Posted on 04/17/2012 8:27:51 AM PDT by Timber Rattler
AUSTIN – The fatal shooting of a pet dog by an Austin Police Department officer over the weekend is sparking outrage near and far.
As of Monday evening, close to 22,000 people had hit the "Like" button on a Facebook page called “Justice for Cisco,” the name of Austinite Michael Paxton's dog, which was killed by an officer.
(Excerpt) Read more at kvue.com ...
Some comments are beneath contempt.
I am truly awed: EVERY one of yours on this thread are not just contemptible, but genuine examples of fascist groupthink.
People who think like you do scare me, and I’m certain I’m not the only one mortified by your seeming acceptance of jackboots and thuggery being used against blameless citizens simply because some faceless dispatcher sent the wrong address?
“Controlling the dog”? Excuse me, but the dog was PLAYING in its owner’s BACKYARD!
NOBODY could possibly be THAT stupid that they expect a dog that sees a threat (stranger for those in Rio Linda) to NOT approach rapidly said danger in defense of its territory.
The cop was in the wrong on several levels: he was at the wrong address (not his fault), he was in the backyard rather than the front door (his indiscretion AND trespass), he had his sidearm out without provocation and was in a potentially dangerous situation without backup (his fault), he gave conflicting instructions to an innocent party (his fault), he reacted faster than any of the instructions he gave COULD BE implemented (his error).
I have my personal issues with cops, but your absolute deference to every error in this case makes me wonder if you’re not part of the Clark County investigative board. You know they’ve not had a “bad shoot” there since 1975, right?
I reread what I had written and while it contained several spelling errors nowhere could I find that I had said you had to respect me. I'm done with this conversation you seem to one of these people who just can't learn.
People who think like you do scare me, and I’m certain I’m not the only one mortified by your seeming acceptance of jackboots and thuggery being used against blameless citizens simply because some faceless dispatcher sent the wrong address?
The details of the event will likely be reviewed under public pressure, but on the first take handling of the situation was acceptable. You and others might assume that the officer was sent to defuse a reported urgent and potentially life-threatening altercation, then keep your conclusions until you have more details.
I have my personal issues with cops, but your absolute deference to every error in this case makes me wonder if you’re not part of the Clark County investigative board.
Well, a few years ago I was president of an urban village association of 102 houses, about 300 people. I had to deal with a couple instances of dogs terrorizing neighbors, with owners not willing to train or restrain their troublesome "pet." So I understand the officer's plight. Are you aware that a "blue heeler" is rather larger, about 50 lb, and is bred to be independent, energetic, aggressive, and to nip and bite? Hmm?
You need to understand that in an urban environment, it is unfair to the pet and to the public if the owner has not met his responsibility to fence, leash, or obedience-train his dog, having that animal under control, even in his own yard. That is the law in my county.
The blue heeler breed is eminently trainable, but the owner here has failed in his social responsibility to the community. The dog is bred to instinctively menace, snarl, and bite cows, why not a law officer, or child chasing a ball onto the lawn, or someone riding a bicycle by, where the dog is not restrained from access to public areas?
Regardless of whether or not the address was "right," the dog owner was in the wrong and was negligent in the responsibility for the predictable menacing of his dog at any time.
Your response in this matter is likewise irrational, emotional, and untrained in self-discipline in assessing the situation and in discussing it without venom in your tone. No wonder you have cued us in that personal issues with law enforcement is a problem for you. Let me suggest that you review your response here, and see if it is reasonable to amend it.
With sincere respect --
I am not yet quite done with this conversation. You need to hear this. You have my respect for two reasons, though you certainly have not "earned" it. Here they are:
(1) In my view, you are a human being, created by The God in His image, and should therefore be treated with high regard for your value and destiny. You cannot "earn" this honor.
(2) As a human, the person next to you may be one of the most dangerous denizens on this planet. Or that person may be one of the most beneficial acquaintances you can make. It might even be both. Looks can be very deceiving. At he outset, one never knows. Automatic initial respect for that person would be the wisest stance to take. Double this for a sworn officer or soldier who has put his/her life on the line for an orderly and safe society.
I'm a Northerner, but I have met many Southern-bred men and women to whom respect of others is a customary trait, and appreciate that they were not brought up in a barn. You might want to review your outlook on life. Your implicit valuation of a fellowman is likely to color your progress and success in life, regardless of command of English grammar.
With sincere respect --
Either you are being intentionally obtuse, ro you’re trolling for comments.
The dog was IN ITS OWNER’S BACK YARD.
The officer was TRESPASSING
The officer gave conflicting orders AND shot the dog before any of the orders could be understood, let alone complied with.
That’s it for me. Some folks just don’t want to see things as they are. All is rosy and the policeman is always right. Seig Heil!
If this comment is to be believed, it’s unofficial policy:
“A friend of mine had an APD detective play guitar in his band for about a year. The detective told him the cops are trained to shoot any dog that “gets in the way.” It’s an unofficial policy that is part of the SWAT training. So these cops know they can shoot first and ask questions later and the department will back them up. When APD claims they have no “official” policy for handling dogs in these situations, it is the truth. They only have an “unofficial” policy and that is shoot the dog first, apologize later (if you feel like it). People who think this is no big deal would probably sing a different tune if it was their dog.”
That one had me rolling on the floor - laughing my ass off - for real. Thanks.
It's not a question of "rights." City codes or village ordinances regarding animal control may be quite a bit stricter than those of the less restrictive county codes applying in rural areas. In fact, the deed restrictions on my property are that in this village association residents may only have small animals always kept inside.
The freedoms you have are limited in the degree to which they impact on those around you. The denser the population, the less the latitude you have.
It might be better to focus on your responsibilities more than on your "rights."
Just an observation ...
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.