Young Female Cop Shoots Family Dog.

[ridestrong 1]

Quote

I have scanned this thread and did not see a news link to the actual incident. If I missed it, my apologies. Here is a link to what I think is the incident the OP is referring to.

http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_14342260

This cannot be the first time a cop in that city has encountered a family dog protecting its territory. It's a shame that this officer felt so threatened that her first reaction was to shoot it. Frankly, I thought cops were tougher than that. I am not a cop, but I find it sad that this officer's response to what appeared to be a mildly threatening situation (at worst) was to pull out a gun and start blasting away. I sincerely hope that cops in general are trained better than this one was.

Thanks for posting the link.

All being said, I would not want her responding to a canceled call at my residence.

*I am not afraid of dying... I am afraid of missing life.*
----Disclaimer: I don't know shit about skydiving.----

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Come on man,
Hate the game, not the Playa.........

And I agree with your sarcasm in a literal sense. As I said, to be a cop you must basically be law-following, then you see some dirty opigs doing shit and getting away and you must stand tall.... many don't. Just remember the exclusionary rule; it's in place to deter police misconduct - maybe those justices are smarter than you think you are.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Or just the stupid cunt in this case?

A person making that assumption and accusation based only on a news report clearly tells a lot about that person.
ARe you really that sexist or are you just pretending?

Leave it to you, the sheeternal aircraft stuctural expert to drift from signage issues to this. I guess you can't defend the cunt's actions either.

It appears you are.
I have no idea what "sheeternal" is. Probably just the next thing you will claim to be an expert in, Mr. Plumber.

There ya go, stooping to spelling errors...and I ignored one of yours not too long ago. Yea, you have nothing to add, just go to spelling, ad hominem,etc. At least you have your cheerleaders.

Oh, if you get done engineering major acft structures or performing ad hominem, just go back to the signage issue. Or just pig-love all the pigs who blow away defenseless people and dogs, like the one the thread is about.

[skycop 0]

Quote

Or just pig-love all the pigs who blow away defenseless people and dogs, like the one the thread is about.

We huff and we puff, but we still can't blow Lucky's house down!! NOT.................

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Or just pig-love all the pigs who blow away defenseless people and dogs, like the one the thread is about.

We huff and we puff, but we still can't blow Lucky's house down!! NOT.................

Any misdirection will work, right?

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Hmmmm....he starts with the PA's, then accuses everybody else of diverting the subject.

People can post all the signs they want warning about a dog. They still have the responsibility to control that dog. If you have read the article you would see that the gate was open, and the owners watched the cop walk at least 40 yards onto their property, yet they either did not attempt to control or were unable to control the dog.
I twill be interesting to see if you can respond without insulting anyone, including the cop.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Hmmmm....he starts with the PA's, then accuses everybody else of diverting the subject.

Unless the cop in the article is a member, there are no PA's..... quit lying / quit whining.

Quote

People can post all the signs they want warning about a dog. They still have the responsibility to control that dog.

Yes, it's called a latched fence; welcome to reality.

***If you have read the article you would see that the gate was open, and the owners watched the cop walk at least 40 yards onto their property, yet they either did not attempt to control or were unable to control the dog.
***

You illustrate your gross bias here by not citing the diffs in stories. We get it: Republican = cops are always right. The family's story is different, they don't make any statement as to the gate either way. I think fundamentally, any person might be cautious when passing thru an open gate or a closed gate when dogs are present. It doesn't take a genius to understand dogs and their domain.

See, I addressed both stories, you addressd 1; the cops. It also doesn't take a genius to see that you have extreme bais.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Uh, yeah...right. Ok. I'm biased as all get out. I called the cop a dumb cunt, I assume she is lying, I assume the dog was posing no threat to her at all, I assume she shot the dog just for fun.
Yep, I'm biased.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Uh, yeah...right. Ok. I'm biased as all get out. I called the cop a dumb cunt, I assume she is lying, I assume the dog was posing no threat to her at all, I assume she shot the dog just for fun.
Yep, I'm biased.

And you post ONLY her version. That, patently, defines bias.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

There have been agencies sued because they did'nt and something was very wrong.

Interesting - given the decision in Warren vs. DC, I'm surprised they even got on the docket.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[futuredivot 0]

Quote

Any misdirection will work, right?

Not so far but I expect you to keep trying.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

There have been agencies sued because they did'nt and something was very wrong.

Interesting - given the decision in Warren vs. DC, I'm surprised they even got on the docket.

The issue here isn't about the welfare check, it's about the events after she got there.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

There have been agencies sued because they did'nt and something was very wrong.

Interesting - given the decision in Warren vs. DC, I'm surprised they even got on the docket.

The issue here isn't about the welfare check, it's about the events after she got there.

I was speaking to his statement of agencies being sued for non-protection post-Warren, not to the case in the OP.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Where did I post the cops version?
Where does the owners version differ from the cops other than whether she was justified in shooting the dog?
The only one showing bias here is YOU. You dislike cops and women so you assume she was some evil incarnation whose only purpose to visit the house was top shoot the dog.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[SkyDekker 1,150]

Quote

Quote

Call them from outside the gate. I am assuming you have heard of the telephone, it replaced pebbles quite some time ago.

Are you sure the officer had their phone number? When 911 dispatches, do they give the phone number directly to the officer?

No, I am not sure. But I am sure that the dispatcher had access to the phone number and that the cop had access to the dispatcher.

