the force of the law.

  4. #4 |  PermaLurker | 

    Cops are like vampires..never never invite them to your home.

  5. #5 |  picachu | 

    “A New Mexico woman called the state police to report that she had been the victim of an Internet scam.”

    WTF is wrong with her? That set off a chain of events that could never have turned out good in any way.

  6. #6 |  croaker | 

    The lesson learned here is to never call the police for anything unless there is no other choice. Bad things will happen, even if you are the innocent victim.

    And all the badge-lickers commenting sicken me. Calling them good Germans is an insult to Germany.

    They see no need for disciplinary action. Fine, I see no need for the taxpayers to fund your agency at the current level. Live with a 25% cut. Why? Because FUCK YOU! That’s why.

  7. #7 |  Difster | 

    Calling the cops for an internet crime was definitely her first mistake.

    If a thief hopped the fence hoping to break in to the house and then killed the dog do you think the court would not press charges for shooting the dog because of self-defense? No, not a chance.

    Bastard cop needs to be punched in the throat and have his nuts stomped on.

  8. #8 |  SJE | 

    There is probably a racial angle. The head of the police dept is anglo, and the victim is hispanic, living in a majority hispanic community.

  9. #9 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    “Was there things that could have done different? Absolutely, however that’s the situation that occurred and so now we’ll deal with it,” Lt. Robert McDonald said . . .

    Hmm, does that count as passive voice? And how will this be dealt with, Lt. By doing nothing, I presume. Look Lt. McDonald, the trooper hopped a fence to investigate an internet crime. If no exigent circumstances exist, police should not be hopping over anyone’s fence. If you can’t knock on a door, then have dispatch call the complainant. If the complainant doesn’t answer, they can just call back. Pretty simple way to handle it and no dogs get killed.

  10. #10 |  picachu | 

    I guess knocking at the door was just too plebian for an “officer of the law.” Internet scam, yea you pretty much have to jump the fence and shoot a dog for something that dangerous.

  11. #11 |  Terry H. | 

    “‘Was there things that could have done different?…’, Lt. Robert McDonald said . . .”

    What they did to the pup is nothing compared to what they do to the English language. Egads.

  12. #12 |  Charlie O | 

    Radley, you last line says it all. Never, ever call the police. It will only bring you trouble and cause you problems.

  13. #13 |  Highway | 

    In the histories of the losing states, the ones that we call ‘evil’ or ‘wrong’ or ‘bad’, doesn’t this kind of thing get categorized as “at the same time, a ‘campaign of terror’ was being waged by elements of the state government against ordinary citizens” or something similar?

  14. #14 |  Juice | 

    Here’s another one:


  15. #15 |  tarran | 

    If you need to report a crime to the police, make an appointment to speak with a detective at the police station.

    Do not invite them into your home.

    Bring a lawyer along if you can afford it.

    You can always leave the police station (unless they decide to detain you). Evicting a trespassing police officer is more difficult.

  16. #16 |  Pugnacious | 

    Racist Hispanic cop shoots dog:


  17. #17 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    #14 Tarran:

    That is pretty sound advice, Tarran. I would only add that if you prefer not to go to the station, then you might also have an officer meet you at a neutral public location. These options are better than calling police to your home at this point, unless your home is itself the scene of a crime.

  18. #18 |  Dante | 

    How many more times before the SPCA acts?

  19. #19 |  Pugnacious | 

    It wasn’t always that way with cops, some were kind-hearted and tried to help the downtrodden.

    Toody and Muldoon must be rolling in ther graves.

    The jewish diamond-cutter episode is the best.


  20. #20 |  el coronado | 

    Am pretty sure it was this blog I saw a comment made that should be tattooed on the arm of every person in America:

    “I have never seen or heard of ANY situation in which the arrival of the cops didn’t immediately escalate the incident and make things *much* worse.”


