More Cop Kills Dog

[KiaKia]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I'm surprised this story hasn't made it to SDN yet...

Watch at 5 minute mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kJVnA5KXJw&feature=player_embedded

Article with the story:
http://www.hannibal.net/news/x1600620381/LaGrange-dog-owner-vows-to-fight-for-law-changes

via: http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/22/cop-vs-dog

 

[Maschka1]

That is insane. I REALLY hate all this anti-pit bull BSL, it freaks people out. they dont know what a pit bull is, just that they are "dangerous." I have been asked on numerous occassions if my Dobermans are pits and there are counties in my state where I cannot have my Frenchie (which really is ridiculous). That was obviously not an aggressive dog and I cannot for the life of me understand why the cop would spend so much time trying to catch it if all he planned on doing was killing the poor thing. I sure would like a stranger to chase after him with a catch poll and see if it freaks him out?

anyhow, my heart goes out to that dogs family.

 

[bunnity]

That dog's family was a man convicted of animal cruelty who acquired this dog illegally. The dog was running loose originally and captured by a citizen who then called the police. The town of 1000 has no animal control, no animal shelter in the county, and the nearest vet is in another state.

This completely sucks, but the cops had zero resources for what to do with this dog, and the owner was an animal abuser who shouldn't have had the dog in the first place. I'm not saying they should have shot the dog, but it's not like they did it for fun.

 

[KiaKia]

This completely sucks, but the cops had zero resources for what to do with this dog, and the owner was an animal abuser who shouldn't have had the dog in the first place. I'm not saying they should have shot the dog, but it's not like they did it for fun.

yeah, it was a crappy situation, but it just shooting the dog in the side seems like a random thing to do.

Now that we have the internet(and the video becomes widespread) perhaps ofter tiny towns will get nervous that this might happen to them and make the police read up on animal restraint.

 

[Maschka1]

Ok well even if the dogs owner was convicted of animal abuse, that does not really mean anything in terms of the poor dog (and I am sure that even if the owner was abusive, losing the dog in such a senseless way would still be traumatic.) and how it deserves to be handled.
I do wonder, however, about the legality of shooting someones dog because you dont have a way to handle it? the dog had settled down, was only afraid, and I am not sure I understand why a gun even came into play??? even if the only vet or shelter was a bit of a drive, wouldnt there be some sort of legality issue with killing a dog for convenience? I know you can shoot your own dog in many places, but shooting someone elses? anyhow these sorts of things always confuse me. I have dealt with numerous animals that actually were dangerous and vicious but they still deserved proper treatment and medical care. Given somedays I think this might be the better approach for human offenders, as well, such a hassle to spend millions of dollars on keeping them alive in prison, if we just dealt with them on the side of the road after they have been restrained.... 😉 (sarcasm)

I really hope this video, at least, gives that county reason to train their officers in proper animal handling and behavior. because it is sad to see such calloused ignorance in a police force.

 

[Polar Opposite]

Wow. I think the thought process went a little somthing like this:

Hey, let's stand around and stare at this abused pitbull that's tied t a bumper for a while with our guns out. Then, we'll chase it around with a catchpole and freak it out a little. When we decide we can't catch it with the pole, we'll give up. Then, we'll try to catchpole it again expecting different results. When we actually do get it on the pole, then we can start thinking about what we're going to do with it. Well, now that the dog is running around in circles on the end of our catchpole, it is just too much to think about what we should do next...so, I'll just shoot it.
Seriously?

 

[david594]

Now that we have the internet(and the video becomes widespread) perhaps ofter tiny towns will get nervous that this might happen to them and make the police read up on animal restraint.

Or they will just ignore calls like this in the future when they do come in for fear of ending up on the internet. Did you guys read the article? While the video was only like 7 minutes the cops spent well over an hour on the scene trying to deal with the dog and had a history of aggressive towards other people in the neighborhood.

Bunnity is right, they had no other options. Its an ugly situation.

But I am sure you guys will all become the veterinarians who are willing to leave your practice for an hour or two to go and take care of this situation. Especially when the town doesn't have the budget to pay you for the service, never mind the fact that you are then going to be tangled up in the ugly legal battle that will follow between the owner of the dog and the town. Or worst case you syringe pole the dog with something and it dies and now the owner is trying to sue you.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

"Read up on animal restraint"? What? How would *you* have restrained a human-aggressive dog with the complete lack of resources they did? Not with a leash and collar. (as bunnity said: the town had no animal control, no animal shelter in the county, and the nearest vet is in another state. ) Same way you do any other aggressive animal - most safely from a distance i.e. catchpole or snare.

