You know, maybe this one isn’t so bad. The dogs were on someone else’s property, had a history of chasing and menacing people, and the cop claims he was protecting an 10-month-old girl.
Oh, but wait. The shooter wasn’t a cop. And the dogs were on his property. And it was his daughter. So naturally he was prosecuted.
According to Feigles, the dogs were at his feet attempting to bite or attack him. He said he attempted to scare the dogs away several times by throwing rocks and eventually firing warning shots into the ground.
The Sullivans heard the shots, but thought nothing of it because some neighbors occasionally shoot targets in the area. Those shots, the Sullivans believe, actually were the ones aimed at their dogs.
“He took away one of the Sullivan’s family members and maimed one of them,” said Melissa Kalaus, assistant district attorney.
Kalaus said the dogs – one of which weighed 16 pounds, the other 20 pounds – were a nuisance, but were not aggressive. Feigles chose to shoot the animals instead of taking other reasonable defenses such as going inside or calling authorities.
“Call the authorities.” Good one.
Here’s another cop-kills-dog case from St. Pete, Florida. Police were responding to a domestic disturbance. The dog lived in a separate apartment. According to the article, St. Pete police killed seven dogs last year, “prompting police Chief Chuck Harmon to change a number of policies for dealing with dogs.”