  21. #21 |  Pugnacious | 

    I have never seen or heard of ANY situation in which the arrival of the cops didn’t immediately escalate the incident and make things *much* worse.”~

    A case in point is the Lowndes County Mississippi Sheriff Office kill team that put four bullets into the chest of a mental patient who was trying to run into the woods behind his home to evade a SWAT Team called to the farm. It was no shootout with deputies! The victim’s mother was denied permission to talk her son out of the woods;instead, either the camouflage sniper put the for 9mm bullets into John Montgomery’s chest with what looks like a M-16 rifle(Colt 9mm SMG ?), or each deputy shot the victim once with their 9mm Glocks. I suspect the sniper used his three-shot burst, followed by a coup de gras shot. John Montgomery was a “threat” to no one but himself.


  22. #22 |  Pugnacious | 

    How many more times before the SPCA acts?~

    I recently sent an e-mail photo attachment of a Hog-Dog fight public event advertisment that was posted on a local Mississippi business establishment in a black area. The ad included two photos of a pig cornered by a dog at the S&L Arena, 751 Porter Road, Crawford, Mississippi. This is NOT the “legal” feral(sp?) hog kills conducted by the local yokels and their urban cousins. I called the LCSO and spoke to a deputy Tony Perkins about the upcoming fight, but I got no interest other than told to call the Lowndes County sheriff Butch Howard who, IMHO, was corrupt, anyway.

    So, I later e-mailed all this information to the Mississippi SPCA and received NOT one response.

    Hoping that Radley will pickup the gauntlet, but not holding my breath anymore.

  23. #23 |  Pugnacious | 

    I might ad also, that I called Mississippi Attorney general Jim Hood’s office and talked to some cornpone yokel there that claimed he had never heard of Hog-Dog fighting–I think that he was lying– and after asking to “speak with someone with brains,” he hung up on me!


  24. #24 |  Pugnacious | 

    Mississippi SPCA is about as useless as teats on a boar hog!

  25. #25 |  Pugnacious | 

    Btw, there are many good folk at the local Mississippi animal shelters…I don’t mean to damn them all. I think that the Peter Principle best explains the problems at SPCA.

    Lowndes County, Mississippi deputies shoot another mentally ill man.


  26. #26 |  Pugnacious | 

    Or would it be best explained by the Dilbert Principle?

  27. #27 |  Not Sure | 

    Unless you have a dog they can kill or some stuff they can confiscate, the police have no interest in coming to your house.

  28. #28 |  Christ on a Cracker | 

    “Cops are like vampires..never never invite them to your home.”

    Mr. or Ms. Permalurker,
    May I use this as my new tagline?

  29. #29 |  Kukulkan | 

    It sounds like the dog owner has a pretty good small claims court case. The owner told the police to call her before coming. This provides a solid foundation for arguing that the police were not invited onto the property. Second, the police officer reportedly jumped over a fence that was marked with a dog warning sign. The owner can make a good argument that the officer was therefore trespassing. Trespassers are generally liable for any property damage they cause while trespassing. The owner’s case could have been improved if she and her children witnessed the dog being killed, then there would be a mental distress claim. Time to add up all the money that has been spent on the dog to determine the monetary value.

  30. #30 |  Matt | 

    “Cops are like vampires..never never invite them to your home.”

    Unfortunately, mere garlic won’t keep the pigs at bay.

    Don’t *ever* call the cops. Don’t talk to cops. Don’t ever imagine they have your best interest in mind. tarran gives good advice if you absolutely must talk to a cop.

  31. #31 |  Matt | 

    “It sounds like the dog owner has a pretty good small claims court case.”

    Pfft. Imagine the repercussion if the roles were reversed and someone did that to a cop’s pet. He’d be doing hard time for home invasion and animal cruelty.

  32. #32 |  Fascist Nation | 

    If the officer was responding to an “old” or even a current Internet scam victim complaint–which he was–why did he trespass upon her property? If nobody answered the front door on a stale call, there was zero reason to enter the back yard. The complaint was about an Internet scam…no one’s lie could reasonably be expected to be endangered therefor no trespass was justified under color of law.

    I can only think he was hoping to see some evidence of drug use when he looked around the back yard or peered through the windows. Get a nice RICO promotion.

  33. #33 |  PermaLurker | 

    Of course you may, Mr. on a Cracker :)

  34. #34 |  a_random_guy | 

    “why did he trespass upon her property?” “I guess knocking at the door was just too plebian”

    There are no pics, but I’m pretty sure you guys have the wrong impression. I know New Mexico, and I am pretty certain that this woman’s house is surrounded by a connected yard – no separate back- and front-areas. She’s living in a crime-prone area, so the dogs have free run of the propertyi, so to get to the front door, you have no choice but to enter the area where the dogs are.

    It is entirely likely, the officer was sent, but no one told him he was supposed to call first. Shit happens.

  35. #35 |  Anti Federalist | 

    “I mean, short of not calling the police at all.”

    As others have already noted, the best line of the whole story.


    The life you save may be your own, your pet’s or a loved one’s.

  36. #36 |  Burgers Allday | 

    Back around 2007, I unintentionally started a mini-mem at a cop board. We were talking about when police officers go to interview crime victims (after the crime is long done and there is no exigency). I wrote that the police officer should call first and try to set up the time and date for the interview by telephone instead of just dropping by the victim’s house. Not only was this ridiculed, but for years afterwards, police officers there would joke about “calling first” with the idea being that regcits (like me, I guess) think that police should call wanted criminals they are trying to apprehend. Bunch of idiots.

    But, yeah, call first. saves time and effort for all involved.

  37. #37 |  Homeboy | 

    @ #33

    “Shit happens.”

    Yes, and apparently it jumps fences when responding to stale, non-emergency calls, and improperly discharges its firearm into any dogs it may encounter as well.

  38. #38 |  red | 

    I’ve seen a few posts by people who fought off home invasion robbers in rural areas who said they didn’t call the cops afterwards. Either fear of having their dogs killed or charges related to shooting at the robbers.

  39. #39 |  winston smith | 

    he’s just warming up for what he wants to shoot…………..you and me.

    Police officer shoots family’s dog

  40. #40 |  Cyto | 

    What the heck are they talking about – “self defense”? Acting in self defense would have been to hop back over the fence.

    This “advance at all costs, never retreat” attitude is causing lots of death and destruction. If the police officer had only retreated when faced with an (allegedly) angry dog, nothing bad would have happened. In this case he didn’t even have reason to suspect anything – he was there to take a report on an internet scam that the police were not going to do anything about anyway. No exigent circumstances existed.

    If the officers in Jose Guerena’s case, or any number of other search warrant raids had only retreated when faced with a potential threat, he’d be alive today. The same goes for the kid with the golf club in his halway. Or the old man trying to scare off under cover officers acting as a drug gang on his lawn. Backing off and identifying themselves would have allowed him to live out his life. The same goes for those officers shot and killed trying to break into rooms that held armed citizens who feared they were under attack. Dialing back the “military storming the hill” mentality and taking a more measured approach would also eliminate the need for evil retaliatory prosecutions of citizens who are defending themselves from armed intruders.

    Strangely, nobody in law enforcement or politics seems to be able to process the idea that there is even an alternative. The department brass in this case doesn’t seem to even be able to form the thought that maybe you shouldn’t be hopping fences to take reports about internet scams. Presumably this guy was operating under department procedures that encourage snooping around looking for violations if there’s any possibility. Maybe he thought “beware of dog” and a fenced yard was an indicator of a drug user – a good snoop through the windows might get him probable cause for a search and arrest. Or maybe he thought “nobody answered, I’d better go kick the door down to be sure they’re not injured inside.”