Ugly situation all around. But david and Bunnity's posts extremely accurate. It's very easy to feel like it is the officer's fault, but until you have been in that situation, you can't call it.

The one complaint I have based on my watching the video, was that the kill shot should have been made much,much sooner.

 

[KiaKia]

"Read up on animal restraint"? What? How would *you* have restrained a human-aggressive dog with the complete lack of resources they did? Not with a leash and collar. (as bunnity said: the town had no animal control, no animal shelter in the county, and the nearest vet is in another state. ) Same way you do any other aggressive animal - most safely from a distance i.e. catchpole or snare.

Ugly situation all around. But david and Bunnity's posts extremely accurate. It's very easy to feel like it is the officer's fault, but until you have been in that situation, you can't call it.

The one complaint I have based on my watching the video, was that the kill shot should have been made much,much sooner.

Actually, I agree with you, the cops were between a rock and a hard place, and they should have killed the dog better and faster.
The entire situation could probably been handled better.

that's what I get for going online past midnight.

 

[LondonBliss]

Oh, god, that made me sick to watch. *crying*:cry:

 

[sofficat]

Am I interpreting this wrong or are people actually defending the officer??

The cop shot and killed a dog because it growled and barked at people who walked by and broke free from a leash. What dog doesn't growl and bark it's head off when people walk by? How many dogs will just go with a stranger and willingly jump in a car and not try to pull and break free from the leash? (haha- now i think of all the stray dogs i've picked up that happily jump in my car and sit in my front seat like they own it 😉 but i think we all get what i'm gettin at)

There is no reason that dog should have been shot. Just like all the other thousands of dogs that are recklessly shot and killed by officers of the law.

slightly off topic but do animal control officers carry guns? Do they/could they ever get away with shooting a dog? Just wondering....

 

[ChicoShadow]

Awww...that poor dog. From reading the article, I think that what the police did was logical given the situation they were in. I feel that it is easy for an animal lover to get angry when they have never been faced with a vicious animal themselves. It really is a life or death situation and many people are seriously injured or killed by vicious animals more often than you would think. I happen to watch a lot of Animal Cops which I know a lot of people don't like but what I think was a major issue in the situation was that these were regular police, not officers trained and experienced in working with animals. I think it was a good dog and my own dog, who is a sweetheart, would react the same way if someone had something around his neck and it was sad to watch this dog be shot but I don't think that it was animal cruelty but more like reality and survival.

 

[bunnity]

I'm saying that the situation is more complicated than an officer just shooting a dog. As I see the options are:

-Return the dog to its owner, a convicted animal abuser who illegally acquired this dog.
-Do nothing, and the let the dog run at large where it is a danger to itself if not other dogs and people.
-Call animal control - not an option because it doesn't exist in this town.
-Drop the dog off at a shelter - not an option; there is no shelter in the county.
-Take the dog to a vet - not an option; the nearest vet is out of state and several hours away.

These guys are on the clock and can't just leave the state. From what I understand these particular police cars are not outfitted in a way that would be safe for them to have the dog in the car anyway; I don't think they have the dividers.

-Give the dog to someone - this has some huge liability issues considering this was an aggressive animal call, this is of course assuming someone would actually want the dog.
-If you're sitting there saying "I would have taken it in" there are plenty of dogs in shelters at risk of death, go adopt one. Even if they take this dog in, what about the next stray dog, and the next one? Asking a police officer to take in every aggressive dog off the street, just because they happen to be the one trying to deal with the problem, makes no sense.

I think the person with highest responsibility here is the owner, who shouldn't have had the dog in the first place, and should have secured it better (and is an animal abuser, remember). Second would be the community: can concerned citizens set up a system of temporary foster homes, or a volunteer animal control, or a committee to figure out better protocols? If we are going to ask law enforcement to make better decisions, they need to have better options.

 

[david594]

slightly off topic but do animal control officers carry guns? Do they/could they ever get away with shooting a dog? Just wondering....

Not in the states I am familiar with. Animal control officers are different than Humane officers who do have arresting powers, carry a weapon, and investigate and enforce animal cruelty related laws.

 

[Maschka1]

I think the officers were completely in the wrong. to start they responded to a call completely unprepared. If you are going to act as an animal control officer, then you should have some basic knowledge of animal behavior and handling. I dont care if this is the poorest, saddest county on the planet. have some common sense! The dog did not appear at all aggressive (any more so then your average scared animal) and if the police really planned on shooting it, then it should have been done before torturing it with a catch poll for an hour. Second, why shoot it in the side then stare at it for a while, then decide to go for the kill shot? Just kill it!

I would also like to comment on how to handle a vicious dog (which this dog is not) and what its like to be face to face with that. Yes it is scary to be in that situation but there are ways to deal with it. I persoanly used to work in a ER clinic that was the go-to place for Animal control and court ordered cruelty cases. I did come face to face with and had to restrain vicious dogs with similar resources- a catch pool and leashes. one such dog was a 250lb mastiff. was I affraid, yes? but it was my job to help the dog. and on that note, it was the vets too. if that meant we drove to the animal to help the ACO we did. Being a vet isnt about covering your own ass and making money, being a cop should be no different.

this sort of thing always scares me as I own 2 Dobermans, both are trained as service animals (one is retired after he started having seizure based aggression) and both would act "aggressively" if a police officer tied them up then chased them about with a catch poll. Would it be OK to shoot my service dog because they didnt know how to deal with it? seriously most cops should not be allowed to have guns... and no, ACO's here just carry tazers

 

[heylodeb]

At the beginning of the video, the animal was comfortable enough to lay down and place its head on the ground - that is not an agressive stance.

To be honest, I'm not sure what the correct action by the police officers should have been. However, I do not think that an inhumane death was acceptable in any case. The jack***** shot the dog and then stared at it while it wagged its tail, lying in pain - when he could have immediately ended its life. idiot - should be charged a heavy fine for animal cruelty.

 

[ZebraFinch]

Be careful about believing the article point blank. Sure, the nearest vet clinics are in another state, but LaGrange is right on the border with Illinois. There are roughly 5 vet clinics less than a half hour drive from LaGrange (in IL), and one 15 minutes away (in MO). There is also a humane society and an animal warden the same distance.

I agree it was a tough situation, the owner doesn't seem fit to own animals and the animal had a record of aggression towards people. However, there were many other viable options available to the officers instead of scaring the dog for a hour then shooting it. A few calls and the situation would have been properly handled in the same amount of time. It may have been easier to just shoot the dog, but now they're going to be mucked up in legalities whereas if they had done things properly there would be no question regarding their actions. (At least these are just my thoughts, maybe after an ethics class things will change 😉).

 

[Polar Opposite]

I think at the very least, dogs accused of being aggressive deserve to be evaluated by an animal behavior specialist.

Just as the officers were between a rock and hard place, so was the dog. He chose to growl and bark. They chose to point and shoot.

 

[david594]

I think at the very least, dogs accused of being aggressive deserve to be evaluated by an animal behavior specialist.

I think all sick people deserve to be evaluated by a doctor. But thats not the case yet either.

Sucks we live in a world where everything isn't free. Thats the heart of the issue here why the cops got stuck dealing with this situation.

 

[Polar Opposite]

I think all sick people deserve to be evaluated by a doctor. But thats not the case yet either.

Sucks we live in a world where everything isn't free. Thats the heart of the issue here why the cops got stuck dealing with this situation.

Point taken. I still think it could have been handled more appropriately.

 

[sumstorm]

Point taken. I still think it could have been handled more appropriately.

For everyone who judges in the absence of experience, what are you personally willing to do? Can I hand your number out to the ACO's in a county in SC, who do carry guns, and you will come get any problem dog with any problem owner? Can the zoo I worked at previously call you if an animal escapes and you will personally come down as absolute experts in animal behavior (since you expect police officers to be so in dog behavior) to avoid an officer shooting an animal simply because it looks dangerous?

These are tragedies, but I am willing to bet that many of the folks foisting criticism haven't worked as police officiers, haven't had to work within the limitiations of government red tape (doesn't matter if there is a vet clinic just over the state line if you will lose your job for crossing that line), and haven't had to worry as much about being harmed by an owner as the animal (there is a correlation between animal abuse and violence towards humans.)

