Posted on 07/21/2017 10:34:26 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Newly released bodycam footage shows a police officer’s perspective when he responded to a burglary alarm and shot two tail-wagging dogs earlier this month — but doesn’t seem to help prove his reason for pulling the trigger.
SEE ALSO Homeowner slams cop for shooting tail-wagging dog Homeowner slams cop for shooting tail-wagging dog The officer, identified as Michael Mays of the Minneapolis Police Department, is seen in the clip pointing his firearm at one of the dogs — a pit bull named Ciroc — as the dog slowly walks toward him. Mays then shoots the pooch in the face.
Ciroc squirms as the second dog, Rocko, runs toward Mays. Mays then fires multiple rounds at Rocko, wounding the dog in the side, face and shoulder.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Do all the cops in Minneapolis have itchy trigger fingers?
Well at least 2,of them do. Must be MPD “protocol” to shoot first then figure out the situation later.Filthy bastards.
Anyone, and I do mean anyone, who harms one of my dogs is a dead person walking. The only open questions are when, where, and how it happens.
P
Standard procedure. Another reason why many are not trusting police.
There was a time in America when police academies wouldn’t graduate simmering candidates who were too delicate and scared to take a dog bite on the job.
Standards and honor mattered back then so there were no metrosexual sissies on the force to defend the wimps we see doing this crap.
It’s who they are. By definition from the facts.
Why does it seem like the first instinct of anyone in law enforcement is to shoot someone’s dog? Hell, some psychotic, uniformed bastard even shoot a dog that was LOCKED IN A CAGE!
I will tell anyone and everyone that I will just about automatically vote to acquit anyone charged with a crime if the cops shot their dog - because that tells me that the cops in question were NOT doing their job - which raises a sincere doubt in my mind as to what else about that case might be fishy.
Now, maybe if some states passed laws that required any cop who unjustifiably shoots a dog to PERSONALLY reimburse the owner - whether a criminal or not - $10,000 if the dog lives, and $25,000 if the dog dies, then we’d see less dogs shot. Oh, and they’d have to prove that the shooting was justified, via a uniform camera...no solid blue wall of silence or justification.
Don’t get me wrong, I do support police and policing in general. We need laws to be enforced, and brave/decent people to do that enforcing. I’m just ticked off at the scumbags who shoot dogs first and without any particular reason, as they are the antithesis of good cops.
My nomination for all-time AH, from Danville, VA: (Murderer of a 11 pound MINIATURE Dachshund!)
http://www.theknightshift.com/2009/06/this-is-danville-police-department.html
There was probably a loud noise some time that day that startled him.
The bodycam was not “turned off,” “malfunctioning,” or just plain erased? I’m shocked. /sadly no sarc
Ah, I was wrong:
“A police report says Ciroc growled at the officer — but Mays’ body camera footage did not begin recording audio until after shots were fired, making it difficult to verify the cop’s account.”
Gee, how coincidental that the bodycam’s audio was not working when the dog allegedly growled. NOT SHOCKED.
Those darn Minneapolis cops, they just love to shoot. People, dogs, whatever happens to be in front of them. Did this cop hear a “startling” noise before he started blasting away? At least there was not another cop there to have his nose nearly shot off.
Bastard! I liked to shoot him!!!!!!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.