Killing of family dog unfolds on videotape (Dog shooter gets desk duty)

tennessean.com ^ | 1/9/03 | LEON ALLIGOOD

[kako]

For all you know you have a car full of bank robbers.

What bank were they suspected as having robbed?

What was the basis for this suspicion? A single cell phone call from an anonymous person who saw a wallet fall off the top of the car?

For all I know, the FReeper named "Politically Correct" is really Osama Bin Laden and maybe a Predator drone should zap the location of the computer he is using.

All it takes is a phone call, active imagination and an idiot with the authority to kill w/o consequence.

[fogarty]

If had been a police dog shot, rest assured these people would be behind bars, waiting for murder conviction. Shooting a police dog is the equivalent of shooting a police officer in the eyes of the justice system. Shooting a citizen's dog, however, means a slap on the wrist.

[Hatteras]

You didn't see the video because you can not see the dog "prancing around".

I'm not defending the officer. What I am saying is that the video does not show what kind of agression the dog was showing as it was in the frame for about two seconds before it disappears. That dog's tail was not swinging wildly from side to side like when he greets you at the door. An erect tail, such as in the video, is a sign of alertness. Not necessarily agressiveness, mind you, just that he's on alert. As he jumps out of the vehicle, that alert tail will bounce.

The dog and the cop were out of the picture and at the last instant the cop backed into the camera frame with what "appears" to be the dog lunging at him. Unfortunate as it is, it becomes a he said/she said determination on the part of any judge.

[T Wayne]

Since no felony had been committed, why was a felony stop indicated.

Having been the "victim" of a felony stop many years ago, I suggest that the cops make sure a felony has been committed before they stop someone at gunpoint.

IS THAT REALLY ASKING TOO MUCH?????????????????

[Politically Correct]

What bank were they suspected as having robbed?
What was the basis for this suspicion? A single cell phone call from an anonymous person who saw a wallet fall off the top of the car?

Sigh.......
Yeah, after the fact we know that.
But that was not the information fed to the officers.
If there's anyone that should suffer for this travisty it's the dispatchers that got all the info screwed up.

Just my opinion........

[kako]

From what I understand so far about this case there was not a crime which could even be remotely linked to the Smoak family, their car or location.

Someone saw a wallet & some cash and the cops/dispatchers conjured up a phantom crime to suit their mentality so they could excercise their full jack-booted glory.

[wimpycat]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/819436/posts?page=117#117

[American Blood]

All you cop-haters on this thread make me want to puke! Did the officer in this particular case make a snap decision, perhaps even a hasty decision in shooting the dog? Probably. Would I be upset if this happened to my family. Without doubt. Regardless, cops are human. They are going to make mistakes. They are not perfect like some of you wannabe anarchists on this thread. 99% of the outstanding men and women who serve and protect us do it with class and integrity.

It's ashamed they have to be denegrated by ingrates who are probably too stupid and cowardly to walk in their shoes, risking death every day, to protect the innocent people of this country against those who would do them harm.

[Hatteras]

"The dog was NOT in attack stance, it was not running and did not display the typical aggressive signals."

I would suggest you review the clip one more time. Dogs don't necessarily "sprint" to a target when they attack. This dog appears to be heading for the officer that was not in the camera frame right from the get go. The officer backs up into the frame and shoots at what "appears" to be the dog lunging at him (There's a light object that comes into the picture and stops when the gun goes off, I'm assuming that's the dog)

Typical aggressive signs? Just what are "typical agressive signs"? Do you mean the officer has to literally have the dog's mouth around his throat before he can shoot?

BTW, all this happened in three seconds. Check the timer on the screen, there wasn't much time to do any "prancing around" as some were suggesting.

[mg39]

Darnright, you are absolutely right. If someone must take their dog in a car, that dog should be secured in some kind of protective crate.

Of course, if someone needs to bring a big dog just a few lcoal miles to the vet, hauling out the crate might be more work than is necessary. However, given the all-too common occurrence of dogs jumping out into traffic and now, IDIOT MORONS WITH BADGES AND GUNS shooting every dog they see because they think it's a rabid pit bull, dogs should always be secured inside the car with a leash.

This cop deserves a good as* kicking; probably, the boys in blue will slap him on his wrists and release him into the public where, as usual, he'll me more of a menace than anything else.

[American Blood]

If your father or brother were a police officer would you consider them "IDIOT MORONS WITH BADGES AND GUNS"?

[Atlas Sneezed]

"Don't police have the "right" to search a car without consent if they can see things in plain sight? If they close the door, there is less that they can see. "

This why, whenver possible, when you are asked to exit your car, you lock it behind you.

[fogarty]

I've walked in combat boots for a decade. I've trod in places where most cops have not.

My loyalty is to the US Constitution. Their oath is to protect and serve. When they have departed from that oath, they need to be held accountable.

Let me make my point clear again: when cops trample on the Constitution of the United States, then in my mind it makes them domestic enemies. It is black or white in my mind.

[Henrietta]

Why is it that only LEO's are justified with this 2 sec rule?

Because, tsk, silly, there are different rules for lords and serfs.... (sarcasm off)

[mg39]

I call it like I see it (all too often). I've met plenty of cops; I'm even friends with a cop. None, not one of them, seemed smart, and that includes my friend.

The cop in this case is too damn stupid to have a gun and a badge.

[Atlas Sneezed]

"Meanwhile you never breathe word of thanks for the good work they do keeping you and your property safe."

Other than being ready to come out and collect evidence after the fact, how do the cops keep me and my property safe?

[T. P. Pole]

The cops, as part of the government have NO rights. They have responsibilities.

Note that I had "rights" in quotes.

[Politically Correct]

From what I understand so far about this case there was not a crime which could even be remotely linked to the Smoak family, their car or location.
Someone saw a wallet & some cash and the cops/dispatchers conjured up a phantom crime to suit their mentality so they could excercise their full jack-booted glory.

No doubt that the dispatchers screwed it up.
No evidence that the cops were aware.....me thinks your tinfoil is showing from under your hat.

[fogarty]

Gimme a break! The cop could have used a baton, could have simply used the butt of the shotgun to hit the dog on the snout, could have done any number of things. Police officers should be TRAINED to recognize when a situation is life threatening. It is clear from the aftermath of this event, his life was NOT in immediate danger.

Instead this guy simply blew the head of the dog off with his shotgun.

[American Blood]

For someone who has served in our great military, your ungratefulness for the outstanding job that most of our officers do is extremely perplexing. You have plenty of venom for the small percentage who "trample the constitution", but yet I hear no words of praise for the vast majority who serve and protect with honor and integrity every single day. How sad.