The reality is that there aren't great options available in a lot of situations that turn tragic. And unless you are willing to step up to the plate and make yourself available and be willing to take the blame when it comes down, how can you criticize those that are? I have heard the same thing recently about the SAR community....why can't we be more effective, how dare we ask for financial assistance, etc during the year when we can't even find a missing kid? And yet I don't see many folks offering to subsidize the $5k+ nearly every SAR handler spends out of pocket, contribute to the thousands of hours of training that go into these animals, or even make sandwhichs for the major seminars and CE that has to happen to stay current.

I guess my take on it is this; unless you are willing to step up and act, not just comment, why would you even assume you are capable of doing better than those who are at least trying, not just talking?

 

[Polar Opposite]

For everyone who judges in the absence of experience, what are you personally willing to do? Can I hand your number out to the ACO's in a county in SC, who do carry guns, and you will come get any problem dog with any problem owner? Can the zoo I worked at previously call you if an animal escapes and you will personally come down as absolute experts in animal behavior (since you expect police officers to be so in dog behavior) to avoid an officer shooting an animal simply because it looks dangerous?

These are tragedies, but I am willing to bet that many of the folks foisting criticism haven't worked as police officiers, haven't had to work within the limitiations of government red tape (doesn't matter if there is a vet clinic just over the state line if you will lose your job for crossing that line), and haven't had to worry as much about being harmed by an owner as the animal (there is a correlation between animal abuse and violence towards humans.)

The reality is that there aren't great options available in a lot of situations that turn tragic. And unless you are willing to step up to the plate and make yourself available and be willing to take the blame when it comes down, how can you criticize those that are? I have heard the same thing recently about the SAR community....why can't we be more effective, how dare we ask for financial assistance, etc during the year when we can't even find a missing kid? And yet I don't see many folks offering to subsidize the $5k+ nearly every SAR handler spends out of pocket, contribute to the thousands of hours of training that go into these animals, or even make sandwhichs for the major seminars and CE that has to happen to stay current.

I guess my take on it is this; unless you are willing to step up and act, not just comment, why would you even assume you are capable of doing better than those who are at least trying, not just talking?

Whoa...calm down...never said *I* could have done a better job. And, I wasn't trying to criticize the officers who used their best judgement--which I respect. I realize there are forces at work that I have no idea about.

Point taken. I still believe it could have been handled more appropriately.

 

[Polar Opposite]

Whoa...calm down...never said *I* could have done a better job. And, I wasn't trying to criticize the officers who used their best judgement--which I respect. I realize there are forces at work that I have no idea about.

Point taken. I still believe it could have been handled more appropriately.

I don't know if you read the blog link in the first post:

http://reason.com/blog/2010/06/22/cop-vs-dog

I think it relays my point of view quite nicely--training officers to handle a potentially dangerous animal that hasn't as-of-yet turned into a dangerous animal should be implemented in more areas.

 

[bunnity]

I'm curious to see the more appropriate scenario, like what the officers should have done. Remember that they are on the clock, probably not allowed to leave their county, and probably unable to transport the animal in the car.

I'm not saying that this was ideal, at all. I just think the criticism so far has been very vague.

 

[Polar Opposite]

I'm curious to see the more appropriate scenario, like what the officers should have done. Remember that they are on the clock, probably not allowed to leave their county, and probably unable to transport the animal in the car.

I'm not saying that this was ideal, at all. I just think the criticism so far has been very vague.

I apologize for the vague postings...I tend to post while I am waiting for a timer on one of my various tests to beep so they just tend to be that way...