    We’ve fallen so far into the police state that when they do things that have absolutely no justification whatsoever, not only do the police not see anything wrong, neither do the press or the public. Just one or two nutty rabble-rousers. We have truly lost our way as a society.

  41. #41 |  Cyto | 

    Also, what happened to our fourth estate? When I was young, Watergate was in full bloom. Reporters shouted all manner of questions at the President all the time. They shouted follow up questions too.

    Where were the reporters when this police spokesperson said “he acted in self defense?” How about asking some real questions:

    1. Under what authority did he trespass on private property?
    2. Why did the officer not retreat from the dog?
    3. How can you claim to be holding a credible investigation if you’ve already declared the incident to be OK?
    4. What would the department’s position be if an ordinary citizen were to take the same actions? Let’s posit they were there to deliver girl scout cookies…
    5. If the officer is being cleared, why is he not here to answer questions?
    6. Under what conditions of “self defense” is it OK for an officer to kill a dog? Does he have to fear merely being bitten? Only barked at? Getting rabies? Why is it OK to kill a dog if you fear you might be bitten? This is not the standard for any other person.
    7. If they trot out “officer safety comes first”, ask “where does public safety come?” Shouldn’t public safety come before officer safety?

    8. Even if a private citizen were actually bitten by a dog, would the police allow him to shoot the dog? Or would they require that animal control be called in to deal with the complaint?

    Simply taking the “nothing to see here, move along” statement at face value and copying it into your story is not reporting. It is shilling for the government. At least ask the questions.

  42. #42 |  Cynic in New York | 

    I dont know about NM but in NY going over a person’s fence is equivalent to barging in their front door uninvited however, I doubt the same standard applies to government thugs. Poor dog

  43. #43 |  Cyto | 

    Further details:

    Clicking through to the TV interview, the lady lives in a dilapidated trailer on a sizable property surrounded by a wire fence. There is no way to approach the door without entering the fence.

    The victim tells us that the officer claims he was bitten.

    The dog was shot and killed immediately next to the front door on a small wooden porch that allows access to the trailer.

    The police spokesman does not appear to be anyone in charge and appears to be winging it to some degree, rather than quoting official policies. He even says “there is no training for this situation” (being confronted with a guard dog).

    Unlike most of these incidents, the police did not confiscate the dog. The dog’s body is still there when the TV crew arrives. They get shots of the dog under a piece of carpet or sheet, but don’t pull it back to reveal the more gruesome “dead dog” shot.

    There was another guard dog on the property that wasn’t shot.

    Despite the victim’s claim that the officer told her he was bitten, the police report to the TV station says the officer was not injured.

  44. #44 |  Careful Observer | 

    It is pretty obvious these days you do not call the police to your house unless you want someone to be arrested or shot. Calling the police to her house like that was irresponsible at best and possibly child endangerment. Social services should look into removing those children from that unsafe home. She is lucky she wasn’t shot. Stupid lady you call the gun toting thugs and wonder that they shot your dog. Get with the program, you don’t call the police unless something needs to be dead or in a cage. GIT-R-DONE!!!

  45. #45 |  me | 

    If this happened to me I would find that officer and kill his dog.

  46. #46 |  M | 

    The officer arrived to help an obviously confused old lady. Fearful that she was hurt when she didn’t answer, they entered (the beware of dog sign is irrelevant if you suspect she’s in danger inside), then was forced to shoot the attacking dog.

    There is no logical reason to be upset by this. People who are angry in this case, just hate cops no matter what they do.

  47. #47 |  J | 

    …What the hell is this? No links or references what so ever. What internet scam? Who the hell calls the police about an internet scam?

    This sounds like bullshit to me.

  48. #48 |  Greg | 

    The cops in this country think they can do anything. We’re just living in their world. Considering the cowardice of our citizenry they seem to be right.

