Posted on 01/31/2011 8:21:41 AM PST by Immerito
A Valley neighborhood is outraged after two dogs are shot and killed by local police.
The Shelburn Town Marshal says he was forced to shoot two dogs.
Officer Doug Inman says he was called to a field off Mill Street, where neighbors say a pack of dogs were fighting.
Inman tried to break-up the fight and even fired shots into the ground to scare the dogs.
When that didn't work he shot two mastiff puppies.
The family says he had no right to kill the dogs.
"I'm just glad it wasn't a child out being attacked by these two dogs," Inman said. "They are saying they were pups but you can go over and look at the dogs and see how large they are. They are probably between 75 and 100 pounds each and if that had been a child we would have a dead child out here."
"It makes me very sad, kids are supposed to be able to trust the police department and after seeing something like that, I don't know how they can," said dog owner Angie Waldon.
Neighbors say the two dogs had a history of being aggressive.
Sadly, these days, it is best to operate under the assumption that there are very few situations that can’t be made worse by the addition of a cop.
Well said.
What if the “warning shots” the cop fired ricocheted and struck a residence? Or hit a bystander?
Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain why it was the mastiffs, who were defending their territory, and not the antagonizing stray that was shot?
Or you would be so kind as to explain why animal control was not called to separate the dogs?
I am having trouble understanding why the officer thought shooting the dogs was necessary or helpful.
Obviously, we want the fight to stop, but wouldn’t it be less dangerous to the dogs to let them fight than to shoot them to death? Was he trying to protect a particular dog or dogs that he thought were being attakced by the ones he shot? Were humans in danger? The article does not indicate this.
The comments posted here actually make the cop’s actions seem slightly more understandable and make me think the irresponsibility of the Mastiff’s owners (who apparently posted them) may have contributed to this sad outcome.
a) 1 year old Mastiffs, while not fully mature, are not “pups” in the sense of cute, harmless little dogs. They are huge at that age, and should be treated as potentially dangerous dogs by their owners, though well trained Mastiff’s are not super aggressive.
b) From the comments, it seems like they had the Mastiff’s tied up outside, in an unfenced yard, and knew that at least one other dog was coming into the yard to tease them. You don’t leave dogs (especially large ones) chained up outside, especially in unfenced yards. This leads to aggression and terrioriality in the dogs and is illegal in many jurisdictions.
It sounds like the cop went way overboard and his actions should be investigated, but the owners seem to have created the dangerous situation.
How large were the animals? Out of control raging 200-lb dogs?
Animal control? Right. . .maybe sometime that week they may show up.
Look, I get it: To you every police officer is wrong every time a dog gets shot. Got it. The police are never right. Got it. And of course, to you every media report is completely honest and unbiased when they report on shootings by the police. Got it.
I'm done. Buh-bye.
“I’m just glad it wasn’t a child out being attacked by these two dogs,” Inman said. “They are saying they were pups but you can go over and look at the dogs and see how large they are. They are probably between 75 and 100 pounds each and if that had been a child we would have a dead child out here.”
What kind of stupidity is this? We had to shoot the dog because if they had been attacking children it would have been bad? By that logic, if a man is walking down the street and a cop drives up and shoots him, he could justify it by saying, if that guy had been on the way to setting fire to an orphanage, it would have been bad.
So you know that your two dog are aggressive, but yet you keep them around.
Like a time bomb.
I suppose in this instance the cop could have stood back and let these animals keep fighting until they killed each other, but he would have been criticised for that ,if he had.
When you have aggressive animals you must keep them away from the public or else they get what they deserve
Ha ha, It takes half an hour to get a police officer in my neighb orhood, It takes a day to get an animal warden.
I’m not kind, believe me.
>> Right on. The number of cop haters on FR is amazing.
Indeed, it is.
SnakeDoc
If you’re calling the cops to your house, put the dogs in another room or garage and let the cops know that you have the dogs and where they are. It’s not that hard to figure out.
“let these animals keep fighting until they killed each other”
Most dogs do NOT fight to the death; they have long inbred instincts that keep them from stopping short of killing another dog.
The fact that those mastiffs had not killed the smaller stray in the time from the beginning of the fight to the arrival of the police highlights that these dogs were not looking to kill the stray, just to establish dominance and make it explicitly clear that the stray was not to bother them again.
You know it, stops the fight right now.
Story says that the animals were in a field, not in a fenced area. And yes, the cop should have shot the stray. Are you from this area? Are wild dogs (aka "strays") a problem? Is this owner a responsible person?
I am getting the feeling that police in America are increasingly becoming more paranoid and overly reactive.
After watching what the Egyptian police have been doing in times of unrest I can only vaguely wonder what they would do here in America should we have a similar national unrest.
“Look, I get it: To you every police officer is wrong every time a dog gets shot. Got it. The police are never right. Got it. “
Wrong. You are inventing positions for me and your fellow Freepers. Had you read the article and the thread, you would know this claim to be patently false.
Would you advocate that police shoot both the intruder and the homeowners fighting him were this a case about people?
Story says that the animals were in a field, not in a fenced area. And yes, the cop should have shot the stray. Are you from this area? Are wild dogs (aka "strays") a problem? Is this owner a responsible person?
The mastiffs were apparently chained to a log, i.e., no fence. doesn't sound like a smart idea to me. Chaining up dogs is illegal around here.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2665987/posts
That article does not discuss the same story. That incident occurred in Arizona. This incident occurred in Indiana.
Story says that the animals were in a field, not in a fenced area.
The fighting dogs were found in a field apparently adjacent to the owner’s property. Likely the stray, realizing that the dogs were about to give him a righteous chewing, attempted to flee and the mastiffs pursued and caught him.
And yes, the cop should have shot the stray.
We are agreed on that score. The fact that a collar and part of a chain was on the female mastiff should indicate to any observer that these were owned animals that had broken loose.
Are you from this area?
I have never lived in Indiana.
Are wild dogs (aka “strays”) a problem?
In my opinion, strays are a problem no matter where a Freeper lives.
Is this owner a responsible person?
Since the owner had restrained the dogs (which pulled loose with justifiable provocation, that would indicate that the owner was concerned with keeping her dogs under control; unless further evidence turns up to indicate irresponsibility, I think we can safely assume a responsible owner.
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.