Okay, here goes:
I am assuming that since the county has no animal control, no animal shelter in the county, and the nearest vet is in another state, they also do not spend a great deal of effort in training their officers to deal with cases such as these.
I am not trying to criticize the officers for their lack of training, only the system in which the officers operate in situations they are unfamiliar with. (I now realize now that my first post may have sounded on the contrary…but, that was my first reaction to the clip without looking further into the details of the event).
You can tell in watching the video that the officers lacked knowledge or training in what to do in this case.
First, while one officer is watching the animal, the other is on the phone (I assume he is calling for advice on how to handle the situation because I see no other reason for him to be on the phone). Secondly, the way in which the officer handles the catchpole is a bit unpracticed. Thirdly, it seemed as though they hadn’t thought of where they were going to put the animal after catch poling it (no kennel or defined area unless they were going to use the back of the squad car which would be another ordeal in trying to catchpole the dog again) . Lastly, a shot to the chest isn’t the most humane form of euthanizing as evidenced by the follow up shot to its head.
The only point I am trying to make is that police officers go through a lot of training to both become an officer and to remain as accustomed to various encounters as they can. It is often the case that in responding to a complaint that they will encounter pets—pets that are of all variety of temperment: aggressive, shy, happy, scared, etc. I think a better knowledge of how to handle them is imperative.

 

[david594]

Point taken. I still believe it could have been handled more appropriately.

I think the point is that in this specific situation there wasn't a more appropriate way to handle it. With the resources they had, they couldn't do anything else. Now if the same situation were to reoccur with those same officers a month from now with the same outcome, then people can feel free to be more critical. Neither of these officers new they were going to have to deal with this when they had their morning coffee.

Lastly, a shot to the chest isn’t the most humane form of euthanizing as evidenced by the follow up shot to its head.

What would you have suggest instead? That he just started taking shots at the dogs skull from 10 ft away? Dogs have a thick skull and a small brain that only occupies a fairly limited portion of it. The odds of him making a lethal shot to the head from a distance on a moving dog seems very unlikely to me. Shot to the chest to immobilize the dog seems like the most reasonable option. The only thing disappointing was with how long it took him to follow up with the second shot.

 

[Polar Opposite]

I think the point is that in this specific situation there wasn't a more appropriate way to handle it. With the resources they had, they couldn't do anything else. Now if the same situation were to reoccur with those same officers a month from now with the same outcome, then people can feel free to be more critical. Neither of these officers new they were going to have to deal with this when they had their morning coffee.

I already touched on that in saying: "I am not trying to criticize the officers for their lack of training, only the system in which the officers operate in situations they are unfamiliar with."
Again, my whole point is training officers to be more efficient in dealing with these situations would be a good idea, and may have changed the outcome if the officers knew what they were up against--maybe they would have been more proficient in using the catchpole so that it didn't take over an hour with people and dog becoming frustrated, thinking out possible scenarios like where they were putting the dog once it was on the catchpole, etc. My point is NOT that these officers are blood thirsty or in the wrong given their circumstances.

What would you have suggest instead? That he just started taking shots at the dogs skull from 10 ft away? Dogs have a thick skull and a small brain that only occupies a fairly limited portion of it. The odds of him making a lethal shot to the head from a distance on a moving dog seems very unlikely to me.

The dog was on the catchpole and entirely still from the moment the officer reached for his gun, aimed, and shot. A head shot from 10 feet away on a motionless target seems more appropriate. But, then again, I am not an expert in firearms...so, you may be right.

Look, we can poke holes in arguments all day. I was just voicing an opinion and seem to have provoked a few debaters. I was just adding my opinion and I feel like I've been defending it for far too long.

 

[goldielocks137]

The one thing I really didn't like, agreeing with Polar Opposite, is that they shot the dog in the chest. The guy was only feet away and the dog wasn't moving. I feel like he should have been able to shoot it in the head. Maybe I'm wrong. Even so, he shot it in the chest then waited almost 40 seconds while the dog lied there! If it takes multiple shots to kill the dog at least do it quickly. Don't put your gun back, look at the dog, yank at it a little, talk to your partner...then get around to shooting it again

 

[heylodeb]

The one thing I really didn't like, agreeing with Polar Opposite, is that they shot the dog in the chest. The guy was only feet away and the dog wasn't moving. I feel like he should have been able to shoot it in the head. Maybe I'm wrong. Even so, he shot it in the chest then waited almost 40 seconds while the dog lied there! If it takes multiple shots to kill the dog at least do it quickly. Don't put your gun back, look at the dog, yank at it a little, talk to your partner...then get around to shooting it again

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

 

[der2002]

I've read all the comments on this thread and I still can't bear to watch the footage for the first time...

mind you, this statement is coming from someone who can't even watch dogs getting shot in fictional movies without flinching (opening sequence of "no country for old men" comes to mind...)

i suppose it's not the actually death that disturbs me as much as the violence...