  49. #49 |  josh | 

    recall similar case from the 1990s: Leatherman v Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/954/1054/128284/

    This dog deaths were in like 1989, lost at district court and appellate court, then reversal by unanimous Supreme Court (Rehnquist writing) and then back on remand the family lost anyway on upheld summary judgment with no new hearing. The dogs never got their day in Court but they did make Supreme Court law.

    Excerpt of opinion written by Judge GOLDBERG, Circuit Judge on the original appeal (deciding against the homeowners but writing it in a way that surely helped get the Supreme Court’s attention for the “heightened scrutiny” issue):

    “After police shot and killed their two dogs during the execution of a search warrant, plaintiffs brought this section 1983 action against the municipal defendants employing the police officers involved. They alleged that the municipalities had failed to adequately train their officers, and that such failure amounted to a municipal policy. The district court, 755 F.Supp. 726 (N.D.Tex.1991), dismissed the complaint because it did not satisfy this circuit’s “heightened pleading requirement.” Under the heightened pleading standard, a complaint must allege with particularity all material facts establishing a plaintiff’s right of recovery, including “detailed facts supporting the contention that [a] plea of immunity cannot be sustained,” Elliott v. Perez, 751 F.2d 1472, 1482 (5th Cir.1985), and, in cases like this one, facts that support the requisite allegation that the municipality engaged in a policy or custom for which it can be held responsible. Palmer v. City of San Antonio, 810 F.2d 514, 517 (5th Cir.1987). Because plaintiffs complaint does not satisfy the heightened pleading requirement, we affirm.

    Dog Day Afternoon

    This civil rights case arose out of two separate incidents involving the execution of search warrants by law enforcement officers with the Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit. One incident involved Charlene Leatherman, her son Travis, and her two dogs, Shakespeare and Ninja. Ms. Leatherman and Travis were driving in Fort Worth when they were suddenly stopped by police cars. Police officers surrounded the two of them, shouting instructions and threatening to shoot them. The officers informed Ms. Leatherman that other law enforcement officers were in the process of searching her residence. The officers also informed her that the search team had shot and killed their two dogs. Ms. Leatherman and Travis returned to their home to find Shakespeare lying dead some twenty-five feet from the front door. He had been shot three times, once in the stomach, once in the leg, and once in the head. Ninja was lying in a pool of blood on the bed in the master bedroom. He had been shot in the head at close range, evidently with a shotgun, and brain matter was splattered across the bed, against the wall, and on the floor around the bed. The officers found nothing in the home relevant to their investigation. Rather than departing with dispatch, they proceeded to lounge on the front lawn of the Leatherman home for over an hour, drinking, smoking, talking, and laughing, apparently celebrating their seemingly unbridled power. …”

    See the rest of the opinion at: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/954/1054/128284/

    And the US Supreme Court reversal at: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-1657.ZO.html

    And on remand, the affirmation of summary judgment against the dog owner family: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/28/1388/580930/

  50. #50 |  Ed Dunkle | 

    Effective disciplinary action (at least here in California) might include forfeiture of their pension.

  51. #51 |  picachu | 

    Cyto “This “advance at all costs, never retreat” attitude is causing lots of death and destruction.”

    It’s called pride. And arrogance. And that’s a big part of the problem. The majority of the public constantly kiss their ass and tell them what heros they are and even on their own internet message boards they ban anyone remotely critical. Like all megolamaniacs they have insulated themelves from all legitimate constructive criticism and the predictable result is an out of control despot mentality.

  52. #52 |  Al | 

    After reading these puppycide posts for several years now I’ve realized something. The cop and the dog are basically operating on the same intellectual plane. They both have a fixed set of parameters with fixed reactions, once triggered logic and reason are useless. A dog will react violently to any intrusion on it’s territory. Likewise a cop will defend itself violently to any perceived threat. Whenever these two forces meet the cop is usually the victor only because they possess the opposable thumb necessary to operate a firearm. I suggest not making any loud noises or sudden movements around either.

  53. #53 |  NWA | 

    I hope this guy burns in the hell I don’t believe in.

  54. #54 |  Sean | 

    “Effective disciplinary action (at least here in California) might include forfeiture of their pension.”

    Even cops who murder people are often allowed to retire with full benefits and pension. The absolute worst that could happen to a cop for wrongfully killing a family pet is a letter of reprimand or a “tsk tsk, shouldn’t uh dun that.” It doesn’t even rate the usual “paid suspension” / paid vacation “punishment.”

  55. #55 |  James Bond | 

    If the dog was that violent, then the filthy mutual deserved to be put down. They owe that officer a medal and an apology.

  56. #56 |  James Bond | 


  57. #57 |  Donnie Davison | 

    Sure, I would have stood there trying to look amused while the dog chewed on my legs, just like the rest of you! NOT!!

    Come on, people – do you REALLY think all the cops want to do is get involved in stupid incidents like this one? Does anyone who was there on the scene, who WITNESSED THE INCIDENT, deserve a chance to have a say, or shall we just march them off to the gallows, too?

    Is this the kind of society you really want to live in?

    What I think is that if you CHOOSE to have a dog that appears to others as vicious as I’m sure this one did, you take your chances with liability and certain other things. Yes, I know, I know; he was kind and patient and has NEVER bothered anyone. But how am I supposed to know that if I come to the door when no one’s home?

  58. #58 |  Chris MacMillan | 

    in my experience if the police actually went to jail every time they failed to follow orders or broke the law; more would be in jail then on the job. I was witness to a homicide and was asked for my phone number I stated Florida is a open law state and I didnt want my unlisted number made public; I was assured it would be under the law kept private as long as it was in fact unlisted as it was it was actually against the law to knowingly release my number. So when I started getting phone calls from all the media on my UNLISTED PRIVATE PHONE NUMBER; I knew the police had released it and had done so illegally. They decided it was a accident not intentionally and no crime had been commited

  59. #59 |  BZ | 

    Their whole “we see no cause for disciplinary action” attitude infuriates me.

  60. #60 |  hatespigs | 

    I’d let that police department know any further attempts to illegally enter my property and harm my family members would be met with lethal force.

  61. #61 |  Jacob Tarr | 

    That’s just wrong. Simply just wrong.

  62. #62 |  JOR | 

    Nice to see the badgelickers are willing as ever to defend the indefensible.

    The only good cop is a dead cop.

  63. #63 |  Wayne Smith | 

    Of course the woman’s only recourse is to sue the police department and the offending officer. Otherwise, absolutely nothing will happen.

    What is wrong with cops these days? I’m 64, and while cops have always done bad things from time to time, I can’t recall a time when they’ve been so completely out of hand, so completely careless of citizen’s rights or the constitution. It’s horrifying.

  64. #64 |  SJE | 

    OK, so the officer went to the front door and got bit. I can see the cops POV better. At the same time, the woman CALLED and said she will be running errands and that the police should call in advance. Why can’t they call first? Why must they use a gun instead of pepper spray? He could have just put a note in the letter box saying he came, and that she should come down to the station to make a report.

  65. #65 |  SSCC #264–New Mexico | The Minuteman | 

    […] A New Mexico woman called the state police to report that she had been the victim of an Internet sca… and then killed her dog. […]

  66. #66 |  Jason | 

    How about if I jumped into the officer’s backyard and he pointed a gun at me. I become afraid for my life and shoot him. That would be okay then right?

  67. #67 |  paige | 

    This is an incredibly sad situation, a similar thing happened to me when I was kid living in Arizona. Our exterminator didn’t ring the door bell and just went into our locked backyard to spray the house. We even had a beware of dog sign. My husky was in the back and bit the man on the hand. She was not an aggressive dog at all, most likely was just startled. The man didn’t shoot her, but he did report her to animal control and forced my family to euthanize her. This police officer was rash, and I highly doubt his life was in danger from one dog bite. I hope that there are consequences for his actions.

  68. #68 |  Joshua | 


    I suspect the only difference is that now we have the Internet. I see no reason to doubt that this kind of thing has always gone on.

  69. #69 |  Dan Z | 

    #64 The cop didnt go to the front door, the cop jumped a fence onto private property into a yard with a “beware of dog” sign to respond to a non emergency call. Theres no way to justify his actions and the reports from the PD do not indicate he was bit.

  70. #70 |  red | 

    It’s actually a combination of huge amounts of funding and incentive from Washington to make everything a crime. Cops used to apply huge law codes towards criminals and left the common man alone because the common man funded them. Now that their funding is dependent on X number of Type Y arrests they arrest and go after people for every little thing.

    Due to grants and state/federal funding the local police no longer feel they are employed by the local populace. Instead they feel they are employed by the state and Washington to enforce occupation law on the locals. This leads to the occupying army policing effect we see today.

  71. #71 |  Brian | 

    If I started shooting at someone, and they shot back, then I shot and killed them, would that be considered self-defense? No. It wouldn’t. The officer hopped a fence, intruding, and disrupting the dog, which reacted (obviously) then shot the dog. The officer is an idiot, and is completely at fault.

  72. #72 |  http://www.theagitator.com/2012/02/25/pu… | log | 

    […] http://www.theagitator.com/2012/02/25/puppycide-23/   […]

  73. #73 |  Bill Poser | 

    There aren’t all that many dogs that are a real threat to a police officer aware that they might be there. These aren’t Siberian tigers. Most won’t actually attack a man who stands his ground, and few will keep coming after a swat with a baton. The idea that any dog that doesn’t immediately run away is a threat worth of a bullet is utter nonsense. My only hope is that a little macho will kick in and the police will realize that real men don’t go around shooting puppy dogs at the drop of a hot.

  74. #74 |  Natalie | 

    I think that anyone who reads this and disagrees should sent a letter or a phone call to the police station. If it gets enough national attention maybe they will make the cop resign or go on leave.

  75. #75 |  Windy | 

    #39 Winston Smith, re: Police officer shoots family’s dog

    This is the comment I left at that site:
    This is an all too common occurrence, I do not go looking for these kinds of articles but I see one or more of them online every single day, just yesterday there were three. Usually the family is not so lucky as to have their dog(s) survive the shooting. For some reason it appears that law enforcement has it in for dogs and the families that love them. For the family, it is just as painful as if it were one of the human family members that was shot/killed. Somehow, some way, we must put an end to this all too frequent and unnecessary killing of our beloved non-human family members. I don’t know how, but we must find a way.

    You know what? Maybe it is time to enlist the aid of veterinarians and all the agencies that claim to be there to protect animals. I have written to the ASPCA and Humane Society about this subject before with not even a single response, but if they start hearing from huge numbers of people, perhaps that will goad them into some kind of action? Everyone reading this who is disgusted with the cops killing people’s pets, please write to every animal protection agency you can and talk to your vet about getting involved in putting a stop to these crimes against people and dogs committed by cops.

  76. #76 |  JOR | 

    #70 That’s really only partly true. Laws deliberately designed to marginalize harmless but unpopular elements are nothing new. The “common man” that the cops were working for was every bit as venal and thoughtlessly bigoted as today’s badgelicking good Americans. So yes, they once upon a time reserved rough treatment for “criminals” – but they still do, and that meant as much then as it means now. Their depredations were perhaps more localized, much to the delight of localist conservatives and socialists, though this can be easily exaggerated.

    Cops today are a bit more egalitarian in their choice of targets than they used to be, but that’s easily exaggerated too (they still overwhelmingly target the poor and/or non-white).

  77. #77 |  Kafkarna | Magic Blue Smoke | 

    […] I get a feeling it’s a word that will come in handy fairly often. […]