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."
That is clearly insane. Pets are innocent and don’t know any better. They don’t know that their caretaker is a deranged lunatic with a badge. Take it to the person himself. If someone killed pet, I wouldn’t even consider killing that person’s pet. Of course, it’s if that person had a pet. I would just help that individual become familiar with types of punishment from the Medieval era.
your jump to bees and asthma inhalers is ridiculous.
Actually I don’t think you are correct. Pretty much when the police try to arrest you, you must comply. You later get your legal redress.
Not if said person is aware of the dog's presence, or unless the someone chooses to actually help the dog to inflict an injury.
is this dog capable of transmitting rabies to a human?
Yes, as is any mammal. Are ill-mannered toddlers fair game, too?
no mater how silly this particular situation is. all he has to say is that he felt threatened and the dog was charging. justified shoot.
not saying it was right, but it was legal.
Right.
Tell me, if dogs are such common threats, especially tiny miniature dogs like this, how is it possible that mailmen, salesmen, gas company employees, telephone workers, real estate agents, water company employees are able to go into neighborhoods *DAILY* and enter peoples properties routinely, without a firearm, and without shooting and killing dogs?
How do these people possibly survive these daily threats?
In addition, do you think all these types of people mentioned above should have firearms, like police officers so they too can protect themselves against threats like this miniature dachshund?
that's a logical comparison. /s
this is why we can't talk about this logically. you refuse to acknowledge that there is a difference between dogs and humans. thankfully our legislators are a tad more pragmatic than you seem to be.
Shooting the kid (or a little dog) in my scenario above would have been legal too. I simply would not have done it because it is not right. I guess that is the difference between the cop and me.
No, we are talking about the law not about what is right. According to this cop right and wrong are irrelevant as long as it is legal.
anyway, give me the choice between a human sustaining a physical/serious physical injury or the dog being shot, i'll take the human every day.
How do these people possibly survive?
i'll type this very slowly...you cannot compare humans and dogs when you are talking about deadly physical force laws!!!
Again, you try to claim something is not malpractice if it is not actionable...the same thing I objected to before with your prattling about "actual law." This is wrong. Furthermore, we both know if the Chief's opinion had gone against this clown he'd be out on his a$$, regardless of the "policy."
yes, i absolutely think all sorts of people should be armed.
So why haven't those pragmatic politicians are you called them, allowed mailmen, water meter readers, RE Agents, and gas company employees etc to be armed with firearms while on the job?
I'll type this even more slowly. In Texas after dark if I feel threatened I can shoot either a dog or a person, especially on my property.
I understand the difference between right and wrong verses legal. You point out that shooting the dog was legal, well shooting a person under these circumstances is also legal. Our point is that the cop was WRONG. Further proof that he knew he was wrong because he wouldn't identify himself.
In my opinion a real chicken shit too.
Okay, lets be logical:
is this dog toddler capable of inflicting a physical injury upon someone?
is this dog toddler capable of transmitting rabies to a human?
Fact is there was no reason for this cop to shoot and kill such a small dog.
It's over the top, and those here suggesting it's within department policy or it was somehow legitimate, are crazy at best.
“As an example, my experience has shown me that most CHP officers are professional and well-behaved (as long as you are respectful), but the local cops seem to be about 50/50. I also know of some cities here in CA which have big reputations for out-of-control cops, and have heard horror stories from people I know.”
My experience is exactly the opposite. The CHP i’ve had dealings with have been gung-ho nitwits for the most part, while the local PD are about 50-50, and the sheriff’s deputies have been the MOST professional.
a 12-pound miniature dachshund is almost two and a half 5-pound Chihuahuas
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.