HPD Officer Shoots Dog In Back Yard

Click 2 Houston ^ | May 3, 2011 | Unknown

[Immerito]

"Yes, citizen; we do consider elderly labs a threat; however, even though we damaged your property, we're not going to pay for damages erroneously delivered. Isn't it great to be IN CHARGE? Well, we suppose you wouldn't know, citizen."

[SJSAMPLE]

Not even safe in your own gated yard.

[WaterBoard]

“Hernandez was told that the city considers a dog property, and the city is not responsible for property damage.”

So the police can burn you house down as innocent third party and you have no recourse. Nice.

[Immerito]

Apparently it never occurred to the officer that had a criminal BEEN in the yard, the dog would be confronting it. Therefore, the cop had NO lawful reason to be in Hernandez’s yard.

Fortunately, the lab survived.

Good dog.

[Las Vegas Ron]

Bruce, lunged at him, he said, so he shot the dog near its left eye.

Too bad dogs can't shoot back like we can.

[Viking2002]

Fire a shot into my yard - especially at my dog - and I won't look for a badge. I will consider you an imminent threat to my life, and go for a head shot. We'll argue about the 4th Amendment later.

"But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: for men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away, for his name is Obama."

[sagar]

I think shooting a dog is customary.

Cops have the power to violate your property and shoot your dog in the left eye, but USA cannot violate Bin Laden’s property and shoot him in between his eyes. Strange times.

[Immerito]

Says who? :-)

[Jonty30]

The cop probably realized that, but there is just something about seeing a dog and having the desire or need to shoot it.

[OrangeHoof]

the city is not responsible for property damage

Since when? You mean the government has free rule to wreck your house without so much as fair compensation?

[Las Vegas Ron]

Sad LOL, one of my favorite pics!

If only it wer true...

RE #6 Viking2002; BUMP!

[Immerito]

[Las Vegas Ron]

but USA cannot violate Bin Laden’s property and shoot him in between his eyes. Strange times.

Sheite, are you kidding?

At least we didn't water board him....that would be "torture"

[Las Vegas Ron]

LOL....raise you one....

[Salamander]

“We’ll argue about the 4th Amendment later.”

Got no porcupines in your area?.....;]

[andyk]

Did cops killing dogs only recently become newsworthy, or did cops manage to survive for years and years up until fairly recently without killing family pets?

[Yet_Again]

Cops did manage to survive for many years keeping the peace. As they have gotten to be more paramilitary with 100,000 a year salaries, military like retirements and patriot act powers they have started acting more like Gestapo.

[EdReform]

LEO’s had better get their heads out of their asses and get some training in animal behavior. This horseshit has got to stop.

[dljordan]

“So the police can burn you house down as innocent third party and you have no recourse. Nice.”

Well, if they burn your house down, kill your family, shoot your dog and declare you a ‘terrorist’ then you have got to go ‘Josy Wales’ on them.

[I still care]

Never call the cops if you have a dog. Isn’t that sad?

“Hernandez was told that the city considers a dog property, and the city is not responsible for property damage.”

If a cop runs into a yard with a dog, it is proper for the dog to protect his property. The dog doesn’t know.

Maybe if the city were responsible for a few thousand dollars worth of vet bills, and a lawsuit or two, the cops might think before they chase a chihuahua into the kennel and kill her or shoot an elderly lab in the backyard.