Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HamiltonJay
The chief's version is more probable than the other alleged witnesses based on simple observation of the results of the altercation.

Dogs are fast, police dogs are fast and aggressive and specifically trained to disarm gun wielding “threats”.

If the dog had been loosed before the deceased pulled out his gun, the dog would have had him down on the ground BEFORE he could pull it out to shoot the dog in self defense. It is very unlikely that he would have had enough time to pull, aim and fire accurately enough to kill the dog unless he already had his finger on the trigger and already formed the decision to shoot.

336 posted on 05/08/2008 10:21:51 AM PDT by Valpal1 (OW! My head just exploded!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies ]


To: Valpal1

Sorry, not buying it, a dog is a dog, its not “The Flash” pulling a gun is slower than a dog covering ground distance? You are dillusional.

A shephard at full speed, not from a standing start tops out at 14 meters per second.. top humans spring at a bit over 10 meters per second. While faster than a human, they are not so blindingly fast that they are on a suspect before he could pull a gun.. you are smoking some good stuff if you believe that.


338 posted on 05/08/2008 10:36:27 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies ]

To: Valpal1; HamiltonJay
Just being logical ~ let's say the dog is fast, really fast, but he got shot.

That might well mean the victim had a gun in his hand aimed at where the dog was going to be once he closed the distance between the dog handler and the victim.

Interesting place to aim a gun eh?

Anyway, a step beyond that, when did the dog handler unleash the dog to attack the victim? Was it when he saw the gun ~ and if so, given normal reflex time to let the dog loose and issue the command to him, what was the officer doing with his gun hand?

Was he standing there with the dog under just voice command, his gun in his hand? Or, did he have the dog tethered with his gun in his holster?

You can see the complexity this situation involves. You have the cop and his gun (he's the one who shot the victim so we have to consider this). You have the cop and his dog. You have the dog and his tether. You have the dog and the distance to cover. You have the victim and his gun. You have the victim and his intent in showing the gun. You have the victim and how he was holding the gun before he fired at the dog.

You also have two other cops on the scene ~ apparantly part of a "team" that consisted of a dog handler, a tazer man, and a lookout/guard for the two specialists ('cause it's a rough town).

What were they doing? They were present with this cop when he let the dog bite a woman's butt 6 weeks earlier, so what were they doing here?

Who stood where; who did what; how many guns were drawn, and when; who got shot; who didn't get shot; and why was it deemed safe enough to use the dog to down the victim rather than zapping him with a tazer?

The number of items in the formula turns out to be quite huge, and far from a simple cut and dried "perp with gun gets shot" deal.

340 posted on 05/08/2008 10:59:47 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson