Posted on 06/16/2009 11:04:00 AM PDT by marktwain
"Killer" the miniature dachshund shot by a police officer. (Richmond-Times Dispatch)Police in Danville, Virginia are defending the fatal shooting and killing of an 11 year-old miniature dachshund, claiming that the police officer who shot the 12-pound dog, acted reasonably and in self-defense.
"Shooting a dog which is actively presenting a threat to an officer is within the department's policy," states a press release issued by Danville Police Chief Phillip Broadfoot.
The diminutive dog, who had the ironic name of "Killer", was known as a "sweet, mild-mannered dog," reports the Richmond-Times Dispatch.
"He just kind of walked up and down the neighborhood and didn't bother anybody," said neighbor Jenine Edmunds. "He was just a little house dog."
Killer and his family --- Tawalin Harper, his wife and two kids --- live on a quiet cul-de sac. "He was the security guard around here," Harper said, explaining that Killer would bark whenever a strange car entered the cul-de-sac.
How did the shooting happen?
Earlier this week, a police officer pulled into the cul-de-sac to serve two warrants to a neighbor. As the officer --- whose name the police department is refusing to release --- returned to his car, "he was surprised by a growling dog running through the yard directly at him from the rear, leaving him with just seconds to consider his options," reads the police statement.
Police Chief Broadstreet said the officer's options in that instance were to run to the squad car, distract the dog, or use pepper spray, his baton or his firearm.
After Killer, allegedly "lunged at the officer and attacked him," the officer decided to draw his gun and shoot the aging 12-pound mini dachshund. Apparently, the officer feared great bodily harm --- perhaps to his ankles.
Harper's children, who were inside the house, heard the gunshot and called their father, who raced home to find Killer laying on the ground "with his guts hanging out.“
According to NBC4i, the officer leaned against his patrol car, smoking a cigarette. He refused to give Harper his name and badge number and said "he had to shoot the dog because he was barking at him."
When the officer's supervisor arrived on the scene, the supervisor/lieutenant was very sorry. "“He kept apologizing," recalls Harper. "And he said I know apologizing can’t bring the dog back, but I just don’t know what to say.“
The Harpers remain devastated at the loss of the dog they have had and loved for 11 years. "He was a family member," says a bewildered and saddened Harper. "They took a family member away."
You can’t defend your point of view, so you run away? Weak.
and please, tell me exactly how you know that this cop did not tell the truth about being threatened.
You misrepresent what I said. I simply said that the article appeared to have been written by someone with a bias, and I couldn’t be certain of the info, however if it was true the cop was wrong. I’m not sure why this makes you so angry.
Then virtually everyone I know is fortunate. I’m glad, it’s a good thing to be!
Your comment is directed at the cop that shot the small dog, right? If not, that just makes you a thug sympathizer and no better than the terrorist cop.
Here’s hoping your luck doesn’t run out, then. The cops can rob, rape, beat, and even kill you and get away with it.
And THEN I’ll be mad!
Unfortunately, too many cops fail to extend that same courtesy to their fellow citizens.
Or their dogs.
Any law enforcer who refers to people in general as "civilians" bears watching as they see the world through the lens of "us and them."
In all my years, whenever I’ve read a story in the media where I have personal knowledge of the events, the story contains at least one material inaccuracy.
FR seems to understand this with every story, with the exception of the perceived misbehavior of a LE officer.
Just find that odd, myself.
It’s easy to laugh about it until it happens to you or to someone you love. And it can.
Just remember that every time you see a cop, you’re rolling the dice with a guy who enjoys dominating other people, and who can legally kill you and get away with it.
You are the only one trying to inject "emotion" into this, as a means to dismiss critics.
Department policy is not "law." The lack of discretion you advocate is only barely acceptable in schools that expel for asprin. It is totally unacceptable in those equipped to use deadly force among unarmed civilians.
Your type of intellectual dishonesty and duplicity is EXACTLY why modern law enforcement is so disdained.
I see a crazed cop-killing death machine laying in wait for unsuspecting LEOs. Just look at the animalistic hatred in those eyes...I hope you are responsible and alert when children and the elderly are around such a razor-toothed hamstringing monster.
Freegards
Basically, because it is apparent you can't understand your own post, you are saying you want to kill the pets of the police officers to make their families cry. . .and that makes you no better than a terrorist because you want, you yearn, to hurt the innocent. Classy.
I thought you were leaving...
Experience. Twelve pound dogs with four inch legs don't scare me and shouldn't scare a cop. If this dog does scare him I wonder how much good he would be breaking up a bar fight.
And you defend the terrorist that kills a family dog the size of a rat, so that puts us in the same boat I guess. How’s the view from your end?
That's okay. After reading your last post I see you have all the intellectual depth of Scarlet O'Hara... Oh fiddle-de-de!
You, on the other hand, relish the opportunity to kill to make the innocent cry. . .your words, not mine.
I will pray for you, truly, as you have deeply held anger issues.
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.