Cop shoots friendly dags....

[BlDtyLry]

Dog lover here so don't jump all over me for the response I'm about to make. Unfortunately dogs, cats, and any other pet animal are considered property and the owner can only sue for the "value" of the animal. Still doesn't make this right,

Just the other day my co-worker and I talked about "taking the hit". Both of us served Active Duty Army and we are trained in restraint. We also wake up each morning thinking today is our last day on earth and we are prepared to give our life. So when a civilian comes up to us with knife in hand, you either shoot and risk a court martial, get stabbed and then shoot, or get stabbed and die; you take the hit and then react if you can. We have the guns, the body armor and the training; we also have a morale responsibilty and need to execute restraint.

I think in some cases the LEO chooses to not take the hit and think they have a better chance in court/legal proceedings. I wonder how may LEOs are killed or injured by dogs to justify this shooting?

[Selador]

Dog lover here so don't jump all over me for the response I'm about to make. Unfortunately dogs, cats, and any other pet animal are considered property and the owner can only sue for the "value" of the animal. Still doesn't make this right,

Just the other day my co-worker and I talked about "taking the hit". Both of us served Active Duty Army and we are trained in restraint. We also wake up each morning thinking today is our last day on earth and we are prepared to give our life. So when a civilian comes up to us with knife in hand, you either shoot and risk a court martial, get stabbed and then shoot, or get stabbed and die; you take the hit and then react if you can. We have the guns, the body armor and the training; we also have a morale responsibilty and need to execute restraint.

I think in some cases the LEO chooses to not take the hit and think they have a better chance in court/legal proceedings. I wonder how may LEOs are killed or injured by dogs to justify this shooting?

The only 'hit' he was going to take, was a good old fashioned dog licking.

Watch the video. The dogs were curious, but ultra friendly.

[BlDtyLry]

Agreed. What I'm saying is let the dogs attack to justify the shooting. I'd rather be wrong and bitten then to deal with the aftermath of what this guy is going to have to live with.

If he jumped over my fence I'm 99.99% sure my border collie would have bitten him. In this case, dogs appear to be friendly and show no signs of aggression; even after being shot.

[Selador]

Agreed. What I'm saying is let the dogs attack to justify the shooting. I'd rather be wrong and bitten then to deal with the aftermath of what this guy is going to have to live with.

If he jumped over my fence I'm 99.99% sure my border collie would have bitten him. In this case, dogs appear to be friendly and show no signs of aggression; even after being shot.

Completely agreed. Just emphasizing the point that the guy was completely incompetent. On top of being chicken-shart.

Thank you for your service.

And I made the very same decision when I was in the army, and later as a deputy. I'd rather take the hit, or bite, (being as prepared for it as I could be.), and know I had done the right thing, than to just shoot to protect myself against "possible" aggression.

Anyone that could do what this guy did, and still look at himself in the mirror, deserves all the 'aftermath', he has to live with...

[snozzberries]

Dog lover here so don't jump all over me for the response I'm about to make. Unfortunately dogs, cats, and any other pet animal are considered property and the owner can only sue for the "value" of the animal. Still doesn't make this right,

Just the other day my co-worker and I talked about "taking the hit". Both of us served Active Duty Army and we are trained in restraint. We also wake up each morning thinking today is our last day on earth and we are prepared to give our life. So when a civilian comes up to us with knife in hand, you either shoot and risk a court martial, get stabbed and then shoot, or get stabbed and die; you take the hit and then react if you can. We have the guns, the body armor and the training; we also have a morale responsibilty and need to execute restraint.

I think in some cases the LEO chooses to not take the hit and think they have a better chance in court/legal proceedings. I wonder how may LEOs are killed or injured by dogs to justify this shooting?

This goes to my point that I think LEO should only be allowed to shoot, if fired upon first. They have body armor, training, radios, helicopters. If they need, retreat, take cover, call for backup, monitor and observe from a distance.

If the pets are considered property to the owner, then police dogs should be considered property too. If police dogs are considered police officers, then pets need to be considered as members of the family. The double-standard surrounding police is fucking bullshit.

We need more people taking responsibility for their own safety via owning firearms and training, and less police officers.

Another example is it should be EASIER to prosecute a police officer for shooting somebody than it is a regular person. Instead its pretty much impossible to prosecute an officer for shooting.

With great power comes great responsibility. Feels like they have all the power and none of the responsibility.