She put herself in a stupid situation and shot herself out of it. Was the shooting justified, sure, but it was still stupid for her to get into that situation.

And you get the common reaction from cops: I am justified to use my gun......but am completely unwilling to discuss how I could have been so stupid to get myself into that situation.

[kallend 1,672]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Call them from outside the gate. I am assuming you have heard of the telephone, it replaced pebbles quite some time ago.

Are you sure the officer had their phone number? When 911 dispatches, do they give the phone number directly to the officer?

No, I am not sure. But I am sure that the dispatcher had access to the phone number and that the cop had access to the dispatcher.

She put herself in a stupid situation and shot herself out of it. Was the shooting justified, sure, but it was still stupid for her to get into that situation.

And you get the common reaction from cops: I am justified to use my gun......but am completely unwilling to discuss how I could have been so stupid to get myself into that situation.

Why is it 'stupid' to respond to a 911 call if it is departmental policy to respond to all 911 calls, even canceled calls? Aggiedave explained very clearly why such policies exist.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skycop 0]

Quote

Any misdirection will work, right?

Damn, you got me! I was trying to be slick but I could'nt get it by you.............

.....look your shoe is untied................

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[skycop 0]

Quote

Interesting - given the decision in Warren vs. DC, I'm surprised they even got on the docket.

I'm going out on limb here, but I believe the Warren case doesn't cover neglegent acts, it can give qualified immunity (I think that's what it's called) to agencies in certain situations. Maybe some of our legal minds can help me out here.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Interesting - given the decision in Warren vs. DC, I'm surprised they even got on the docket.

I'm going out on limb here, but I believe the Warren case doesn't cover neglegent acts, it can give qualified immunity (I think that's what it's called) to agencies in certain situations. Maybe some of our legal minds can help me out here.

Seems that it would still fall under the 'no responsibility to protect' decision of Warren, but that's obviously just my opinion.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

This cannot be the first time a cop in that city has encountered a family dog protecting its territory.

And, in protecting its territory, if those dogs appeared violent or dangerous with no owner in sight to restrain it, I hope the cops shot it each and every time.

Cops are under no obligation to put themselves in unnecessary danger of life or even injury for a pet.

Disagree. I think we have seriously screwed up the ratio of authority to responsibility and accountability in our law enforcement organization, i.e. there is too much of the former and not enough of the latter. I understand that my opinion is likely too uncommon to even be considered part of a minority, but such is life.

Did you know that tandem instructors are widely expected to protect their students, even at the expense of their own bodies? How much authority comes with this level of responsibility?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

This cannot be the first time a cop in that city has encountered a family dog protecting its territory.

And, in protecting its territory, if those dogs appeared violent or dangerous with no owner in sight to restrain it, I hope the cops shot it each and every time.

Cops are under no obligation to put themselves in unnecessary danger of life or even injury for a pet.

Disagree. I think we have seriously screwed up the ratio of authority to responsibility and accountability in our law enforcement organization, i.e. there is too much of the former and not enough of the latter. I understand that my opinion is likely too uncommon to even be considered part of a minority, but such is life.

It's not just the officer's life that is endangered it is also the people the officer is there to help which can't be done if Fido bites them or is keeping them at bay.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[AndyBoyd 0]

Quote

Cops are under no obligation to put themselves in unnecessary danger of life or even injury for a pet.

Disagree. I think we have seriously screwed up the ratio of authority to responsibility and accountability in our law enforcement organization, i.e. there is too much of the former and not enough of the latter. I understand that my opinion is likely too uncommon to even be considered part of a minority, but such is life.

Did you know that tandem instructors are widely expected to protect their students, even at the expense of their own bodies? How much authority comes with this level of responsibility?

Blues,
Dave

[SkyDekker 1,150]

Quote

Why is it 'stupid' to respond to a 911

That's not what I wrote. I think the policy is great and makes perfect sense. Her execution of said policy was piss poor.

I'm done trying to explain my stance. Your a professor and am assuming have an IQ above 100. With that in mind, I know you can understand what I am saying.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

So you have no response and try to police the forum? Sad.

nah... I made my response earlier in this thread.

What's sad is I'm still a little tweaked over how a policy is selectively enforced. I used the word "ignorance", not in a mean way, and was called out on it.

Yeah, I should just let it go, but seeing shit like that fly past the mods, (I know they can't read every post. hell, most of the warnings probably come from PM complaints) just tweaks me a little.

Some would say I have anger issues. Some would say I just have a selectivegood memory.

which reminds me... heard someone being "motivated" to do better on a jump. Went something like... "don't worry... it's not like skydivers have memories like elephants. It's not like everyone on that jump will remember how you fucked up their 20-way and not want to jump with you again. No wait... it's exactly like that isn't it!"

wasn't me, but I sure remembered it.

--
Rob

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

Cops are under no obligation to put themselves in unnecessary danger of life or even injury for a pet.

Disagree. I think we have seriously screwed up the ratio of authority to responsibility and accountability in our law enforcement organization, i.e. there is too much of the former and not enough of the latter. I understand that my opinion is likely too uncommon to even be considered part of a minority, but such is life.


the police certainly are not required to put themselves in harms way to protect you.

did you realize the SCOTUS said that the police have no obligation to protect you from harm?
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html

Quote

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation

you can count on the police and emergency services to respond to your call (most of the time) but when is always the question. Be prepared to deal with whatever you have to deal with in the minutes before they get there (3-7min average response time to my neighborhood).

--
Rob

• Quote